Overclockers Break 4GHz Barrier for AMD Processors
Posted 08/29/08 at 11:44:31 AM | by Paul Lilly
Intel fans be polite and stifle those snickers, but at the Games Convention in Leipzig, Germany, members of AwardFabrik.de managed to breach 4GHz on an AMD Phenom 9950 processor using liquid nitrogen cooling. Not without controversy, the feat failed to pass CPU-Z's validation.
Running at precisely 3952MHz, the team recorded a 19.954 second SuperPi 1M time, setting a new record for AMD processors. Other hardware used in the endeavor included a Foxconn A79-S motherboard and an OCZ 1KW power supply.
On a related side note, SuperPi may find itself being replaced as processor technology moves forward. While the world record for AMD CPUs now sits at just under 20 seconds, the record for an Intel processor is 7.14 seconds using an E8600 overclocked to 6376MHz, leaving little headroom for future record breaking attempts.
Image Credit: AwardFabrik.de
Comments
Print
Email
Check out newegg
Submitted by guest001 on Tue, 2008-09-09 17:25
If I'm not mistaken, isn't the Q6600 $15 dollars more than the 9850 phenom retail at newegg? And it's also the black edition, which allows for easier overclocking.
Submitted by madtaxman on Tue, 2008-09-09 13:03
Comment was in reply to "But....All is about money."
Submitted by madtaxman on Tue, 2008-09-09 13:02
If you could write or spell correctly then we might understand what you have to say. And what you have to say may be of interest. I love to read comments from many forums but I often find that I can't get past the mistakes in spelling, grammer, or just typing. Or maybe the writer has thoughts that are faster than his or her fingers can type. And I should not single any one person out. But hey, I,m a crotchety old man so I get to say things like this.
Madtaxman don't be an
Submitted by Keith E. Whisman on Tue, 2008-09-09 13:22
Madtaxman don't be an asshole. We are'nt in school and this aint in a print magazine. This is a blog and we are all human and we make misstakes. We misspell and stutter. We are'nt perfect at all. I love this website and the magazine. When I see an error in type I just ignore it. I understand what the author is trying to explain and live with it. I suck too and I'm probably worse than they are.
But to show you how embarrasing it is for someone to point out an error of yours I noticed that you spelled I'm incorrectely in your final sentance. It's spelled I,m with a comma.
So next time you correct somebody try to think how you would feel. Put yourself in their shoes. They have feelings too. And everyone hates an ASSHOLE.
Submitted by madtaxman on Tue, 2008-09-09 15:27
I'm not trying to be one, just asking for a little more clarity. And I did state that the person probably had good ideas and could just be thinking faster than they could type. So I did cut them some slack. I too have good days and bad ones but when I'm having a bad day, I try to be extra carefull. I don't sit here with a grammer book or a dictionary and I am a terrible typist (Uncle Arthritis ya' know). Nor did I call the person names mom would have washed my mouth out for saying. But from your reply, I must have hit a real sore point and from your flame I would guess that you are uncouth, can't spell, and have a real way with words. But at the same time could probably build a box in thirty minutes
By the way, your final paragraph pertends to give me advice to think twice and be aware of the writer's feelings. But then you shoot yourself in the foot with your own last sentence.
Submitted by j3pflynn on Fri, 2008-11-21 07:09
Grammer? Pertends?
I've found it's best to have your own ducks in a row before you choose to correct others. :)
Submitted by Keith E. Whisman on Tue, 2008-09-09 16:17
I'm not trying to flame I'm just sick of people pointing out errors in spelling and grammer. And people taking other peoples statements apart as if their point of view is retarded and better left not said.
What's so hard about just acknowledging the subject and staying in the subject or just giving your two cents or even making in irrelevant statement but don't waste time and space picking on others statements and grammar and spelling. I think it just makes people not want to get involved in the subject.
People will be afraid to make comments. I'm not afraid to fight so I don't care too much but I also don't like to see others picked on so I defend others. I'm a big guy and can take alot personally but I can't stand to see someone else get picked on.
So please don't be offended. I'm just hoping people will quit picking on others here.
Submitted by madtaxman on Wed, 2008-09-10 01:42
I'm not offended, I just wish people would take the 1/2 second it takes to preview their comments and make them readable. Is that so hard?
I'm done.
Submitted by Keith E. Whisman on Sat, 2008-09-06 01:24
I think the only thing that is holding AMD back is on die cache. Why wont amd put more on die cache on their processors? Intel has proved that more cache gives better performance. My E8400 has 6mbs of cache compared to a Phenom with 2mb.
That's only 512k per core. This is a problem and it's the reason why AMD processors are slower than Intels. I think that if AMD did a Die shrink and added more cache and I mean closer to at least 2mbs per core and a more streamlined instruction set I think AMD can surpass Intels core 2's. But I don't see AMD even trying to outperform Intel and it's a shame because that is the only thing that can save AMD.
What I can't believe is that
Submitted by vistageek on Mon, 2008-09-01 07:03
What I can't believe is that they say they did it when it isin't even hardly stable. I bet that thing would fail in Crysis in 20 minutes.
NO. It didn't state that it
Submitted by gatorXXX on Mon, 2008-09-01 09:22
NO. It didn't state that it wasn't stable, just that it failed CPU'Z's validation. And CPUz is NOT a benchmark or a testbed of any kind.
AMD needs to do some work,
Submitted by Strongbad536 on Mon, 2008-09-01 02:32
ive done this on stock cooling with an intel quad core. Ummm, yeah. As much as I dont want to bash AMD, I think they need to work on their thermals.
