Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

AMD Phenom II Overclocked To 6.5GHz

CmdrTaco posted more than 5 years ago | from the freeze-your-bits-off dept.

303

An anonymous reader writes "During CES a group of overclockers with access to liquid nitrogen and liquid helium for the extra boost of coldness cooled an AMD Phenom II X4 chip to -232 degrees Celsius. Once they got the chip cooled to this frigid temperature, they pushed the clock speed all the way up to 6.5GHz, which is a world record for a quad-core CPU, and then dished out an astonishing 45,474 3DMark05 score!"

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Zomg (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26609291)

Wow.

People use liquid nitrogen to over clock a CPU, news at 11.

Re:Zomg (5, Funny)

sakdoctor (1087155) | more than 5 years ago | (#26609389)

Yeah, only 6.5GHz too.
Call me when it goes up to 11

Re:Zomg (4, Funny)

Yvan256 (722131) | more than 5 years ago | (#26609557)

Don't we already have CPUs running at 3GHz?

Re:Zomg (2, Informative)

rbanffy (584143) | more than 5 years ago | (#26609933)

No x86s in this space. IBM has POWER6 running at 5 GHz.

Re:Zomg (5, Funny)

hierophanta (1345511) | more than 5 years ago | (#26609935)

yes, yes we do.

i cant tell but is there an incredibly large whoosh goin over my head? (or just your head?). 6.5Ghz is faster than 3. And in other news six is afraid of 7, because 7, 8, 9

RED RED RED (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26609315)

red SO lame

The things you have to go through.. (5, Funny)

DigitAl56K (805623) | more than 5 years ago | (#26609321)

.. to get a decent score in 3DMark ..

Re:The things you have to go through.. (4, Funny)

shootlessjoe (1461919) | more than 5 years ago | (#26609795)

And the question is, Why are they still using the 3DMark 05? Technology has advanced people!!

Re:The things you have to go through.. (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26609971)

It's good to know that I can spend a few thousand on cooling supplies now and get a machine that can run Crysis.

I was worried I'd have to wait a year or two for those kinds of numbers to reach the few hundred dollar range.

Re:The things you have to go through.. (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26609915)

Now Vista can run decently.... That's a shame, they want to replace it with Win7...

Re:The things you have to go through.. (2, Interesting)

twowoot4u (1198313) | more than 5 years ago | (#26610033)

Now if only they had set the cpuID bis to 'Genuine Intel' http://arstechnica.com/reviews/hardware/atom-nano-review.ars/6 [arstechnica.com] they probably could have reached 70k!

Re:The things you have to go through.. (1)

zippthorne (748122) | more than 5 years ago | (#26610189)

Atom uses 60W???

Why not just get core 2 mobile, then?

Re:The things you have to go through.. (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26610295)

Atom itself uses 1 to 4 watts. It's the chipset that sucks.

Okay.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26609343)

Sorry, I'm not a chip enthusiast, but is this supposed to be impressive? Does it affect what CPU I should use for my regular work in any way?

Crunchy (5, Funny)

x1050us (832886) | more than 5 years ago | (#26609367)

Numbers must be really crunchy at that temperature

Re:Crunchy (1, Flamebait)

thatskinnyguy (1129515) | more than 5 years ago | (#26610461)

I think spit goes *clunk* at those temperatures.

from TFA (5, Insightful)

caffeinemessiah (918089) | more than 5 years ago | (#26609381)

which is a world record for a quad core CPU and they dished out and astonishing 45,474 3DMark05 score! Watch the video below to see how it was done and how history was made:

Truly PHENOMenal, but I can't help but (cynically, I admit) think about how history inevitably mocks overclockers. Cue back to the 90s and a headline might have read "486 overclocked to 500Mhz -- history has been made!". Like Ozymandias, nothing beside remains...

Re:from TFA (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26609611)

It's not so much history but a glimpse at the (near) future. It is one thing to know that in two years you can regularly buy a system twice as fast as today's fastest system. It is quite another thing to see that performance *now*.

Re:from TFA (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26609897)

It is one thing to know that in two years you can regularly buy a system twice as fast as today's fastest system

I doubt it. CPU speeds haven't really increased that much in the past few years. We're reaching the limits of what we can do
with a CPU as far as speed goes. Even shifting to 32nm wont increase the speeds that much... mostly just lower power usage.
They wont be running too much faster but we'll have CPUs with many more cores and it'll take more than a couple of years to shift
to properly distributed programming which will be needed to properly use those cores.

There is no mockery. (2, Insightful)

unity100 (970058) | more than 5 years ago | (#26609739)

at the time a 486 might have been overclocked to 500 mhz, it would have been a great deal. more precisely, at the time anything has been overclocked to phenomenonal mhz, it has been a great deal AT THAT TIME.

Stability? (5, Insightful)

SanityInAnarchy (655584) | more than 5 years ago | (#26609869)

I know I once bought a specific CPU because I knew it would be good for overclocking. It wasn't a bad idea -- a 1.8 ghz CPU that I could get running at 2.4, at perhaps half or a third the price of a similar CPU at 2.4 ghz, and I'd overclock my RAM, also.

I learned two things:

First, you really have to know your stuff. The RAM I had wouldn't overclock very well, and RAM which would cost a bit more. I had the BIOS helping me out, and I still had to fiddle with timings and voltages.

And second, despite all the stress testing I did, it would still occasionally crash. I never tracked down these crashes until I clocked it back to spec. Once I got a job, I decided that shelling out another hundred dollars or so for a faster CPU was a better use of my time than trying to overclock one, and dealing with the instability once I did.

Now, that's probably a completely different area than overclocking to 6.5 ghz, but if I really needed that, I imagine it would be much more cost-effective to buy two or three of them. It won't really help rasterized games (that'd be video-card bound), and raytraced games should scale to multiple machines.

Re:Stability? (1)

anss123 (985305) | more than 5 years ago | (#26610247)

First, you really have to know your stuff. The RAM I had wouldn't overclock very well, and RAM which would cost a bit more. I had the BIOS helping me out, and I still had to fiddle with timings and voltages.

My experience has been similar. I've managed to overclock CPUs but to get them runing stable I had to fiddle with voltages and even then the overclock had to be pretty mild (2.4 Ghz to 2.6 GHz for instance).

Ignoring stability performance did increase, yay, but so did the heat and the noise of the CPU fan. Not worth it.

Celeron 300A (1)

Locke2005 (849178) | more than 5 years ago | (#26610365)

I made the same mistake. I bought 3 OEM Celeron 300A CPUs, based on widely published claims they could be overclocked to 450MHz. Only one of them could successfully run at 450MHz, and that required cranking the CPU voltage way up (that machine is still running and still crashing all the time, but then it is still running Windows 98 SE.) I suspect the dealer had gone through the batch and picked out all the good ones for himself. At this point, overclocking seems silly when you can wait a few months and get a CPU that will run the same speed without overclocking!

Re:Stability? (1)

Fackamato (913248) | more than 5 years ago | (#26610389)

I have heard claims that people has been running Prime95 (stress test) on all cores for 24 hours, and still had problems while playing a game for example. Often it's because the PSU can't keep up, not many people stress test CPU and GPU at once, which is essential to make sure that the PSU isn't holding you back. You make it sound like OC is extremely difficult and not reliable. I'm willing to agree with you to some extent, but it's like everything; you have to know your stuff. If you know how to do it, or want to spend the hours learning, it could save you a couple of hundred bucks. I remember running my 1700+ tbred (1.4) at 2.4Ghz solid with watercooling. Those were the days...

first post! (2, Funny)

CaptainNerdCave (982411) | more than 5 years ago | (#26609399)

whoo! and i _still_ get the first post with my q6600!

Re:first post! (5, Funny)

ByOhTek (1181381) | more than 5 years ago | (#26609945)

I'm fairly sure 'epic fail' doesn't even begin to describe your post

Re:first post! (2, Funny)

TheLink (130905) | more than 5 years ago | (#26610357)

It would if he had said he was using an Itanic CPU.

Vista? (1, Troll)

omarabas (1349901) | more than 5 years ago | (#26609417)

can it run Vista?

Re:Vista? (0, Troll)

furby076 (1461805) | more than 5 years ago | (#26609693)

No.

And I'm Guessing (1, Troll)

Cnik70 (571147) | more than 5 years ago | (#26609443)

Windows still seems to run slow at -232 degrees

Re:And I'm Guessing (3, Funny)

dkh2 (29130) | more than 5 years ago | (#26609579)

Your Windows EULA prohibits operation in such an environment.

A cat has gotten my tongue (-1, Troll)

binarylarry (1338699) | more than 5 years ago | (#26609465)

Is this the only way to get an AMD chip that is performance competitive with Intel's stuff? I was a huge AMD fan up until the Core 2's started to dominate.

Come on AMD, make your chips fast in a normal setup! :)

Re:A cat has gotten my tongue (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26609505)

Intel's chips run at 6.5 GHz?

Re:A cat has gotten my tongue (1)

triffid_98 (899609) | more than 5 years ago | (#26609737)

Some of them run faster than that, actually. [slashdot.org]

Intel's chips run at 6.5 GHz?

Re:A cat has gotten my tongue (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26609859)

OP seemed to be implying that AMD needed to super-cool and heavily over-clock just to compete with Intel's stock offerings ("normal setup"). A bit trollish.

Re:A cat has gotten my tongue (1)

hierophanta (1345511) | more than 5 years ago | (#26609995)

fair that, that chip went to 8Ghz (which is dam impressive). But it was Pentium 4 architecture, and we all know the P4's sacrificed actual throughput for silly clock speeds (as a marketing gimmick). i bet the 3dmark score on that wasnt more than 25k

Re:A cat has gotten my tongue (1)

triffid_98 (899609) | more than 5 years ago | (#26610315)

Actually, the original plan for the P4 netburst architecture was to hit 8Ghz, but then we discovered the magic of Electromigration and why that was not such a great idea.

Re:A cat has gotten my tongue (2, Informative)

Thornburg (264444) | more than 5 years ago | (#26609623)

An slightly overclocked Core i7 965 (Extreme Edition) in a similar rig (in terms of video cards, etc) scored about 26,000 in the same benchmark (3DMark05).

So, no, they didn't have to go to liquid helium to be competetive, but going to liquid helium did allow them to set a world record (although I don't see any Guiness Book or other "official" information about this).

Re:A cat has gotten my tongue (1)

horza (87255) | more than 5 years ago | (#26609789)

I think if you post something like this to Slashdot and nobody contests it, that's about as official as you can get :-)

Phillip.

Re:A cat has gotten my tongue (5, Insightful)

Merovign (557032) | more than 5 years ago | (#26609865)

AMD doesn't make any $1200 chips.

Like it or not, that's just not the market they're in. They're doing well at the $200 level, though.

I'm not particularly concerned that there's little competition in the segment I'd never pay for anyway. I mean, it's nice that there are Maybach Mercedes and McLaren F1's, but that doesn't mean I'm worried about competetiveness in the segment.

Whereas I'd be worried if there was only one mid-priced performance sedan, especially if it was sub-expectations in some way.

I don't think AMD is ashamed to have set a record with a $235 chip, in a world previously dominated by $1000+ chips.

Re:A cat has gotten my tongue (1)

Sosarian (39969) | more than 5 years ago | (#26610255)

Priced any high end Opterons lately?

Re:A cat has gotten my tongue (1)

binarylarry (1338699) | more than 5 years ago | (#26610281)

yeah but Intel's $200 chips (see Q6600) can compete with AMD's expensive stuff.

Normally, I'd be amazed that got marked troll... but this is Slashdot afterall.

Re:A cat has gotten my tongue (1)

Nimey (114278) | more than 5 years ago | (#26610459)

They do have a $950 processor, the Opteron 2384.

Hosting their website on it (1)

ksd1337 (1029386) | more than 5 years ago | (#26609489)

Then they installed it in their server and waited to see if it would pass the Slashdot test.

But... (3, Funny)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 5 years ago | (#26609503)

Can you run FSX and Cryis at 60FPS?

Re:But... (1)

Sabz5150 (1230938) | more than 5 years ago | (#26609595)

Can you run FSX and Cryis at 60FPS?

No.

Re:But... (1)

A. B3ttik (1344591) | more than 5 years ago | (#26609759)

How about SupCom with 6 AIs with 1000 units each?

New York weather... (4, Funny)

VinylRecords (1292374) | more than 5 years ago | (#26609513)

I'm not sure if it's quite -232 Celsius in my apartment but it's pretty close. They probably could have achieved 6.0GHz overclocking using an air-cooled system in my living room alone.

Re:New York weather... (1)

somenickname (1270442) | more than 5 years ago | (#26610109)

You must be married.

I was there (4, Informative)

Rinisari (521266) | more than 5 years ago | (#26609567)

I was there, too. The coolest it got was approximately -242 degrees C; the warmest was approximately -218 degreesC, at least while I was watching.

