Friday, February 24th 2012

Core i7-3820 Overclocked to 5.666 GHz

GUN'G'STAR of TeamRussia successfully achieved an overclocking record of 5.666 GHz for the quad-core Intel Core i7-3820 processor; a feat that validates the LGA2011 i7-3820 of being a generally good chip for overclocking, despite being "Limited Unlocked" (BClk multiplier being unlocked only to a few notches above its stock setting). GUN'G'STAR achieved a clock speed of 5,665.99 MHz using a BClk speed of 131.74 MHz, a multiplier value of 43x, and core voltage of 1.6V. The chip was assisted with GeIL-made DDR3-1600 memory sitting on all four channels, and ASUS Rampage IV Extreme motherboard. Only 2 out of 4 cores of the i7-3820 were enabled for the feat, HyperThreading was disabled. Extreme cooling was used. The CPU-Z validation can be accessed here.

Source: Expreview
Add your own comment

32 Comments on Core i7-3820 Overclocked to 5.666 GHz

#1
avatar_raq
:twitch: 2 cores without hyperthreading? extreme cooling? 5,665.99 MHz?:wtf:
Posted on Reply
#2
entropy13
Hurr durr only 5.666GHz, too slow!!! Bulldozer R0x0rs!!! 8.461GHz FTW!!! INTEL SUCKS!!! -AMD fanboy
Posted on Reply
#3
THE_EGG
by: entropy13
Hurr durr only 5.666GHz, too slow!!! Bulldozer R0x0rs!!! 8.461GHz FTW!!! INTEL SUCKS!!! -AMD fanboy
lol baiting the hook for trolls are we? ;)
Posted on Reply
#4
Yo_Wattup
I thought that was really cool until i saw '2 cores and extreme cooling'
Posted on Reply
#5
buggalugs
If you have to disable cores it kinda defeats the purpose...
Posted on Reply
#6
Ikaruga
by: buggalugs
If you have to disable cores it kinda defeats the purpose...
I have to agree, an I7@~5.7Ghz with only two cores and extreme cooling is pretty much pointless. Some animals can reach ridiculously high speeds by falling into the abyss of a 500 meters deep ravine, - but because of some "certain" reasons - we don't measure maximum speeds like that;)
Posted on Reply
#7
Assimilator
Just like the 8GHz Bulldozer BS, this is useless information that's akin to penis-waving.

by: Ikaruga
I have to agree, an I7@~5.7Ghz with only two cores and extreme cooling is pretty much pointless. Some animals can reach ridiculously high speeds by falling into the abyss of a 500 meters deep ravine, - but because of some "certain" reasons - we don't measure maximum speeds like that;)
That is the best analogy I've ever heard for extreme overclocks that defeat the purpose of having a highly-threaded CPU.
Posted on Reply
#8
1Kurgan1
The Knife in your Back
Nice OC, but I don't see why they say this validates it as a good chip for overclocking, a term like that makes me think over everyday air cooling or water cooling OCing, not DICE or other crazy method.

------------------------


The bottom left of that imagine was what makes your statement great. Guess you never visited the AMD record threads where all the Intle fanboys said "you can't run this daily", :slap: no shit.
Posted on Reply
#9
entropy13
by: 1Kurgan1
http://img.techpowerup.org/120224/Capture085.jpg

The bottom left of that imagine was what makes your statement great. Guess you never visited the AMD record threads where all the Intle fanboys said "you can't run this daily", :slap: no shit.
So you just "imagined" this? WTF are "Intle fanboys"? Is there another company out there making CPUs?

And what's the point of your post anyway? Do you have to be an "Intle fanboy" to say "you can't run this daily" in the AMD 8.461GHz news thread over here in TPU? And why bring THAT up then? I haven't even APPROACHED that "can't run this daily" angle, since I just focused on the overclock itself.

So here I am, just talking about the overclocks themselves, the NUMBERS, the FREQUENCIES, and then you suddenly come up with that "can't run this daily" angle? For what purpose? To provide confusion?
Posted on Reply
#10
MikeMurphy
Is this supposed to be an impressive overclock?
Posted on Reply
#11
entropy13
by: MikeMurphy
Is this supposed to be an impressive overclock?
It's impressive because of the how (not talking about the cooling for obvious reasons), and regardless of the nature of the CPU itself. Even if the overclock is "just" 4.67GHz with liquid cooling it would still be impressive.
Posted on Reply
#12
THE_EGG
by: entropy13
So you just "imagined" this? WTF are "Intle fanboys"? Is there another company out there making CPUs?

And what's the point of your post anyway? Do you have to be an "Intle fanboy" to say "you can't run this daily" in the AMD 8.461GHz news thread over here in TPU? And why bring THAT up then? I haven't even APPROACHED that "can't run this daily" angle, since I just focused on the overclock itself.

So here I am, just talking about the overclocks themselves, the NUMBERS, the FREQUENCIES, and then you suddenly come up with that "can't run this daily" angle? For what purpose? To provide confusion?
jesus dude, take it easy. Clearly "Intle" was just a typo for Intel. He is just saying that to shut down those cores and to use "extreme cooling" for this OC to work isn't viable in a daily use situation.

