Phenon II 965 - 3.4 GHz released in the next couple weeks

[richierich1212]

4.3GHz on XS

 

[Sylvanas]

Originally posted by: richierich1212
4.3GHz on XS

No stability test and probably a 32bit OS- means nothing.

 

[aigomorla]

Originally posted by: lopri
@Atechie: You probably should have quoted someone else. I never said that it's difficult to overclock i7.

im the one who said it was difficult.

But im not doing low end overclocking.

As you get higher, you need to make sure your three values are in sync or you fail overclocking.

Its annoying to have the right vcore but not enough PLL or QPI and have your cpu fail. And if you dont know the i7 cpu, then your ASSED in trying to find out what failed in your system.

And AUTO is the most dangerous thing u can set on your board when you go for high end overclocking.

 

[dmens]

On the other hand, on LGA1366 QPI (and related voltages) is tightly interwoven with CPU and memory

You see, all these voltage fiddlings in i7 system involve QPI, and #1 reason why Intel developed QPI is da license. Even giving Intel the benefit of doubt and assuming performance was Intel's utmost concern, that would be for multi-socket servers, not single-socket desktops. I have no doubt that Nehalem desktop would perfom just as well using HyperTransport which is royalty-free industry standard. And Intel seems to agree! It will reportedly do away with QPI on upcoming LGA1156. (Though we'll have to wait and see)

incorrect, the I/O voltage is separate. you only have to mess with the CSI voltage when you are overclocking with locked ratios, which is absolutely no different from all the other overclocking mechanisms, i.e. bumping up the bus clock (BCLK). since everything on the CPU is a ratio of BCLK being fed into the processor, increasing the BCLK will require more voltage on all domains. it is the same way with the old FSB and HT.

except for PLL voltage, you should never have to mess with that and i have no idea why the option is even exposed to the user. my guess is shitty power delivery by the motherboard.

hypertransport is very different from CSI (or QPI, i hate that name) in a variety of ways, plus HT isn't much of an open industry standard for CPU's, being that there is exactly one other supplier in the market. and besides, 1156 still has CSI.

 

[CurseTheSky]

Originally posted by: aigomorla
Well let me tell u guys 1 thing...

its a hell of a lot easier to overclock a C2Q and a PHII vs an i7.

Because theres a ton of new rules u need to follow, and you have 3 sets of voltage for the cpu on the i7 that need to be tweeked or your cpu clock will fail.

Also the most annoying thing on a i7... if u failed prime or OCCT on a C2Q, it would just say failed... on a i7 its instant blue screen.

No, that's just because with all the equipment you're running, when you bump the voltage a LITTLE too high or something hiccups, it knocks out the local power grid.

 

[ShawnD1]

Back on topic, even though the Phenom doesn't stand a chance against the Core i7 in most tasks except File Encryption, in games the Phenom is exceptional, it can outperform quite easily it's C2Q siblings thanks to it's architecture and IMC improvements and can get past i7 specially when overclocked, you can argue that i7 overclocks too, but i7 doesn't react exactly the same as the Phenom when overclocked, both are different architectures, but I would give the edge to the i7 when SLI/Crossfire is used, and Phenom II when single GPU configurations are used.

I'm not even sure what all the CPU hype is about. In test after test we see again and again that CPU does almost nothing to improve gaming performance. The only people who should even care about new processors are people doing things like video encoding or Photoshop.

Case in point: Anandtech tests various gaming systems.
(I'm looking at the single card configurations since I'll probably never buy SLI or Crossfire)
COD5: stock Phenom II 720 and i7 920 get the same frame rate at high res
Crysis Warhead: Phenom II 720 and i7 920 get the same frame rate at high res
Fary Cry 2: i7 920 is roughly 10% faster than Phenom II 720
Left 4 Dead: i7 is about 6% faster than Phenom II 720
Grid: same frame rate
Company of Heroes: same frame rate

Then Anandtech's conclusion at the end of the article:

The question we wanted to answer in this article, ?Is the Phenom II X3 720BE an alternative to the Phenom II X4 940 for a mid-range gaming system featuring CrossFireX?? We have to enthusiastically answer with ?Yes!? to that question based on our experiences with the games we tested today and several others offline.

Alright so AMD has new chips on the way. Um ok. I guess that's nice if you use Photoshop. For the rest of us, this doesn't really mean anything. I actually do a lot of Xvid encoding and I would see much faster encoding with a better processor, but I still don't care about this because I can set it to queue up 10 movies to Xvid encode and it will do them while I'm sleeping or run it in the background when I'm reading Anandtech.

 

[veri745]

Anything pop up on the internet yet about the 965 coming out soon? I was hoping to get one by the end of the week. I thought it would be out by today or tomorrow, but haven't heard anything.

 

[Gikaseixas]

where's 965? shouldn't it be out by now?

reports say AMD lowered Phenom 945 TDP from 125W to 95W, this got me thinking "965 will be out soon then" ...

 

[LoneNinja]

Originally posted by: Gikaseixas
where's 965? shouldn't it be out by now?

reports say AMD lowered Phenom 945 TDP from 125W to 95W, this got me thinking "965 will be out soon then" ...

August 13th

http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/c...n_II_X4_in_August.html


Although I don't understand why any overclocker would buy this unless it is proven to overclock better than a 955.