The party was the XtremeSystems.org [xtremesystems.org] party at its LV headquarters, and it was sponsored primarily by AMD, DFI, Gigabyte, Cooler Master, and Thermaltake. It seems to me that Commodore had a presence there, too.

See ThinkComputers' blog [thinkcomputers.org] for some more pictures (disclosure: my article).

Re:I was there (-1)

dex22 (239643) | more than 5 years ago | (#26609671)

-242C is a temperature that doesn't exist, unless your religion allows temperatures below absolute zero. All we need now is a campaign for Intelligent Cold. ;)

Re:I was there (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26609749)

Absolute zero is in Kelvin, which is about -273C. Durrrr!

Re:I was there (3, Informative)

horza (87255) | more than 5 years ago | (#26609765)

Why doesn't -242C exist? -273C exists.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absolute_zero

Phillip.

Re:I was there (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26609769)

-242 C isn't close to absolute zero which is -273.15 C as I recall. So, yes, my religion allows for -242 C.

Re:I was there (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26609771)

-242C is a temperature that doesn't exist, unless your religion allows temperatures below absolute zero. All we need now is a campaign for Intelligent Cold. ;)

By international agreement, absolute zero is defined as precisely 0 K on the Kelvin scale, which is a thermodynamic (absolute) temperature scale, and â'273.15Â[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absolute_zero]

what the fuck are you smoking?

Re:I was there (1)

adriantam (566025) | more than 5 years ago | (#26609787)

-273C is absolute zero, -242C is not.

Re:I was there (1)

Rinisari (521266) | more than 5 years ago | (#26609801)

Both I and Wikipedia disagree (edited to make the degrees and negatives display correctly): [wikipedia.org]

By international agreement, absolute zero is defined as precisely 0 K on the Kelvin scale, which is a thermodynamic (absolute) temperature scale, and -273.15 degrees on the Celsius scale. Absolute zero is also precisely equivalent to 0 degrees R on the Rankine scale (also a thermodynamic temperature scale), and -459.67 degrees on the Fahrenheit scale.

Re:I was there (1)

berend botje (1401731) | more than 5 years ago | (#26609803)

Perhaps it is in your own little mental bubble, Bub.

Meanwhile, in the real world, absolute zero is -273.15 Celsius.

Your -242C might be considered balmy compared to that.

Re:I was there (1)

jimbo3123 (320148) | more than 5 years ago | (#26609805)

This is true; Absolute Zero is -237.15 C.

Metric ? (5, Informative)

DrYak (748999) | more than 5 years ago | (#26609949)

I don't know what weird kind of units you are using in your part of the world. But the rest of the planet is using Celsius for everyday temperature measures and Kelvin for scientific measures (same step size, different zero).

And on our scale, absolute zero [wikipedia.org] (0K) is -273C.

Thus -242C (aka 31K) is pretty legal and possible temperature. (Although maybe not a very common one outside university labs and mad overclocker's basements)

Now please stop using Réaumur scale and start using what everybody else is using around.

--

PS: I checked, -242Ré is indeed impossible on Réaumur scale - 0 K is -218Ré

Re:Metric ? (1)

wumpus188 (657540) | more than 5 years ago | (#26610161)

I don't know in what weird part of the world you are, but here on Earth -242C is not considered to be "everyday temperature".

Re:Metric ? (1)

Alastor187 (593341) | more than 5 years ago | (#26610407)

And on our scale, absolute zero (0K) is -273C.

You metricpeans would think -273C is cold. Our scale goes all the way down to -460F, now that is cold!

Re:I was there (5, Funny)

Hordeking (1237940) | more than 5 years ago | (#26609969)

-242C is a temperature that doesn't exist, unless your religion allows temperatures below absolute zero. All we need now is a campaign for Intelligent Cold. ;)

In this house, we obey the laws of thermodynamics!

Re:I was there (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26609997)

In the pictures there seems to be a mist coming up from the rig. Was the helium released into the air? And if so, did anyone inhale and talk funny?

Reliability? (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26609583)

How reliable is that thing?