Besides, in your first post in this thread, you were pretty much asking for trouble (even though i took it as a joke) some people will take that seriously and to their heart.
Posted on Reply
#13
mrw1986
by: entropy13
So you just "imagined" this? WTF are "Intle fanboys"? Is there another company out there making CPUs?

And what's the point of your post anyway? Do you have to be an "Intle fanboy" to say "you can't run this daily" in the AMD 8.461GHz news thread over here in TPU? And why bring THAT up then? I haven't even APPROACHED that "can't run this daily" angle, since I just focused on the overclock itself.

So here I am, just talking about the overclocks themselves, the NUMBERS, the FREQUENCIES, and then you suddenly come up with that "can't run this daily" angle? For what purpose? To provide confusion?
What's the point of attacking peoples' spelling and grammar? How does that contribute to the conversation at all? Typically people do that when they don't have a valid rebuttal to an argument.
Posted on Reply
#14
entropy13
by: THE_EGG
jesus dude, take it easy. Clearly "Intle" was just a typo for Intel. He is just saying that to shut down those cores and to use "extreme cooling" for this OC to work isn't viable in a daily use situation.
And there's no point in raising THAT when quoting me, since both this 5.666GHz and 8.461GHz overclocks for the i7-3820 and FX-8150 respectively were both done with "extreme cooling" and with just two cores. The fact that such clocks are not sustainable in daily use does not preclude the comparison between the two.

by: THE_EGG
Besides, in your first post in this thread, you were pretty much asking for trouble (even though i took it as a joke) some people will take that seriously and to their heart.
Exactly, fanboys are everywhere. AMD fanboys are even more vicious, eclipsed only by Apple fanhipsters.

by: mrw1986
What's the point of attacking peoples' spelling and grammar? How does that contribute to the conversation at all? Typically people do that when they don't have a valid rebuttal to an argument.
What's the point of attacking the "attack" on peoples' spelling and grammar? How does that contribute to the conversation at all? Typically people do that when they don't have a valid rebuttal to an argument.

But then again I had rebuttals, so...you didn't "contribute" at all. :laugh: You can say that I was...:cool: the atypical. ;) :laugh:
Posted on Reply
#15
ensabrenoir
Impressive this would have been....If it were on water or air.... However still dosent change the fact that Intel rocks and the The other teams fan-boys secretly drool over Intel's hardware in private like naughty little school boys with pin up magazine.
Posted on Reply
#16
radrok
Nice overclocking feat for a partially locked chip, too bad for it a good binned 2600k/2700k can achieve 6GHz on exotic cooling, I wonder what's the roof of this chip on water cooling or even phase change which are possible to run 24/7.


@ fanboys argument, excluding the fact that entropy was trolling hard (Idk why he would do that)
Because makes sense to be a fanboy of either Intel or AMD, right?
Fanboyism is what ruins goods forums like this, they'll always defend their beloved company even if they have to make up an argument.
Many times I've seen fanboys recommending hardware to people who asked for an advice about hardware.
Seriously, if you are a fanboy ( I'm talking generally) you should get your brains tested.
Posted on Reply
#18
LagunaX
Unless these babies do 5ghz easy for 24/7 on air, there is no need to upgrade from a 2500k or 2600k.
Posted on Reply
#19
1Kurgan1
The Knife in your Back
by: entropy13
So you just "imagined" this? WTF are "Intle fanboys"? Is there another company out there making CPUs?

And what's the point of your post anyway? Do you have to be an "Intle fanboy" to say "you can't run this daily" in the AMD 8.461GHz news thread over here in TPU? And why bring THAT up then? I haven't even APPROACHED that "can't run this daily" angle, since I just focused on the overclock itself.

So here I am, just talking about the overclocks themselves, the NUMBERS, the FREQUENCIES, and then you suddenly come up with that "can't run this daily" angle? For what purpose? To provide confusion?
Whoa silver, whoa, lol, don't get so butt hurt. Imagined what? (clarification helps) And grammar police on a obvious typo, I am so hurt. :laugh:

And no, you don't have to be an Intel fanboy to bring up that you can't run 8ghz 24/7, you have to be a moron (it's pretty obvious you can't does't take a rocket scientist to figure that out). I bring it up because rather than making a constructive post about the record itself, you would rather be the first to troll (don't act like anyone else but you started this). You didn't focus on anything, except for trolling, don't act like your post had any point except being inflammatory.

So here you are talking about nothing and trolling, not talking about any sort of numbers, and you get offended when someone calls you out. (this is a restructuring of your last sentence since you weren't discussing anything about specifics like you probably should have been).

by: entropy13
Exactly, fanboys are everywhere. AMD fanboys are even more vicious, eclipsed only by Apple fanhipsters.
It's funny you say that, since you were the first troll in the thread, a Intel thread, and you had to mention AMD. I haven't seen any other BS posts in this thread except yours.
Posted on Reply
#20
mrw1986
by: entropy13
What's the point of attacking the "attack" on peoples' spelling and grammar? How does that contribute to the conversation at all? Typically people do that when they don't have a valid rebuttal to an argument.

But then again I had rebuttals, so...you didn't "contribute" at all. :laugh: You can say that I was...:cool: the atypical. ;) :laugh:
Funny you should say that considering your posts contain nothing of substance. I wasn't attacking you in anyway, just pointing out that you have contributed nothing worthwhile to this post. Granted, I have not as well, but I did not demean anyone in the process.

This thread has nothing to do with fanboyism. While I think that this is a decent accomplishment for the chip, I can't say I'm overly impressed. These chips should be tested to their full potential with all cores on and HT on.
Posted on Reply
#21
Dent1
by: ensabrenoir
Impressive this would have been....If it were on water or air.... However still dosent change the fact that Intel rocks and the The other teams fan-boys secretly drool over Intel's hardware in private like naughty little school boys with pin up magazine.
Other team? Secretly drool?

You do realise that AMD broke the overclocking record @ 8.429GHz. Yep

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4770/amd-sets-world-overclocking-record-with-8429ghz-bulldozer-processor
Posted on Reply
#22
EarthDog
by: radrok
Nice overclocking feat for a partially locked chip, too bad for it a good binned 2600k/2700k can achieve 6GHz on exotic cooling, I wonder what's the roof of this chip on water cooling or even phase change which are possible to run 24/7.
A good bin :slap:? How about there are only two listed at Hwbot.


I have to imagine that 5Ghz+ on water with all cores is tangible. I cant imagine LN2 was needed to get there.

This also tells me that the turbo is up to 4.3Ghz, so thats interesting.

by: Dent1
Other team? Secretly drool?

You do realise that AMD broke the overclocking record @ 8.429GHz. Yep

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4770/amd-sets-world-overclocking-record-with-8429ghz-bulldozer-processor
too bad a 5.7Ghz SB-E pounds on it in benchmarks though! One trick pony comes to mind. :D

SB-E 2.2s @ 5.7Ghz - http://hwbot.org/benchmark/wprime_32m/rankings?hardwareTypeId=processor_2470#start=0#interval=20
FX 4.2s @ 7Ghz- http://hwbot.org/benchmark/wprime_32m/rankings?hardwareTypeId=processor_2396#start=0#interval=20
These chips should be tested to their full potential with all cores on and HT on.
See... again, thats not the name of the game with CPUz. The object is to get the highest score... that is achieved by disabling cores and using your strongest ones. Of course its not a 24/7 thing to do, its never intended to be that way for CPUz. This site just doesnt understand the demographic those numbers are intended for. ;)
Posted on Reply
#23
Dent1
by: EarthDog

too bad a 5.7Ghz SB-E pounds on it in benchmarks though! One trick pony comes to mind. :D.
That's irrelevant. AMD holds the record. That can not be disputed.

Pounds on it? There is no benchmarks of Bulldozer @ 8.429GHz and there is no benchmarks of SB-E @ 5.7GHz for a cross comparison. So how do you know which performs better? Or whom pounds on whom?


by: EarthDog


These chips should be tested to their full potential with all cores on and HT on.See... again, thats not the name of the game with CPUz.
An OC with all cores I would love. But regardlesss, both SB-E and BD had only 2 cores running, so its fair game. AMD holds the OC crown. Lets not cry over a fact.
Posted on Reply
#24
EarthDog
Lulz.. nobody is crying here.. I see people reaching to defend AMD at all costs though! :p

I edited in examples. BD cant run Wprime anywhere close to 8.4Ghz so tough to compare apples to apples. So at 5.7Ghz (SBe) and 7Ghz (BD) SBe is almost twice as fast in that bench. 5.7Ghz Wprime to 5.9Ghz CPuz max (full cores in Wprime, and less in CPUz) vs BD at 7Ghz full cores, and 8.4zGhz less in CPUz. Drastic difference there. You wouldnt want to see 5.7Ghz v 5.7Ghz... my 2600k would beat it out! :p

But yes, they hold that record.. absolutely. I cannot and would not take away from that feat. :)


But I digress. :)
Posted on Reply
#25
Dent1
by: EarthDog
Lulz.. nobody is crying here.. I see people reaching to defend AMD at all costs though! :p:)
Nobody is defending AMD. They are stating the truth. AMD holds the OC crown. Performance crown isn't being disputed.

If you want to talk performance open another thread. We are talking OC and AMD is top notch for overclocking according to "The world record".

by: EarthDog

I edited in examples. BD cant run Wprime anywhere close to 8Ghz so tough to compare apples to apples. So at 5.7Ghz (SBe) and 7Ghz (BD) SBe is twice as fast.

But yes, they hold that record.. absolutely. :)
But its irrelevant. WPrime is 1 benchmark. How can you base performance on 1 benchmark?

Also Intel always did better in WPrime. Pentium D used to outperform the Athlon 64 X2 in WPrime, and the Athlon 64 X2 was a much faster CPU overall. How do you explain that?
Maybe the same thing is happening with BD vs SB-E, at their respected OC record.

I want to end this thread or post with a fact. Fact: AMD holds the OC record @ 8.429GHz. :)
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment