Saturday, October 29th 2011

AMD OC Record Broken, Still Powered by AMD FX-8150

In mid-September, earlier this year, a team of overclockers sponsored by AMD set a new Guinness Record for clock speed by a silicon processor, setting an AMD FX-8150 processor to run at a staggering 8429.38 MHz. If anything, the coveted Guinness Record feat helped cement the general notion that AMD FX processors are good at overclocking. Sadly, AMD's record didn't last long, with renowned overclocker Andre Yang breaking it with his 8461.51 MHz feat. At this point we don't know if Andre had Guinness covering his feat to he could officially break AMD's record. AMD wouldn't mind it at all, because the new record was set using an AMD FX-8150, too. Andre did it single-handed, or at least he is the only person in the "Submitted by" field on the CPU-Z Validation page.

According to the validation page, 8461.51 MHz was achieved using a base clock speed of 272.95 MHz, with 31.0X multiplier, and a brutal core voltage of 1.992V (almost 2 volts!). As with AMD's record feat, an ASUS Crosshair V Formula motherboard was used. A single 2 GB Corsair-made memory module was used doing 909.8 MHz (1818.16 MHz DDR) with timings of 9-9-9-24T. Like with AMD's feat, only two out of the FX-8150's eight cores were enabled. More details are awaited.
Add your own comment

110 Comments on AMD OC Record Broken, Still Powered by AMD FX-8150

#1
nt300
by: LeadSled
I wonder how many they went through before they found the best of the bunch. When they did this test it showed 3 trays of CPU's for testing. AMD has made some huge steps in the overclocking field how many 8150's are you now seeing runing over 5Ghz online now, its alot but to get that 50Ghz+ it shuts down how many cores ? who knows . It is still a step in the right direction for AMD and they are even on par with the 4 core Intels what are they going to do when Intel releses their 6 and 8 core E models. AMD will be back in the mud again. At least they are trying good luck AMD its been along time since you where king of the hill.
There's many that have all 8 cores OCed at 4.80 GHz with only 1.4 vCore running 24/7 stable. That is impressive. I do agree if Piledriver does not deliver with AM3+ platform, then AMD may have to move to FM2 sooner. What I would be happy with is AM3+'s 8-core Piledriver beats the fastest Phenom II by more than 20% all across the board and stays ahead of the i7 2600 a little. This to me would tell me AMD is on the right track.
Posted on Reply
#2
pr0n Inspector
How much of our finite helium did they waste this time?
Posted on Reply
#3
meran
i smell netburst which is a very un efficient processor come on sandy bridge still the most efficient processor in the world!

the celeron on netburst was the record breaker now the new netburst they should have made an 32nm x6 with clock bump first :(
Posted on Reply
#5
Super XP
by: meran
i smell netburst which is a very un efficient processor come on sandy bridge still the most efficient processor in the world!

the celeron on netburst was the record breaker now the new netburst they should have made an 32nm x6 with clock bump first :(
This is a Bulldozer thread, not a Pentium 4 thread. :D
Posted on Reply
#6
meran
by: Super XP
This is a Bulldozer thread, not a Pentium 4 thread. :D
but its a semi pentium 4 slow un efficient u may call it that way :D
i.e. desined to run at highest chocks possible without taking in mind the ipc :D that was the p 4 and now the bulldozer
Posted on Reply
#8
entropy13
by: Super XP
This is a Bulldozer thread, not a Pentium 4 thread. :D
It isn't a Bulldozer thread per se since we're talking about a 2-core, 2-threads CPU from AMD (which doesn't exist under the "Bulldozer" lineup).
Posted on Reply
#10
repman244
by: JrRacinFan
Busted again by another 120mhz!
And also don't forget this is on LN2 and not LHE ;) I think 9GHz is close :)
Posted on Reply
#11
entropy13
by: JrRacinFan
LOL ...
Then if it isn't a Bulldozer chip, what is it?! :p
A "Bulldozer" with "missing parts"? To reach this frequencies a lot of compromise was made. It's like an actual bulldozer without everything that makes it one (like the blade, ripper, track) except for the body, the tracks replaced with four road tires and the engine also replaced with a more beefier one.
Posted on Reply
#12
cadaveca
My name is Dave
by: entropy13
A "Bulldozer" with "missing parts"? To reach this frequencies a lot of compromise was made. It's like an actual bulldozer without everything that makes it one (like the blade, ripper, track) except for the body, the tracks replaced with four road tires and the engine also replaced with a more beefier one.
You need to understand that the world of Extreme clocking has far different rules than what the average user deems acceptable. I've watched the scene grow from it's infancy, to what it is now, so I'm pretty confident in saying that stuff liek this will ALWAYS happen.

This a clocking challenge, not performance.

This is not a compare between CPUs from differnt OEMs...this is a compare of skill in clocking.

Over the next several months, these guys are going to be working hard @ getting a BD module over 9GHz. And nothing we think or say is gonna stop them.


Many people want to be the one to be first to say "It's over 9000!".:roll: you can sit back and watch the competition, or you can ignore it. The choice is yours. ;)
Posted on Reply
#13
Damn_Smooth
by: entropy13
A "Bulldozer" with "missing parts"? To reach this frequencies a lot of compromise was made. It's like an actual bulldozer without everything that makes it one (like the blade, ripper, track) except for the body, the tracks replaced with four road tires and the engine also replaced with a more beefier one.
You had me up until they added a "more beefier" engine. They most certainly did not swap out parts from the chip.
Posted on Reply
#14
cadaveca
My name is Dave
No, but you could call the cooling the engine...;)
Posted on Reply
#15
Damn_Smooth
by: cadaveca
No, but you could call the cooling the engine...;)
Ok, I'll concede. But that's a stretch.
Posted on Reply
#16
cadaveca
My name is Dave
So are many other similes. ;)
Posted on Reply
#17
Damn_Smooth
Right again. I still personally like to consider cooling the fuel though.
Posted on Reply
#18
cadaveca
My name is Dave
The power input is the fuel that is consumed to get stuff done.

It would not be capable of handling that power without the cooling upgrade. Kinda like how sometimes you need a bigger block or heads to push for horsepower.

A stretch, for sure, but whatever. You really gonna gripe about THAT, of all things?:D:p
Posted on Reply
#19
Damn_Smooth
Sometimes I just like to hear myself bitch. :laugh:
Posted on Reply
#20
JrRacinFan
Served 5k and counting ...
by: Damn_Smooth
Sometimes I just like to hear myself bitch. :laugh:
You need to stop that! :p Not good for your health :D

@entropy

Oh cmon, my post was meant with lighthearted-esque-ness. :ohwell: Nothing more
Posted on Reply
#21
entropy13
by: cadaveca
You need to understand that the world of Extreme clocking has far different rules than what the average user deems acceptable. I've watched the scene grow from it's infancy, to what it is now, so I'm pretty confident in saying that stuff liek this will ALWAYS happen.

This a clocking challenge, not performance.

This is not a compare between CPUs from differnt OEMs...this is a compare of skill in clocking.

Over the next several months, these guys are going to be working hard @ getting a BD module over 9GHz. And nothing we think or say is gonna stop them.


Many people want to be the one to be first to say "It's over 9000!".:roll: you can sit back and watch the competition, or you can ignore it. The choice is yours. ;)
:confused:

So in short...an FX-8150 with 4 cores enabled at 8.3GHz for example is NOTHING compared to an FX-8150 with 2 cores enabled at 8.5GHz?


No wonder overclocking competitions are just like your typical elections ($$$, influence, blackmail, cheating), or your typical workplace (patronage policies, favoritism, badmouthing of others).


EDIT: Actually there's a better analogy then to overclocking record setting/competitions. It's the (illegal) motorcycle racing here. You start with a typical motorcycle, and you end up with basically what would amount to a bicycle with slightly bigger wheels and an engine. There's no seat, no headlights, no mudguards, no any other covering over the body, just for the sake of speed.

