1. Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

First Intel Clarkdale Core i3 Low-Voltage Overclocking Feat Yields 4 GHz at 0.832 V

Discussion in 'News' started by btarunr, Jul 21, 2009.

  1. Mussels

    Mussels Moderprator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2004
    Messages:
    42,150 (11.66/day)
    Thanks Received:
    9,474
    only the "good" wolfdales can do 4Ghz on 1.2v. Theres a lot of people on these forums who cant manage that stable, so its most definately not as common as you think. This can do it on ~ 0.85v, with an integrated memory controller (more power draw) AND two virtual cores.

    Its doing it with a decent amount less voltage, despite the fact its got more hardware within it.
  2. h3llb3nd4

    h3llb3nd4 New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2009
    Messages:
    3,323 (1.64/day)
    Thanks Received:
    307
    Location:
    Durban, South Africa
    sh*t!
    I want to see benches with HT off...
  3. filip007

    filip007 New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2009
    Messages:
    151 (0.07/day)
    Thanks Received:
    13
    Location:
    Slovenia
    They are trying to make low power and high GHz this is perfect for normal users, two core is just OK

    4GHz is this retail speed or just some high speed prototype ?

    5GHz or 6GHz dual core not bad you will get the same speed like 3GHz Quad core but with lower power consumption.
  4. mdm-adph

    mdm-adph New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2007
    Messages:
    2,478 (0.91/day)
    Thanks Received:
    340
    Location:
    Your house.
    Waiting to see some benchmarks! Still an impressive feat, though, however I think it has much more to do with the simple fact that it's only dual-core and 32nm. Perhaps AMD's 32nm chips will run with similiar ability. :D

    However, when Intel makes an affordable true 8-core 32nm chip, and if AMD doesn't have anything close that'll match it, I'll buy one from Intel, just because it's neat.

    Nope -- I have a feeling it's all going according to plan.

    Because they were trying to regain the performance crown (you want to make it as easy for people to adopt/upgrade to sell as many chips as possible).

    That's exactly it.

    AMD did it when they were ahead, performance-wise, and now Intel is doing the same (forcing you to buy/choose from tons of sockets/chipsets). It's a neverending circle. When/if AMD gets back ahead, they'll start doing the same thing again, probably.
  5. Mussels

    Mussels Moderprator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2004
    Messages:
    42,150 (11.66/day)
    Thanks Received:
    9,474
    single socket was flawed anyway - as revisions came along, compatibility went to shit.

    early 775 boards cant run pentium D, later ones cant run core 2 duo, then theres ones that cant take quads, and then theres still ones that couldnt take 45nm.
    There was many, many revisions of 775 - how the hell is having two main desktop sockets different?
    With an integrated memory controller CPU controls memory support, so it makes sense that if you want different memory, use different sockets. AM2 vs AM3, 1366 vs 1156

    AMD has similar issues, although they only started with AM2. AM2, AM2+, high wattage chips that blew out average boards. It sure as hell got confusing for average joe who wanted to buy "the best"



    1. socket 1366: Triple channel ram, high end CPU's. more cores, more threads speed comes before anything else, chipsets based around 2 video cards, or more.

    2. Socket 1156: dual channel ram, midrange CPU's, dual to quad core (cool running, power efficient chips for the average user - efficiency over speed). Mobo chipsets designed for 1 video card, two at most.

    3. There is another, lower socket. Its designed for ITX platforms and such, with integrated graphics. It'll be just like the atom, perhaps even a replacement. No one whines that atom isnt 775, do they?
  6. LAN_deRf_HA

    LAN_deRf_HA

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2008
    Messages:
    4,525 (1.93/day)
    Thanks Received:
    932
    I could stand the two socket bit a lot more if they just hadn't put an i7 on 1156. Doesn't feel right on multiple levels.
  7. btarunr

    btarunr Editor & Senior Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2007
    Messages:
    28,431 (11.29/day)
    Thanks Received:
    13,618
    Location:
    Hyderabad, India
    How not? They will last, and both offer better upgrade paths, and processors.
  8. Mussels

    Mussels Moderprator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2004
    Messages:
    42,150 (11.66/day)
    Thanks Received:
    9,474
    i3, i5, i7 and i9 are all about how many threads the CPU can do.

    2, 4, 8, and 16 respectively.

    They could have a native quad core be an i5, as well as a dual core with HT - i cant confirm it, but thats how it seems to be going.
  9. newtekie1

    newtekie1 Semi-Retired Folder

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2005
    Messages:
    19,839 (6.19/day)
    Thanks Received:
    5,944
    As someone already pointed out, we have just about as many platforms in the works for these two sockets. And LGA775 was around for a long ass time, it started with the 900 series chipsets remember.

    As these sockets progress through time, I can guarantee you there will be more chipsets developed. You can't expect these to last anywhere near as long as 775 and stick stick with the original few chipsets that were released, it just isn't going to happen.

    Yes, but none of that is solved by a dual(or triple) socket system. As new processors are released, having multiple sockets doesn't help guarantee that they will be compatible with older boards. Most of the reasons older 775 boards were not compatible with newer processor either came down to the chipsets not supporting the processors, or the electrical specifications changing. Having multiple sockets does not solve this issue, we can't say that the X58 or P55 chipset is going to support processors released 4 or 5 years down the road, and we also can't say that Intel isn't going to make an electrical change on newer processor rendering the current two sockets useless.

    And of course no one whines that Atom isn't 775, just like they don't whine that the mobile processors use a different socket than the desktop processor. People don't buy an Atom machine expecting to slap a core 2 in it. However, you better believe there will be people buying an i7/i5/i3 system, and expecting to be able to put a better i7 in it, only to find out the best i7's they were looking to use won't work because they use a different socket...

    How many topics a week do you think we will get on this?
    Last edited: Jul 22, 2009
    Meecrob and phanbuey say thanks.
    Crunching for Team TPU More than 25k PPD
  10. Mussels

    Mussels Moderprator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2004
    Messages:
    42,150 (11.66/day)
    Thanks Received:
    9,474
    as far as i care, only the dual socket matters. the third one is as irrelevant as atom.


    It doesnt solve many problems, but it doesnt ADD any either - its no different to how AMD had socket 939 and socket 940, one being mainstream and one being server.

    All intel have done, is made a second series which costs more money for the niche market of entuhsiasts and small business/home servers. as far as 90% of the world cares, 1366 may as well not exist - they'll never see it, and they'll never buy it. its like the intel extreme CPUs.
  11. iStink

    iStink New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2008
    Messages:
    648 (0.30/day)
    Thanks Received:
    49
    THATS EXACTLY WHAT I SAID!


    lolololol:roll:
  12. HalfAHertz

    HalfAHertz

    Joined:
    May 4, 2009
    Messages:
    1,886 (0.97/day)
    Thanks Received:
    378
    Location:
    Singapore
    I think you hit the nail on the head. This seems to be their main reason - compatibility. The platform isn't limited by the chipset anymore because the chipset is in the cpu itself. You are right, the motherboard may be obsolete in 2 or 3 or even 5 years, but at least for the next one or two generations it is going to last.

    So if I may, from what I understand the situation is something like this:

    LGA775 -nada lowend i3

    LGA1155 - Dual channel DDR3 memory controler, integrated graphics, (?) no pci-e controler lowend/middle i5

    LGA1156 - Dual channel DDR3 memory controler, pci-e controler middle/highend i5/i7

    LGA1366 - Tripple channel DDR3 memory controler, ... Ultra highend i7/i9

    This was a very wothwhile debate :)
  13. Mussels

    Mussels Moderprator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2004
    Messages:
    42,150 (11.66/day)
    Thanks Received:
    9,474
    yep thats pretty much it.

    If they get chips at 1.0v or lower stock for 1155, we'll be seeing one hell of a leap in CPU power in the mobile arena. single core atom, pssh. lets go dual core w/ HT :D
  14. TheMailMan78

    TheMailMan78 Big Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2007
    Messages:
    20,936 (7.91/day)
    Thanks Received:
    7,509
    So Intel has 4 sockets?!
  15. a_ump

    a_ump

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2007
    Messages:
    3,598 (1.45/day)
    Thanks Received:
    367
    Location:
    Smithfield, WV
    haha it cracks me up reading all your questions bout these sockets and the feeling of utter bewilderment. but yep looks that way. Honestly i personally think using different sockets is much easier to understand than 1 socket that may or may not be compatible with your CPU of choice(LGA 775). Though there is a difference, all CPU released for LGA 775 were compatible with the chipsets of their time, the only misunderstandings that occured were when you wanted to upgrade and your old chipset not supporting the new CPU in mind. I thk within the life time of these sockets, each one(1266, 1156, etc) will have just as many chipsets as LGA775 alone had.
  16. newtekie1

    newtekie1 Semi-Retired Folder

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2005
    Messages:
    19,839 (6.19/day)
    Thanks Received:
    5,944
    It doesn't solve any problems, and it certainly does add problems, I've already stated them.

    Yes, the 1366 was a niche market, but only because Intel made it so. If they didn't release 1156, and instead launched i5 and i3 processors for 1366, then it would be mainstream.

    The problem now is that people are going to buy an i5 machine, and want to upgrade to i7 or i9 later, and find out they can't because it uses a different socket. It is confusing and dumb. It gets even more confusing when people with i7 processors go to upgrade to another i7 processor...and they can't!:banghead: Imagine that. How idiotic would it be if someone bought a Core 2 desktop only to find out they couldn't upgrade to another Core 2? Well that is exactly what Intel is doing...:banghead:

    The problem is, it doesn't help with compatibility. Even though most of the chipset is on the processor, that doesn't guarantee compatibility. Even in the 775 days, the main reason for the needing of a new motherboard was generally caused by changes to the power requirements of the processors, not the chipset itself. The chipset supported the processor just fine, but the power setup on the board did not. That is why Pentium D's were not compatible with certainly older boards, and why the 45nm Quads were not compatible with certain boards. It might have even been a reason behind why the Core 2s required new boards also. But take a chipset like the 965P...that goes way back...and it supports virtually every 775 processor in existance when on the right motherboard.

    And while the northbridge is on the processor, the southbridge isn't, and it still has to maintain compatibility with the newer processors, which isn't guaranteed either.

    And again, compatibility is hampered by dual sockets. Having two different processor in the same generation, in the same series(Core i7) that won't work in the same motherboard doesn't sound like compatibility to me...:banghead:
    Crunching for Team TPU More than 25k PPD
  17. 3870x2

    3870x2

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2008
    Messages:
    4,875 (2.05/day)
    Thanks Received:
    689
    Location:
    Joplin, Mo
    Actually, we are both talking out of our "ass", because we are talking pure speculation. Have some respect, don't talk to me like that.
    In a perfect world, where every processor would work with its intended socket (775/1155/1156/1366) this would be a great idea, where in 2 years newer corei7 processors would still work with the 1366 mainboards of today, this system would be absolutely wonderful.
    Last edited: Jul 22, 2009
  18. TheMailMan78

    TheMailMan78 Big Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2007
    Messages:
    20,936 (7.91/day)
    Thanks Received:
    7,509
    Meh. I'm lost. Ill stick to my "slower" AMD rig for now I think. (kisses his rig gently).
  19. 3870x2

    3870x2

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2008
    Messages:
    4,875 (2.05/day)
    Thanks Received:
    689
    Location:
    Joplin, Mo
    There is absolutely nothing wrong with your rig. My next step though, is to stick with dual and go to i3 from e8500.
  20. TheMailMan78

    TheMailMan78 Big Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2007
    Messages:
    20,936 (7.91/day)
    Thanks Received:
    7,509
    I know. But with Intel having no "clear" upgrade path I'm sticking with AMD for now. 4 sockets? WTF.
  21. Meecrob New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2009
    Messages:
    318 (0.17/day)
    Thanks Received:
    12
    People, IFB's mostly will say amd's had more sockets then intel over the years, I have more then once listed them all, but the fact is Intel has MORE SOCKETS over the years, you cant count 775 first gen and current as the same socket, because newer chips will not work in older boards, many/most first gen 775 boards cant even take pentium-d's that are just 2 p4's on one socket, and NO pre core2 board can take a core2 cpu thats not an unlocked ES chip.

    the core2 COULD HAVE WORKED IN NORMAL 775 BOARDS, thats what it was tested in, BUT intel wanted to sell more chipsets, so they SOFTWARE FUZED the cpu to give an error and refuse to boot if on a pre core2 board.

    I have owned many an AMD rig, and have never had a problem finding upgrades even YEARS after the socket came out, 939 was a semi-dark spot, but i avoided 939 as it didnt offer much more perf then 754 and was a good bit more expensive( no 15% in synthetic benches and 7% at best in rare real world apps isnt enough to justify the diff in cost)

    I have no intrest in these chips/sockets, sure they will bench well, but fact is that im about 80% gamer, 10% video/audio encoder and 10% webhead, and AMD covers those bases VERY WELL.

    slap in a current nvidia card and grab badaboom and you got better encode speed then any intel cpu can offer!!!
  22. phanbuey

    phanbuey

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2007
    Messages:
    5,203 (2.10/day)
    Thanks Received:
    973
    Location:
    Miami
    wow 10.5 at 4ghz... thats extra meh - thats only marginally faster than e8500 at 4Ghz with some decent ddr2 :/

    then again, superpi = useless benchmark across platforms.
    Last edited: Jul 23, 2009

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guest)

Share This Page