Re:Reliability? (1)

Fackamato (913248) | more than 5 years ago | (#26609733)

Who modded parent as interesting? It's self evident that an extremely overclocked chip isn't reliable, and reliability has nothing to do with this record attempt. Good stuff: it's the first AMD chip to not have a cold bug (afaik), it overclocks very well on air (3.5GHz on stock voltage - not bad) compared to its predecessors. It's an alternative to Core2Quad now, depending on what applications you are running. Core i7? Faster, very much so, but the mainboard and DDR3 are gonna cost you. The most bang for the buck seems to be the cheapest Core i7 today anyway.

They don't have the results yet (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26609767)

The first test box burnt down the underwriters laboratories.

Re:Reliability? (3, Funny)

Huntr (951770) | more than 5 years ago | (#26610223)

Ah, it runs hot and cold. Mostly cold.

FIRST POST (5, Funny)

A. B3ttik (1344591) | more than 5 years ago | (#26609677)

...with my lightning-fast 486!!!

And this is exciting exactly why? (1, Insightful)

Giant Electronic Bra (1229876) | more than 5 years ago | (#26609727)

Last I checked neither my condo nor my office has a piped in supply of cryogenic gasses...

Re:And this is exciting exactly why? (1)

moderatorrater (1095745) | more than 5 years ago | (#26609775)

That's why I have the milk man deliver me some every week.

cheaper than milk (1)

pbhj (607776) | more than 5 years ago | (#26610217)

Liquid helium is alittle more expensive (about 2x AFAICT) per litre than Milk. Not sure if it has a full weeks shelf life under normal fridge temperatures though? How good are dewar flasks nowadays?

Re:And this is exciting exactly why? (1)

pipboy9999 (1088005) | more than 5 years ago | (#26609845)

I agree...its neat. But why not spend all that time, money and effort into research on making faster chips that are actually usable by a normal person?

Re:And this is exciting exactly why? (1)

hierophanta (1345511) | more than 5 years ago | (#26610239)

uhh chips are so fast right now (for normal people) that the industry has been looking at making them super low powered. case in point - the Atom. why on earth do we need faster chips for 85% of use [by hours of usage]?

im sorry to say it but i dont think normal people dont game on their PCs. Even if you and i do.

Re:And this is exciting exactly why? (1)

mdm-adph (1030332) | more than 5 years ago | (#26610123)

Why travel to the moon? The average person has no purpose there.

For that matter, why design the ICE? Walking or horseback is just enough for anyone.

Re:And this is exciting exactly why? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26610235)

(a) Some people just enjoy this sort of thing. I don't really pay attention to who is the fastest at driving a car around a track, but some other people do. So, one answer to your question: maybe it's not exciting at all, to you, and no one says it must be.

(b) Epic overclocks like this presage the chips to come. While I won't be using anything but stock air coolers in my own computers, I'm happy to know that the Phenom II overclocks this well, because that means there is headroom in the design and that AMD will be able to get the clock rate up over the next year or two. So, maybe it's not exciting, but it is interesting to know that the Phenom II isn't a chip that can just barely support its official clock.

ho8o (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26609735)

Apple IIe (1)

philspear (1142299) | more than 5 years ago | (#26609745)

That's pretty impressive, but right now I'm posting using my overclocked apple IIe.

nice and swolen.. (1)

viper34j (1401493) | more than 5 years ago | (#26609757)

my nerd is swelling...

Re:nice and swolen.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26610227)

Try ice and ibuprofin.

Close to superconduction? (0)

zerobeat (628744) | more than 5 years ago | (#26609793)

I'm wondering, since they used liquid helium, do they get superconduction inside the chip? Maybe not everywhere, but perhaps some of the wired connectors etc. I doubt silicon superconducts, though. Anyone know?

Re:Close to superconduction? (2, Insightful)

CookieOfFortune (955407) | more than 5 years ago | (#26609923)

It really depends on the type of substances used, usually an alloy with the correct proportions, but I doubt they would stumble upon a superconducting combination on the chip. (Not that it would matter anyways, since the speed limitation is caused by the switching speed of the transistors).

Re:Close to superconduction? (1)

ChrisMaple (607946) | more than 5 years ago | (#26610439)

Actually, at temperatures that low, speed-of-light limitations can be as significant as transistor switching speed.

Frost Piss post (0, Offtopic)

edsousa (1201831) | more than 5 years ago | (#26609823)

With -232 degrees Celsius, it's a shame that nobody came remembered this earlier...

Thats Cool but the real question is (1)

jammindice (786569) | more than 5 years ago | (#26609877)

Does it run Vista?

Re:Thats Cool but the real question is (1)

Locklin (1074657) | more than 5 years ago | (#26610023)

It sure does, and so well that it can do an infinite loop a second faster than Linux!

Anyone know (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26609943)

what would happen if you cool down a CPU to temperatures where the CPU becomes super conductive?
Or it that even possible with doped/diffused Si? Would it still work as a semiconductor?
Would it give you even better benchmarks? Did someone already try?
Someone should... ;)

Nobody knows (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26610207)

"Although the local resistivity of semiconducting silicon in its standard crystalline form can be changed by many orders of magnitude by doping with elements, superconductivity has so far never been achieved. "

E. Bustarret et al, Nature 444, 465-468 (23 November 2006)

So it doesn't look like anyone will be trying any time soon.

200% is pretty decent (1)

rwa2 (4391) | more than 5 years ago | (#26609961)

Considering that chip is rated to run at 3Ghz and you can OC only around 5 - 15% at room temperature, I'm pretty impressed by >200%. Also that the chipset held up while the CPU was running that as well.

Wonder what kind of power requirements that would translate to... Current leak becomes a significant loss above 3Ghz (which is pretty much why no one really makes 4Ghz+ chips), do the low temperatures keep those leakages under control, or does it just keep the hemorrhaging from making the system unstable? Also would be interesting to see what kind of chiller you'd need to keep a constant supply of liquid N2 flowing...

NASA Processors? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26609999)

Anyone know how fast the processors on our deep space satellites are? Considering space is pretty damned cold, NASA should be running their probes at around 6.5gHz from now on.

Re:NASA Processors? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26610381)

If the probe is in the sunlight, it is incredibly hot; if the probe is in the shade, it is incredibly cold. The temperature of deep space is pretty much meaningless as there is no convection or conduction to lose or gain heat, only radiation. In general probes are designed to keep cool but heat from the electronics is enough to keep it well above "deep space" temperature as it is so difficult to lose heat.

3DMark? (1, Insightful)

Sir_Lewk (967686) | more than 5 years ago | (#26610017)

What the hell is a "3DMark"? It sounds about as objective as a bogomip.

On the summary and grammar.... (2, Informative)

117 (1013655) | more than 5 years ago | (#26610043)

During CES a group of overclocker's

a group of overclocker's what exactly? Is it just me or is the correct use of apostrophe's [sic] starting to become a lost art these days?

Light Distances (5, Interesting)

SuperAndy (1414157) | more than 5 years ago | (#26610155)

What I think is really amazing about this is that at a clock speed of 6.5 GHz, each cycle takes around 15 nanoseconds (15 * 10^-9 seconds) to complete. In this time frame light can only travel around 5 cm. Electrical signals travel close to this speed themselves, so the limit of clock speeds is being reached, since the chip itself is on this same order of distance. It is around the point where one side of the chip will not be able to communicate with the other side in a single clock cycle.

Real world results (1)

Enderandrew (866215) | more than 5 years ago | (#26610183)

I'm more curious to see real world results. How well can you overclock this on air?

I just ordered the same proc, a 790GX mobo, and a 1 gig HD 4850 yesterday on the cheap. The cpu+mobo combo was $295, and the video card was $161.

Intel still has the top end market, but at these prices, I'm pretty happy with what AMD is offering.

I'm suprised it even worked (5, Interesting)

w0mprat (1317953) | more than 5 years ago | (#26610285)

I'm highly surprised and intrigued the chip even worked at -242C (31K!) for a long time it was speculated in overclocking circles that weird things would happen to current silicon much below the temperature of liquid nitrogen. It does seem liquid helium has been tried a few times but this is the lowest reported temperature I have ever seen on a overclocked CPU. It might not mean much for people who don't care about overclocking but I think this is a significant achievement.

I'm also intrigued by the possibility this chip could have gone faster, it may have become bound by motherboard reference clock and multipliers at this speed. It's not uncommon for the motherboards ability to deliver current to become the limiting factor.
8ghz is reportedly the outright world record http://www.nordichardware.com/news,5505.html [nordichardware.com] Although I think this was reset to 8.2ghz not long after.

Bored now! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26610303)

"Hey Joe, I'm bored and I have some liquid helium.."

Coming soon, to a mobile phone near you (1)

VorlonFog (948943) | more than 5 years ago | (#26610437)

So you can watch all your postage-stamp-sized video and hear all your high-bitrate MP3 tracks.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?