Of course I'm not saying overclocking is illegal, but apparently it's better to reach 150kph with a "skeleton" motorcycle rather than 145kph with the same motorcycle that didn't have that much compromises.
Posted on Reply
#22
nt300
More news of higher Overclocks for upcoming Bulldozer II CPU's based on the Socket AM3+ :D
NT says:
Great Review: The 10-Core Piledriver based on Socket FM2 won't be released until sometime in 2013. It's replacement is based on Socket AM3+ and will be an 8-Core Piledriver CPU. AMD plans on releasing a B3 revision to it's current Bulldozer (FX-8170), then will move to the 8-Core Piledriver in around Q1 2012 to Q2 2012 for an added 10% increase in performance. This 10% increase in performance should be an addition to the B3 stepping performance boost which should amount to approx: 5% to 7%. Add in the tweaks and some minor design repairs and we are looking at a total possible 20% to 25% increase in performance with Piledriver. So Socket AM3+ has a much longer life.
Posted on Reply
#23
cadaveca
My name is Dave
by: entropy13
:confused:

Of course I'm not saying overclocking is illegal, but apparently it's better to reach 150kph with a "skeleton" motorcycle rather than 145kph with the same motorcycle that didn't have that much compromises.
Basically, yes, that's exactly it. And just so we're straight, I kinda feel as you do, too, about the whole thing.

That said, I have spoken to many of these guys over the years, and it's jsut liek any other hobby..they are in it for the fun. There have been some unfortunate instances of overclocking competitions rigged(Dude in the OP has access to MEGA amounts of parts to bin from, and in the past, was giving scores away to people that then used those scores and won competition entries and prizes they never actually competed for. NOt the OP poster, but dude who lays claim ot those clocks), but all that said, I still enjoy WATCHING them.

I just feel that this side of the OC world has no place in product marketing. AMD marketing team should have pulled their socks up, and sent TPU a chip for a launch release, but clearly they decided that things like the Guinness record were more important. I think that was a very bad move...and really, you must understand that it would not be me personally doing that review, so this is not ME bitching about not getting a chip myself. This is me bitching that my co-worker here @ TPU didn't.

And let me just say, sub-zero clocking isn't as simple as getting a pot, pouring LN2 in it, and then running up the clocks. There is a bit of knowledge you need to just get the system to boot when under that much cold...so I do appreciate the "skill" these guys have.


I wouldn't call it "skill", exactly, but whatever. These guys still put on a good show.
Posted on Reply
#24
Wrigleyvillain
PTFO or GTFO
by: cadaveca


And let me just say, sub-zero clocking isn't as simple as getting a pot, pouring LN2 in it, and then running up the clocks. There is a bit of knowledge you need to just get the system to boot when under that much cold...so I do appreciate the "skill" these guys have.

I wouldn't call it "skill", exactly, but whatever. These guys still put on a good show.
It's definitely skill. And there is a a lot more knowledge and experience involved than the uninitiated is like to think, starting with knowing how not to kill your hardware from any number of things from condensation to too much voltage.
Posted on Reply
#25
cdawall
where the hell are my stars
by: meran
but its a semi pentium 4 slow un efficient u may call it that way :D
i.e. desined to run at highest chocks possible without taking in mind the ipc :D that was the p 4 and now the bulldozer
Well this chip technically is not inefficient, it is not as efficient as the Intel offerings. It is however still a better CPU than the previous generations in certain aspects. IPC on these chips is still 4 the same as the intel offerings and up from 3 on the old chips and 2 on P4 "netburst".

by: entropy13
It isn't a Bulldozer thread per se since we're talking about a 2-core, 2-threads CPU from AMD (which doesn't exist under the "Bulldozer" lineup).
No that little box still says "Bulldozer" the core is still a bulldozer core. This isn't any different than a rebadged Sargus core which is really just a Regor core tuned down.

by: repman244
And also don't forget this is on LN2 and not LHE ;) I think 9GHz is close :)
You would be surprised how little gains they get from LN2 to LHe we will see larger gains moving from stepping to stepping as fab techniques improve. The same way the last batches of Phenom 1 clocked better and the last batches of Phenom II clocked better.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment