Tuesday, September 13th 2011
AMD FX Sets Guinness Record for Clock Speed
Weeks ahead of its market launch, AMD pulled off a nice PR feat by setting making its trusty squad of overclockers, Sami Mäkinen, Brian Mclachlan, Pete Hardman, and Aaron Schradin set a new clock speed world record (as in Guinness World Record). With just one of its four modules enabled, the eight-core FX-8150 engineering sample was overclocked to a stunning 8429.38 MHz. The chip was able to tolerate a brutal core voltage of 2.016V. Even for a one-in-a-million cherry-picked chip, those are staggering numbers.
8429.38 MHz was achieved using a base clock of 271.92 MHz, with 31.0X multiplier. The memory used was a Corsair Dominator GT single module, which apparently tolerated 3:10 DRAM ratio and timings of 2-16-2-22. That's right, 2-16-2-22. ASUS Crosshair V Formula seated the platform. Cooling was care of a custom liquid-nitrogen evaporator setup. The team used liquid nitrogen as its cooling medium, and switched to liquid helium halfway, which has a lower boiling point. The team cherry-picked chips from the best lots on-site.
A video of the feat follows.
This feat was more of a hit-and-run, in which the system could run at the desired frequency stable enough to make a CPU-Z validation, no proper stability testing was done. AMD claims that frequencies over 5.00 GHz were possible using sub-$100 cooling solutions (now that can be anything between a high-end heatsink and a cheap closed-loop liquid cooler). AMD did a similar overclocking feat ahead of its Phenom II processor launch.
Source:
Overclockers.com
8429.38 MHz was achieved using a base clock of 271.92 MHz, with 31.0X multiplier. The memory used was a Corsair Dominator GT single module, which apparently tolerated 3:10 DRAM ratio and timings of 2-16-2-22. That's right, 2-16-2-22. ASUS Crosshair V Formula seated the platform. Cooling was care of a custom liquid-nitrogen evaporator setup. The team used liquid nitrogen as its cooling medium, and switched to liquid helium halfway, which has a lower boiling point. The team cherry-picked chips from the best lots on-site.
This feat was more of a hit-and-run, in which the system could run at the desired frequency stable enough to make a CPU-Z validation, no proper stability testing was done. AMD claims that frequencies over 5.00 GHz were possible using sub-$100 cooling solutions (now that can be anything between a high-end heatsink and a cheap closed-loop liquid cooler). AMD did a similar overclocking feat ahead of its Phenom II processor launch.
225 Comments on AMD FX Sets Guinness Record for Clock Speed
It's the same thing here, this is how the frequency records have always been broken, the same way you do anything you can to be able to make a 3dmark run the same way you do everything you can do get a frequency record.
That's the reason why all of those records are in separate "categories", every benchmark has it's own WR. Spend some time here: hwbot.org/
Now I can't wait for these to be released.
What AMD***EDIT*** And the Overclockers(showin some respect) was trying to DO was achieve a new FREQUENCY WORLD RECORD, LET ME RESTATE.
NEW FREQUENCY WORLD RECORD.
They did a great job to, Considering that INTEL has been the Previous Record Holder for the HIGHEST FREQUENCY CLOCK (CPU-Z).
They were holding that record with a I. CELERON 352 LGA 775 with 1.9 volts @ 8308.9Mhz. For a while also.
But AMD Just took an ENTIRE NEW PLATFORM, Used a Multicore FX, Disabled only but 2 CORES. Pumped 2+ Volts in it, and got a stable VALIDATION of 8.43Ghz.
Thats a feat.
^^^^ WIN.
Your Funny :laugh:.
I like Intel.
The point that you seem to be missing that others are trying to make, and you helped show even though you didn't know it, was that just because the processor can overclock like a bat out of hell, that doesn't mean it is a good processor.
The Celeron 352 is hardly a good processor. The netburst processors themselves were hardly good processors at that time. AMD was stomping all over them with their 939 processors at the time, despite lower clock speeds. The fact that you could push the celeron to 8GHz, and push it to 4GHz easily on air, didn't make up for the fact that the processor performed so terriblely clock for clock.
The reason people are saying it is irrelevent is because no one is going run it at those speeds 24/7 and more imporantly without knowing how they perform clock for clock clock speed is irrelevent.
I don't think they were trying to break any records with a celeron when it comes to clock vs clock ratio performance. They were promoting mobile versions also, but calling out a Celeron for its terrible competition against clock for clock vs AMD's 939 brethren is hilariousness. I can understand completely about the 939 Low budget processors for more performance per clock but at same estimated market values.
I understand when everybody says its irrelevant that fx bulldozer overclocked to 8.43Ghz, and its epicly ironically obvious no one's gonna be throwing liquid hydrogen on the CPU's 24/7 so ..
We all know that Bulldozer is going to perform decent, and its not going to be overpriced, and probably be a cheaper platform overall. But many people can argue, find deals, and speculate.
The threads title is about a Guinness Record clock speed, on how they achieved a record clock awesome, :rockout:. I did flame slightly because all I read in this thread was more speculation, free post about Ironic irrelevance about the clock speed, and 30% cheered on the OC feat itself. It is everybody's viable opinion to post what you want, but its just the plane statements about bulldozer and its worth as mostly bad compared to Intel Competetion. Where did Intel and Speculation come out of no where.
But, no arguing. Because I realized (havnt loged on in couple months) there is just talk bash talk of bulldozer vs i72xxx k's.
Ok, now on topic, wow just wow, over 8ghz very impressive :)
We do have a verified AMD rep here, so I am fairly confident those opinions were stated so that AMD would see it. I mean, this event proly cost a pretty penny..potentially money that could ahve been spent better elsewhere.
I think it's cool, but am very upset it didn't happen to coincide with launch. The fact it's ES, too, has me raise a few questions, as we know that early samples didn't exactly function correctly...nor will the same chips be out in the "wild".
But, Guinness did verify it, it seems, so it's all good, just poorly executed. I've called myself ATI's #1 fanboy for years, and now, ATi no longer exists, but AMD does.
In the end, as someone said, nearly every site is talking about htis, so it's as effective as AMD wanted it to be...we're talking MORE about Bulldozer!