TechSpot

Intel overclocks Sandy Bridge CPU to 4.9GHz

By Emil
Sep 16, 2010
Post New Reply
  1. Intel has provided quite a bit about its upcoming Sandy Bridge processors, slated for early 2011, but only now do enthusiasts have something to start drooling over. The chip giant this week held a session where it did some impressive Sandy Bridge air-cooled overclocking, according to APC Mag.

    Read the whole story
     
  2. seronx

    seronx TS Rookie Posts: 26

    That's the Intel 2600K @ 3.4 GHz overclocked to 4.9GHZ the guy didn't do a good job blurring it

    it has 4 cores and 8 threads

    and they are running it on windows 7 64bit ultimate edition

    with a 460GTX

    LOL he zoomed in lol nice job guy thanks didn't notice that
     
  3. TomSEA

    TomSEA TechSpot Chancellor Posts: 2,356   +402

    LOL...excellent detective work, seronx.
     
  4. seronx

    seronx TS Rookie Posts: 26

    and here I was thinking I had good eyes lul!

    It also doesn't look like they actually overclocked the CPU that's at stock speed the losers lol
     
  5. Yeah, but can it run Crysis 2?
     
  6. wow, really?
     
  7. Modena

    Modena TS Enthusiast Posts: 182

    So much for that NDA hahaha. I love how he goes in for the close up of what the guy said to blur out.

    @seronx apparently Cinebench won't report the correct reading of anything that uses a multi higher than 25.
     
  8. princeton

    princeton TS Addict Posts: 1,716

    So judging by this Intel is still running far ahead of AMD.
     
  9. seronx

    seronx TS Rookie Posts: 26

    Not really you can go beyond that but what it says is weird

    If you had an AMD Processor and overclocked it to 7.299GHz it would show

    AMDAuthenticated CPU @ 7.299GHz

    Intel's way of doing that is

    IntelGenuine CPU @ 4.9012GHz

    Both the model of the cpu would be unknown and the stock speed would be unknown

    We have yet to see Bulldozer in action yet or any other fusion/CMT cpu from AMD

    Cinebench loves Intel's SMT tech

    also it isn't very impressive beating a amd 12-core server cpu that's clock at what 2.2GHz?

    Yeah, It can
     
  10. dividebyzero

    dividebyzero trainee n00b Posts: 4,905   +715

    There's an old sporting adage; You can only beat what's put in front of you.
    Bulldozer is ~1 year away..and it is (hopefully) competition not for LGA1155, but LGA 2011 and Ivy Bridge on 22nm
    While Cinebench will utilise each and every thread/core available it will tend to favour the CPU offering the fastest single thread speed, so it probably isn't the best indicator of CPU productivity. It is, however, a reasonable indication that AMD PR and shareholders might need to have a supply of new underwear close to hand.



    Yeah, It can[/QUOTE]
     
  11. seronx

    seronx TS Rookie Posts: 26

    A pic

    No where do I see the i7 2600k in that benchmark so how can I trust their word?
    and if you look really closely
    The Opteron beats the i7 960 thats at 3.2GHz debunking your theory

    but if you look at the 8C/16T Xeon cpus
    running at 2.0Ghz and 2.2GHz ofcourse they beat the Opteron

    actually that Opteron is dual cpu
    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819103689
    2435 is only a six-core

    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819105267
    A real 12-core is in the 6000 range

    there is so many inconsistencies in that benchmark

    I indeed mistook that the .6 as a 2.2 GHz when in acutallity that is 2 cpus running at 2.6GHz
    include the XEONs they are also 2 cpus
    ----
    This is not including that the fact that the benchmark closes instantly the test is done....
    Thus making everything they say a BS'ed lie
     
     
  12. Adhmuz

    Adhmuz TechSpot Paladin Posts: 929   +106

    First of all the score is only added after the test is finished running thats why the i7 2600 is not displayed, if you run the bench you would see this for yourself, the reason it closes right away is to attempt to hide the score, so nothing is being "BS'ed" and they are not liars. That being said having freeze framed the video just as its closing I can clearly, or almost clearly see a score of 9.57 pts which beats the Opteron by a healthy margin. So no inconsistency's there at all, just a really bad attempt at covering up whats going on and someone has no idea what NDA means. That said, my current i7 920 @ 4.0 GHz scores only 6.73 pts which is in itself not bad but not even close to this i7 2600. Lastly being a pre-release motherboard and CPU its very possible that the clock speed is not being read properly. But thats just what I can make of this video.
     
  13. seronx

    seronx TS Rookie Posts: 26

    screen shot plox?
     
  14. Adhmuz

    Adhmuz TechSpot Paladin Posts: 929   +106

    Pictured for seronx.
    And to compare to what the actual scores are for the other CPUs
    Compared
    If the links don't work they're in the Techspot Gallery. For some reason the links only work when your in forum mode not the comment view mode...
     
  15. seronx

    seronx TS Rookie Posts: 26

    Thanks it works for me oddly

    looks like it can be either 8.57 or 9.57
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socket_F
    Socket F = AM2(Server)

    just a reminder that the amd cpu is not a 12 core but 2 six-cores
    Socket C32/G34 are AM3(Server) which is the 12 cores
     
  16. dividebyzero

    dividebyzero trainee n00b Posts: 4,905   +715

    So, rather that take the demo as a possibility...you would automatically believe that the benchmarking is dishonest? Does this go for every public demonstration? How about the behind-the-stage-and-no-we-wont-show-you Ontario demo AMD recently publicised? Will we see your comments on that thread decrying foul play?
    Hey, dont take my word for it then how about Johan De Gelas:
    Whatever. Life is too short to decipher that train of thought.
    But how this is at odds (since you've quoted my post) with what I said regarding Cinebench 11.5 probably not being the most accurate representation of CPU performance seems to be nonsensical at the very least.
    But of course you've managed to uphold the proud troll tradition of sidestepping my original point...that Bulldozer is NOT (or will not be) competition for Sandy Bridge LGA 1155.
     
  17. Adhmuz

    Adhmuz TechSpot Paladin Posts: 929   +106

    It has to be 9.57, not to go to technical but if you look at the math its very simple to calculate. 10.33 - 7.95 = 2.38 so theres 2.38 pts between the two points on the graph, if you go exactly half way between those two points it would be 9.14. But the i7 2600 clearly is further past the half way point between the Opty and the Xenon that much you can make out so it has to be more than 9.14, and lastly because you can see the .57 its without question 9.57. Just wanted to point that out.
     
  18. seronx

    seronx TS Rookie Posts: 26

    divided by zero you obviously mistook what I said...
    How dare you call me a troll....!

    "So, rather that take the demo as a possibility...you would automatically believe that the benchmarking is dishonest? Does this go for every public demonstration? How about the behind-the-stage-and-no-we-wont-show-you Ontario demo AMD recently publicised? Will we see your comments on that thread decrying foul play?"

    All benchmarks are to some degree dishonest they totally void Image Quality for Performance or Processing speed over core amount..blah blah..I have yet to see an AMD Cinebench of the new Fusion APUs so I can't say...I never called out foul play....

    "Whatever. Life is too short to decipher that train of thought."

    You mean life is to long
    Cinebench is not an accurate method of showing cpu performance...as it is meant for intel cpus

    http://www.virgilioborges.com.br/hyperpi/
    would be a better benchmark

    There is many names for the Fusion APU series so many that it is confusing Bulldozer has two sockets FM1 and AM3+

    Bobcat also has two sockets which are based on the mobile series of FM1 and AM3+
     
  19. Adhmuz

    Adhmuz TechSpot Paladin Posts: 929   +106

    How is a hyper pie a better test? The overclocked CPU will trash the stock clock CPU any day, Benchmarks like that are single core performance benchmarks, at least Cinebench used all the cores to create one final score. The only way to truly test the performance of a CPU is with a barrage of test not a single test that may or may not favor one CPU maker over another.
     
  20. So let me get this straight. AMD had no answer for 2008's Nehalem, they have no answer for Sandy Bridge and they are hoping to tackle Intels Ivy Bridge 22nm processors with Bulldozer on 32nm in 12 months? Seriously stick a fork in em people they're done, they will never be able to compete with Intel again.
    It's no wonder everytime I see something AMD related I think of that "Yesterdays Hero" song, cause really thats what they are, they are Yesterdays Hero, looking to relive their Athlon glory days as they fall further and further behind and their fanboys slip further and further away from reality.
     
  21. red1776

    red1776 Omnipotent Ruler of the Universe Posts: 5,906   +90

    :haha:

    Yes, I often can be found sitting on the beach with a tear in my eye....for alas....the unrequited die shrink that haunts my very soul.....

    Being a little dramatic, don't ya think?

    what I don't understand if you are the Intel fan-boy you appear to be, why you come across as so bent out of shape about it. you should be on the front line cheering and hoping AMD does not make a Cyrix/IBM like demise . Because if they don't, your Ivy Bridge mid CPU is going to be about $400.00
     
  22. DokkRokken

    DokkRokken TS Rookie Posts: 275

    If you're attaching some amount of pride to a two-bit computer chip and its brand which really doesn't care if you live or die, you need new life priorities.
     
  23. @Guest September 19, 2010 8:45 PM

    Mate, you really are a twit, aren't you.
    Laugh it up. If AMD goes down you'll be the one that fed the bullying monster that is Intel and you'll be crying, paying twice as much for a range of CPUs that only get slightly better each year.

    I'll happily keep buying AMD-centred systems that have 80% performance of an Intel one, for 50% of the cost and feel good about myself while I'm doing it. If and when VIA steps up and does a decent multi-core processor, I'll consider them too.

    No fanboyism here. I simply detest Intel.
     
  24. @ red1776, Not really. Perhaps a fanboi would find it dramatic. Anyway all i did was call it as I see it. If you get your knickers in a knot over it thats not my problem. Although I do agree the demise of AMD would be terrible, the fact is that this is a possiblilty especially if Bulldozer flops Phenom style. I hope this doesn't happen (I dont want to pay $400+ for mid range cpu's) but with AMD's track record of late the fanbois on both sides need to face up to this possibility. kthxbai.
     
  25. red1776

    red1776 Omnipotent Ruler of the Universe Posts: 5,906   +90

    that does not even make any sense. My knickers are not now, nor ever were in a knot, talk about rolling your own. What exactly was it in my post that pointed to "my knickers being in a knot? Your the one with the anger and dramatic melancholy.I think you should not get your bloomers in a bunch.

    The dramatic:
    and the anger:
    :rolleyes:
     


Add New Comment

TechSpot Members
Login or sign up for free,
it takes about 30 seconds.
You may also...
Get complete access to the TechSpot community. Join thousands of technology enthusiasts that contribute and share knowledge in our forum. Get a private inbox, upload your own photo gallery and more.