7GHz Ivy Bridge?

tinate said:
http://www.brightsideofnews.com/new...capable-of-10025-overclock.aspx#disqus_thread

"When it comes to the hardware side, we were shown that the processor excels in performance. We saw the samples of Core i7-3770K going from 3.5 GHz to a massive 7.06 GHz clock. By raising voltage to 1.889 Volts, using 63x multiplier and 112.11 MHz and using dry ice - the 22nm beast passed 7000 MHz."
Click to expand...

so they were basically able to take the processor to the absolute limits that intel put in. RAISE THE MULTIPLIER CAP INTEL! I want to see 8gigglehurtz.
 
well it means they fixed the cold bug.. but thats only 7Ghz, AMD already did 8.49Ghz with bulldozer.. hit 9Ghz or the magical 10Ghz, then that will be worth wild.
 
Looks faked to me.... I don't see how it can do 7 ghz with all 4 cores enabled with hyperthreading, unless Ivy Bridge is just that vastly superior to Sandy Bridge. Also, isn't 112 mhz outside the tolerance range of Z68 motherboards?

Edit: Also, why is the IGP enabled? It would make much more sense to disable it when aiming for max overclock.
 
That's my processor baby! Just what this hobby is all about, pure fun...

We have to start a 3770K thread as April approaches, bring the love!

What about this title:

The Official Ivy Bridge 3770K “my chip kicks your chips ass” Hyper-thread

…do ya think it’s too wordy? Ok, I’ll keep working on it!;)
 
Last edited:
With dry ice... Doesn't that make it not really amazing. 990x's can hit 7gh/z with 6 cores with hyperthreading under LN2. Daily frequencies are what matters, not this kind of thing.

Also higher clocks compared to other chips does not mean moar speed. See bulldozer.
 
Completely worthless performance metric considering the extreme measures needed to get there. Show me what it can do in a properly ventilated case with a good HSF and then lets talk. I'm sure IB will be great, I plan on upgrading once it's available but this doesn't do anything for me.
 
It’s a measured metric! If one processor can be pushed to 7.06Ghz in an extreme measure, and another can only be pushed to 5.556Ghz in an extreme measure, then the former will overclock higher in your own personal measure i.e. normal quality air and water-cooling in everyday use on your desktop.

I think the tangoseal is right about the corn…naysaying and cynicism have already eaten.

noun

the act or an instance of opposing, refusing, or denying

adjective

that opposes, refuses, etc., esp. habitually
 
MeanBruce said:
It’s a measured metric! If one processor can be pushed to 7.06Ghz in an extreme measure, and another can only be pushed to 5.556Ghz in an extreme measure, then the former will overclock higher in your own personal measure i.e. normal quality air and water-cooling in everyday use on your desktop.

I think the tangoseal is right about the corn…naysaying and cynicism have already eaten.

noun

the act or an instance of opposing, refusing, or denying

adjective

that opposes, refuses, etc., esp. habitually
Click to expand...

no.

people have hit higher frequencies on 1366 than 1155 under "extreme" circumstances. Yet 1155 is a better overclocker under normal conditions.

Bulldozer has hit 8.5ghz but once again, doesnt overclock as well as 1155 under normal conditions
 
MeanBruce said:
It’s a measured metric! If one processor can be pushed to 7.06Ghz in an extreme measure, and another can only be pushed to 5.556Ghz in an extreme measure, then the former will overclock higher in your own personal measure i.e. normal quality air and water-cooling in everyday use on your desktop.

I think the tangoseal is right about the corn…naysaying and cynicism have already eaten.

noun

the act or an instance of opposing, refusing, or denying

adjective

that opposes, refuses, etc., esp. habitually
Click to expand...

Thats not true. You're making the assumption that two completely different processors will react the same way when exposed to the same conditions which is not the case. It is very possible and even likely that CPU A may react differently to being supercooled than CPU B. So again, its useless. Why not do everyone a favor and compare the processors in conditions they'll actually be used in?
 
MeanBruce said:
Hey no fair, I'm cool and very excited!;) And by the way, you were right...
Click to expand...

