#TBT You just bought a new CPU and it seems to run cool, so you try a bit of overclocking. The GHz climbs higher. Did you hit the silicon jackpot? You've got yourself a binned chip. But what's that exactly?
#TBT You just bought a new CPU and it seems to run cool, so you try a bit of overclocking. The GHz climbs higher. Did you hit the silicon jackpot? You've got yourself a binned chip. But what's that exactly?
I suppose I could have gone into the distributions (e.g. bins for the top-end models tend to be chi-square distributions, whereas the lower end ones are normal distributions) within the bins, but the article was meant as a simple primer on chip binning. Lots of people, including yourself, already know what is refers to, but plenty don't and the piece was for such folk.So, you explained what binning is - which I don't think was that much of a mystery - but not how you sometimes end up with a chip that outperforms the model average.
Actually they do explain it... in this part:So, you explained what binning is - which I don't think was that much of a mystery - but not how you sometimes end up with a chip that outperforms the model average.
In those instances, enthusiasts may recognize the good batches (as has happened many times in the past) and take advantage of that by overclocking, etc.
Good times indeed: https://www.techspot.com/article/922-memorable-overclocking-friendly-cpus/The good old days of overclocking. The notorious Celeron 300A that did 450Mhz no problem, or my personal favorite was the P4 Northwood 1.6A which ran at 1.6Ghz, but was built off of the Northwood 2.4Ghz proc stepping at the time. My Northwood 1.6A hit 2.7Ghz but was not stable. Stable 24/7 clock was I think 2.56Ghz.
Ah, the Athlon 700. Mine ran at 900MHz for years on end, and it was a sad day when it headed for silicon heaven (die fracture at one corner, from endless cooler swaps). My Q6600 wasn’t as awesome, 3.2GHz, but its replacement (4970K) was lovely: 4.5 GHz with just a minor voltage tweak. These days I’m happy to just take what the lottery gives me and eschew overclocking.
Ah, the Athlon 700. Mine ran at 900MHz for years on end, and it was a sad day when it headed for silicon heaven (die fracture at one corner, from endless cooler swaps). My Q6600 wasn’t as awesome, 3.2GHz, but its replacement (4970K) was lovely: 4.5 GHz with just a minor voltage tweak. These days I’m happy to just take what the lottery gives me and eschew overclocking.
The AMD Duron 600MHz (K7 generation) could be OC'd up to 1.2MHz.The good old days of overclocking. The notorious Celeron 300A that did 450Mhz no problem, or my personal favorite was the P4 Northwood 1.6A which ran at 1.6Ghz, but was built off of the Northwood 2.4Ghz proc stepping at the time. My Northwood 1.6A hit 2.7Ghz but was not stable. Stable 24/7 clock was I think 2.56Ghz.
Yes, some of the dies from the 10 core wafers could end up as laptop parts, but Pentium/Celeron models are more likely to come from the 6 core wafers - being smaller chips means that more can be cut from a single wafer. The upshot of this is that there is a greater distribution of dies to select from, allowing them to go from i5 all the way down to a Celeron. This is also why Nvidia uses chips from ‘small die’ wafers for their low end and budget models.Your list of things that it could end up as isn't even complete. There are also the Comet Lake laptop parts, and there will probably be Celeron or Pentium models in the future that use the same die.
It's a little old now, but still relevant and answers your query:Also... Why the hell don't they make those silicon wafers square instead of circles?? Trying to cut square shapes on a circle and losing 5-25% of them seems crazy?
There are some spinning thing in the fabrication that makes the silicon ingot in tubular shape. The tubular was later cut into circular wafersI could destroy one of those fabrication plants in two seconds by just shaking my newly washed and dried socks out in there ;-)
Also... Why the hell don't they make those original silicon wafers square instead of circles?? Trying to cut square shapes on a circle and losing 5-25% of them seems crazy?
Really? If you understand chip voltage and clocks can vary, it only makes sense some will, not can, perform better than required.So, you explained what binning is - which I don't think was that much of a mystery - but not how you sometimes end up with a chip that outperforms the model average.