Submitted by gatorXXX on Mon, 2008-09-01 04:26
Yeah they do. And intel does overclock 2 fold over AMD in a sence. But if people buy a proc just because of it's overclock potential then there's a priority problem. Would you buy a car if it had the same features as another BUT one car could easily be modified to have 20-30% more horsepower (safely) at 20-30% more cost? Why? they both get you to the same place, and what's a few seconds anyways? I wouldn't. Overclocked or not, both procs do the same just one can do it a lil faster. And it's not all in the proc. It's in the build and ALL your hardware combined. No 2 PC's are the same. I'm not bashing intel, nor am I an AMD lover. But remember folks......when AMD gets put down.....there's no more competition and all intel lovers will be crying cause they can't afford that shiney new intel proc.
Submitted by Strongbad536 on Mon, 2008-09-01 10:05
I see your point, but I think it would be great for the market if AMDs chips were faster, bringing lower prices to everyone, especially the consumer. Because as soon as AMD is done (and assuming Nvidia doesnt have sucess in the CPU market), intel will practically have a monopoly on CPUs.
Submitted by gatorXXX on Tue, 2008-09-02 14:26
Yeah, i wish they would be faster as well as it would be even more competition for intel. And I wish they overclocked better. But hey, I can't have everything!
Submitted by jberumen on Mon, 2008-09-01 12:09
You see the problem of AMD was let this happens. AMD don't wanna invest in better technologie and all is about money. However, I don't see a bright future in AMD. Is loosing ground and this m'mistake' is what Intel needs to recover ground. People don't care about money, care about performance and power. And the prices of Intel are not that high. I prefer an E4400 ove X2 5000 for much and the prices are almost the same. Better technology is not mean to be cheaper. But better.
Submitted by gatorXXX on Tue, 2008-09-02 14:23
not investing in better technology? AMD brought you 64 bit first. AMD brought on die memory controllers first. AMD brought you hypertransport first. ALL of which intel has already adopted or about to adopt. Intel has 64 bit now, intel's new i7 has an on die memory controller and is about to adopt a hypertransport like FSB. AND people DO care about money. Why should I (personally) pay an extra $30-50 for a proc thats thats little faster? I'm not going to. Your right, they are not that expensive but still higher than it's counterpart AMD all for a few extra seconds in media encoding or 3 FPS in a game. But, there is no problem spending the cash for faster procs if you have it to burn.
Better tech is not meant to be cheaper. But without AMD in the picture and intel owning the monopoly, There will be no reason for intel to invest in better tech as they will have no competition. Why spend the cash to beat your rival competition that's not there anymore? Also intel procs will increase in price 2 fold as newer procs arrive.
Personally, I do prefer
Submitted by n0t_a_n000b on Fri, 2008-09-05 13:56
Personally, I do prefer that extra 3 frames in Crysis and Far Cry 2. Also, a better overclocking, better value, better preformance, and cooler Q6600 is only about $10 on newegg.com. Want something cheaper? Buy a E8400 for $168, yes, less than most phenom procs. The E8400 is a dual core, but is at 3.0 GHz and is only 45nm.
N0t a n00b
Submitted by jberumen on Sun, 2008-08-31 15:53
Oh Yeah!!! using liquid nitrogen cooling.
Very nice. My question is how many people can afford that. Heheh maybe we can use later the same system NASA uses to cool the space shuttle cooling system. Maybe this way we can get 4.01 GHz X)
Keep dreaming Intel Core 2 is a lot cooler processor with out too much alien technologies.
Submitted by -it- on Fri, 2008-08-29 16:00
lol, this is a another step that amd takes foward, but then u realize that no one really gives a damn
Submitted by gatorXXX on Sat, 2008-08-30 04:28
punk......
You mean besides all these
Submitted by Pentium 0 on Fri, 2008-08-29 11:32
You mean besides all these people?http://www.ripping.org/database.php?club=4GHz&brand=AMDoh ya and: http://tokyo.cool.ne.jp/hedgehogs/86006895.gif
Submitted by vistageek on Fri, 2008-08-29 10:35
How long ago was it that intel did that?
Submitted by n0t_a_n000b on Sat, 2008-08-30 10:49
I think about oh, PENTIUM FOUR REIGN. Take that AMD fanboys. I think it is funny that AMD's motto is make smarter choices, becuase if anyone using their hardware is not and should buy a Q660 or a E8400.
N0t a n00b
RESOURCE CENTER
MOST COMMENTED ARTICLES
NewsNew Forceware 180.48 Drivers Released, Claims up to 80% Improvement, Enables SLI Multi-Monitor Support
1 NEW COMMENT(S) | 29 TOTAL COMMENTS
FeaturesRip DVDs for Playback on Your iPhone, PSP, Xbox 360, PS3, AppleTV, or Any H.264-Enabled Player
2 NEW COMMENT(S) | 25 TOTAL COMMENTS
THIS MONTH's ISSUE 
FEATURE Windows Tips: Find out what works and what doesn't as we test the most commonly prescribed Windows tipsHOW TO Customize and streamline your Windows desktop Core i7 Check out Intel's next-gen chip, up close and personal The Reactor We preview the first production-ready oil-immersed PC
Technology News
Computer Cooling Fans
Computer Cases
PC Game Controllers
PC Games
Computer Hardware
Headphones
MP3 Players
Stream Video
Computer Mouse
Monitors
Motherboards
NAS Storage
Networking
Laptop Computers
DVD Burner
Digital Cameras
Portable Storage
Computer Accessories
Smartphone
Antivirus Software
Sound Cards
Speakers
Computer Systems
Thumb Drives
Video Cameras
Video Card Reviews
Water Cooling
Gadgets
- Keyboards
© 2008 Future US, Inc. All Rights Reserved.