Hyperhorn

Thread title - a blast from the past

It's not even a real backup (IIRC Andre said he hasn't any with FX-8350), it just hasn't been uploaded at Hwbot yet. The vali link is public since the very first day. I don't know what @lexandre MD O_C_P is thinking ...

As far as I can see it's not explicitly mentioned in the general rules, but the usage of ES CPUs in the Xtreme OC league is limited to non-current generations. So it is okay to use an i7-980X ES or i7-2600K ES, but not an i7-4770K ES as long as Haswell is the most recent Intel architecture.

No comments on any of your P3 550 MHz Katmai scores? O_o Those are great achievements with a huge clock frequency gap compared to the competition. Congratulations, very well done!

So 35 x 133 gives you a bluescreen, but you can boot into Windows at 34 x 133? I think you will end up around stable 4.2-4.3 GHz (Prime 95 or the like) then. Some Hwbot benchmarks like 1M will probably run at 4.5 GHz+ though. Just try and have a look at the temperatures. By the way for the highest system performance you should raise the base and uncore frequencies, too. But you can do that later once you figured out in what range your cores run stable.

For ambient cooling (stable?) 4.5 GHz are pretty good. You can't expect much more from Bloomfield CPUs without advanced subzero cooling.

Guys, don't do this to me! After reading the title at first I thought someone somehow overclocked an old Celeron CPU from 900 to 4.000 MHz. I almost suffered a heart attack, lol. But it's a nice job with this setup anyway!

If you feed your core with 5.45 Volt, red color in the UEFI menu is your smaller problem. I'm pretty sure you mean 1.45 V Vcore, which is quite a lot. However 4.7 GHz on ambient cooling is already a pretty neat frequency, especially for such a CPU with 6 cores, don't you think? Getting 4.8 or 4.9 GHz stable needs a very strong water cooling solution and very likely binned chips (with a random-picked one you have to be very lucky ). I suppose you have recognize this is the limit of your chip

Happy birthday, enjoy the day!

"Over time" needs a time scale. 2 x 850 Watt PSUs would count as 1,700 Watt in this graph, right? Oh, and how many submissions actually were used as source data?

Oh, nice surprise! Welcome back! :celebration:

Lately most of the interesting threads I discover at the Hwbot forum are yours. Please keep sharing the oldschool modding reports, I appreciate it!

I'm fine with you beating my result, but I am very confused about the result details. How did you manage to run this CPU at an astonishing multiplier value of x26? All results I've seen yet were achieved with x18, the stock multiplier for the default frequency of 2,400 MHz. According to Intel this chip doesn't support Turbo technology: http://ark.intel.com/de/products/49020/intel-core-i3-370m-processor-3m-cache-2_40-ghz So either you have found an amazing way to unlock higher multipliers or the result is not correct.

I guess one day is just enough to beat 23 hours, so that's no real challenge. However 23 hours to beat one day would require some overclocking skills for sure. :banana: On a serious note I've noticed that some challange texts are bugged and an amount of hours is shown instead of the user name. Maybe it is connected to the time left for a competition, but that's just a wild guess. However I really had a good laugh about this one. Examples: http://hwbot.org/challenge/asadsaads_cpu_frequency_global_challenge___dec_21_2013_until_dec_28_2013/ http://hwbot.org/challenge/asadsaads_cpu_frequency_global_challenge___dec_21_2013_until_dec_28_2013_2/

Very impressive result! Congratulations CherV! I have to admit I'm curious: Did AMD screen this specific chip for overclocking purposes?

Why is it necessary to confuse Hwbot community members about the cooling solution being used? Just for future reference - this is an air cooler: This is a water cooling system: So if you used the water cooling system Corsair Hydro H60 for your results, don't call it "5.7 GHz air" please (even if the H60 isn't superior to high-end air-coolers, no doubt). (It would be wrong to use a 4 stage cascade and call it air cooling, just because it has some fans attached to it, right? ) I'm sorry if that sounds rude or fussy in a way, but I'm just a bit disappointed about that wrong claim as we're talking about 500 bucks here, so provided information simply should be correct and not random.

Here you go: http://www.pcgameshardware.de/Benchmarks-Thema-58180/Specials/Gigabyte-EOC-2013-Alle-Fakten-zum-spannenden-Extreme-OC-Event-inklusive-Video-1084099/ I placed a link to your great summary at the bottom. (Crappy auto-translation that turns Roman into novel and seems to kill the video :banana:: http://translate.google.de/translate?sl=de&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=de&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.pcgameshardware.de%2FBenchmarks-Thema-58180%2FSpecials%2FGigabyte-EOC-2013-Alle-Fakten-zum-spannenden-Extreme-OC-Event-inklusive-Video-1084099%2F)

So Corsair and Intel had some Zimbabwean dollars left?

I didn't have time to test the benchmark yet, but although it's based on Linpack, the integrated stability test drops behind LinX (@ max. problem size) and Intel Burn Test (@ stress level maximum). In comparison it does not only lead to lower power consumption/CPU & RAM usage/Vdrop, but is also more volatile in these matters and needs more time to reveal an unstable setting. I suggest a customization function for the amount of memory being used.

Given the circumstance I actually worked with one today, Bavaria not longer seems to be part of the Federal Republic of Germany. (Yay, separatism ) On a serious note: Samples are out, so I expect retail availability of the M6E before the end of the month. But we will see ...

Congratulations on the APU record! :ws: On a side note I think you are the person that really deserved to enter the 8 GHz zone as first because of your continual dedication for the FM1/FM2 platform. :celebration:

der8auer is now called the8auer

Great result! But you just have to love that the provided video is about everything else than the actual result. :banana:

Any new thoughts about "is L3 cache running at core or ring frequency" thing? What would you guys think if core AND ring frequency boost L3 cache performance at a 2/3 (core) and 1/3 (ring) relationship? Wouldn't it be a nice idea that L3-cache runs at core frequency and ringbus only boosts the interface between the cores and the L3-cache? Given L3-cache and ring share one clock domain in fact and run at the same frequency - for what reasons would the core frequency affect synthetic L3 performance values much more than the ring frequency or e. g. CPU NB clock frequency of AMD CPUs?