Emotions should have no place in a technical discussion. But because some people are unable to separate the two, that's why you have fanboyism, haters, etc.
 
Tsumi said:
Emotions should have no place in a technical discussion. But because some people are unable to separate the two, that's why you have fanboyism, haters, etc.
Click to expand...

I completely disagree; the two should by all means coexist!

In a public forum you have to allow for both the technical and the emotional responses. If when reading a discussion you happen on substance that is not relevant to your appeal then just overlook it, and move on to that which is to you relevant, and sparks your interest.

If you wish a sterile salient field of technical discussion then please create that thread that is purely yours, I will not trespass, but please do not post to threads of enthusiasts discounting or discouraging their enjoyment of new technology as it is for the single purpose to “set them straight” on how wrong they are for expressing happiness or excitement, it’s just not right.

And using the terms fan-boy-ism and haters, well that just makes your position even more immaterial, either support others, add positivity or just don’t____you can fill in the blank.
 
MeanBruce said:
I completely disagree; the two should by all means coexist!

In a public forum you have to allow for both the technical and the emotional responses. If when reading a discussion you happen on substance that is not relevant to your appeal then just overlook it, and move on to that which is to you relevant, and sparks your interest.

If you wish a sterile salient field of technical discussion then please create that thread that is purely yours, I will not trespass, but please do not post to threads of enthusiasts discounting or discouraging their enjoyment of new technology as it is for the single purpose to “set them straight” on how wrong they are for expressing happiness or excitement, it’s just not right.

And using the terms fan-boy-ism and haters, well that just makes your position even more immaterial, either support others, add positivity or just don’t____you can fill in the blank.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry to say, but it is the emotions that lead to fanboyism/haters. To believe it doesn't is pure ignorance or naivete.

Emotions in a speculation thread such as this makes it worse. After it is released, then you can express your happiness/whatever. This should be a discussion thread, considering the plausibility of rumored reports. And it is right to be doubtful, that's the nature of discussions; one person doubting what another person says. I mean, look at all the crap that happened in the AMD forums leading up to the Bulldozer release.

Edit: All I have seen so far from you and teletran is "woohoo, Ivy Bridge is the best thing since the discovery of fire, anyone else who doesn't believe it and these reports are just flat out wrong, etc." If that is not fanboyism, I don't know what is. Okay, that might be a bit of an exaggeration, but you get my point. There have been 3 posts so far that question the validity of the rumor, and valid points backing the position. So far, you have not said anything to address those points, instead just babbling on about "You're wrong, you just are, because I think this will be the best CPU ever." I don't doubt it's going to be a very good CPU. I just question if it's as good as you're making it out to be.
 
Last edited:
RamonGTP said:
Thats not true. You're making the assumption that two completely different processors will react the same way when exposed to the same conditions which is not the case. It is very possible and even likely that CPU A may react differently to being supercooled than CPU B. So again, its useless. Why not do everyone a favor and compare the processors in conditions they'll actually be used in?
Click to expand...

I may be missing the point here (haha), but when sites and people are testing CPU's overclocking abilities, the main thing they always run into is thermal limits... They'd like to go higher, or give more vcore, but the temps are already too high...

That's why we need places and people to test with more extreme cooling, like liquid nitrogen, something that will take the heat aspect out of the equation!
 
Missing the point said:
I may be missing the point here (haha), but when sites and people are testing CPU's overclocking abilities, the main thing they always run into is thermal limits... They'd like to go higher, or give more vcore, but the temps are already too high...

That's why we need places and people to test with more extreme cooling, like liquid nitrogen, something that will take the heat aspect out of the equation!
Click to expand...

There's a reason why SB overclocks almost the same regardless of whether they are on air or on water... SB just hits a wall once you increase it to a certain frequency. Massive voltage will only net you marginal gains after that point, despite the cooling method used. I.E. Using LN2 on a 2600k will at best get you 200-300 mhz over water cooling. The chip simply won't accept any more voltage, and it won't clock higher. It is entirely possible that IB, which is based on SB, will experience the same kind of wall. Then again, it's also entirely possible they won't.
 
Missing the point said:
I may be missing the point here (haha), but when sites and people are testing CPU's overclocking abilities, the main thing they always run into is thermal limits... They'd like to go higher, or give more vcore, but the temps are already too high...

That's why we need places and people to test with more extreme cooling, like liquid nitrogen, something that will take the heat aspect out of the equation!
Click to expand...

Whether or not you will benefit from extreme cooling is irrelevant because you're not going to actually implement such cooling solutions.

Ok, so you buy a new processor and you get it up to 5GHz and can't go higher even though you have the best water block/pump/radiator on the market. You read a review that someone got theirs to 7GHz by using liquid nitrogen.

What are you going to do?

Answer: Your ass is staying at 5GHz.

Now lets take a more practical scenario

You get a new processor and manage 4GHz using the stock cooler. You read a review where someone with a Corsair H60 got 5GHz.

What are you going to do?

See the difference between practicality and... Not?
 
how far will it oc using stock air cooling?

and this cpu is a socket 1155, right?
 
tinate said:
http://www.brightsideofnews.com/new...capable-of-10025-overclock.aspx#disqus_thread

"We saw the samples of Core i7-3770K going from 3.5 GHz to a massive 7.06 GHz clock. By raising voltage to 1.889 Volts, using 63x multiplier and 112.11 MHz and using dry ice - the 22nm beast passed 7000 MHz."
Click to expand...


Ouch although awesome in overclock capability, I wonder how they managed to cool 1.889Volts going through the cores. Better still, would those of us not privy to their technological accesses be able to obtain such cooling capability while not maintaining a nuclear reactor in the basement?
 
Tsumi said:
There's a reason why SB overclocks almost the same regardless of whether they are on air or on water... SB just hits a wall once you increase it to a certain frequency. Massive voltage will only net you marginal gains after that point, despite the cooling method used. I.E. Using LN2 on a 2600k will at best get you 200-300 mhz over water cooling. The chip simply won't accept any more voltage, and it won't clock higher. It is entirely possible that IB, which is based on SB, will experience the same kind of wall. Then again, it's also entirely possible they won't.
Click to expand...

IB and SB share similar micro architecture but the process technologies are different. Apart from the feature shrink the type of transistors are also different. The highest multiplier moves up 10% and clock speed should follow. Minor changes in architecture add another 5% or so.

So performance gains in the teens are what I am looking for.
 
aviat72 said:
IB and SB share similar micro architecture but the process technologies are different. Apart from the feature shrink the type of transistors are also different. The highest multiplier moves up 10% and clock speed should follow. Minor changes in architecture add another 5% or so.

So performance gains in the teens are what I am looking for.
Click to expand...

My point was:

SB has an overclocking "wall" so to speak.

My speculation was:

IB may have a similar overclocking "wall" that SB has, since IB is based on SB. It might be around the same clock speeds, or it might be at higher clock speeds. Or it might not have a wall at all. Everything is speculation until IB is released.

I did NOT, however, say anything about performance.
 
Ummmmmm............. every chip gets this same argument. Lets just edit 15 old threads, replace X chip with the word ivy and save having to regurgitate this arduous waste of text space.
 
RamonGTP said:
Whether or not you will benefit from extreme cooling is irrelevant because you're not going to actually implement such cooling solutions.

Ok, so you buy a new processor and you get it up to 5GHz and can't go higher even though you have the best water block/pump/radiator on the market. You read a review that someone got theirs to 7GHz by using liquid nitrogen.

What are you going to do?

Answer: Your ass is staying at 5GHz.

Now lets take a more practical scenario

You get a new processor and manage 4GHz using the stock cooler. You read a review where someone with a Corsair H60 got 5GHz.

What are you going to do?

See the difference between practicality and... Not?
Click to expand...


who cares if its practical, you do realize you are on "hardOCP" and not anandtech correct? you do realize what this forum and site was originally created for right? who the hell cares if its practical or not, no one ever said it was to begin with. why the heck is it always the same people that bring up the useless practical argument every time some one posts a thread about extreme overclocking? great we get it, you aren't ever going to do it, so how about let the people that actually like reading about extreme overclocking enjoy it and talk about it instead of trying to argue about nothing.
 
Come on guys, let's keep it civil.

What exactly determines within a chip the maximum frequency? I was always under the impression that heat was the limiting factor, and the smaller the transistors became, the less heat the chip produced and the higher you could overclock the CPU.

What am I missing because surely there is some other limiting factor?
 
Common sense tells anyone that these new 22nm chips will do 5.2 to 5.5Ghz for most users.

What is really exciting? 22nm 8 core / 16 thread cpu's in 2013 that will do 5.5Ghz under air / water cooling.
 
aphexcoil said:
Come on guys, let's keep it civil.

What exactly determines within a chip the maximum frequency? I was always under the impression that heat was the limiting factor, and the smaller the transistors became, the less heat the chip produced and the higher you could overclock the CPU.

What am I missing because surely there is some other limiting factor?
Click to expand...

Read my posts above. There's too many factors besides just heat that limits overclock.
 
aphexcoil said:
What exactly determines within a chip the maximum frequency?
Click to expand...
What ultimately determines the maximum stable frequency is the length of time it takes things to settle after a clock pulse. If things haven't settled after one pulse before the next pulse hits then you will get wrong results. This in turn depends on all three of chip design, voltage and tempreature and the dependence on both voltage and tempreaure is often very nonlinear.

Of course voltage and temperature are also linked, increasing the voltage tends to reduce propogation delays but it also produces more heat which must be removed to keep the junction at an acceptable temperature.
 
Overclocking using some unrealistic cooling setup that keeps the computer running just long enough to run CPUZ and take a screenshot doesn't seem very exciting to me.

What makes the 2500K a great overclocker isn't it's theoretical top end, but the fact that it's possible to hit 5Ghz using a $20 HSF.
 
And considering that this doesn't represent real world and realistic overclocks we'll be seeing, what did we learn from this and from Bulldozer's ability to clock extremely high under extreme circumstances? That's right, nothing at all.
 
sirmonkey1985 said:
who cares if its practical, you do realize you are on "hardOCP" and not anandtech correct? you do realize what this forum and site was originally created for right? who the hell cares if its practical or not, no one ever said it was to begin with. why the heck is it always the same people that bring up the useless practical argument every time some one posts a thread about extreme overclocking? great we get it, you aren't ever going to do it, so how about let the people that actually like reading about extreme overclocking enjoy it and talk about it instead of trying to argue about nothing.
Click to expand...

So practicality is useless eh? lmao.

You're free to enjoy the article just as I'm free to criticize it. You getting upset about it is not going to stop me. If my criticizing an article causes you to not enjoy it, that's gonna be a personal problem you'll need to deal with. Just keep telling yourself practicality is useless and you can go back to enjoying the article. Better yet, just ignore everyone who makes the same argument I do and you can surround yourself by like minded folks.
 
People getting all worked up over a cherry picked chip from intel, when I see users from here getting over 5ghz on air with retail bought chips then I will get excited.
 
What I find really funny is the people bitching and moaning about this were the ones who were so gung ho about the bulldozer single core fiasco.

Regardless, I am looking forward to upgrading to Ivy and retiring my 920 to server status.
 
RamonGTP said:
Whether or not you will benefit from extreme cooling is irrelevant because you're not going to actually implement such cooling solutions.

Ok, so you buy a new processor and you get it up to 5GHz and can't go higher even though you have the best water block/pump/radiator on the market. You read a review that someone got theirs to 7GHz by using liquid nitrogen.

What are you going to do?

Answer: Your ass is staying at 5GHz.

Now lets take a more practical scenario

You get a new processor and manage 4GHz using the stock cooler. You read a review where someone with a Corsair H60 got 5GHz.

What are you going to do?

See the difference between practicality and... Not?
Click to expand...

how do you know the next guy wont get a LN setup?
 
cheapo said:
how do you know the next guy wont get a LN setup?
Click to expand...

Because I'm not retarded.

Look, I "enjoy" reading these articles just as much as the next guy, where I draw the line is getting overly excited over it because I know it's a meaningless figure.

Now you have ever right to get overly excited, just like I have every right to point out the impracticality of it all. If you take issue with that, either deal with it or go buy yourself a LN setup and put me in my place.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top