AMD FX Sets Guinness Record for Clock Speed

[trickson]

Really could care less....Whats stupid is we've seen benchmarks from the LGA 2011 lineup before we've seen Bulldozer's performance level. All signs indicate that this is intentionally done because of lack luster performance.

TLDR; Doesn't matter if it does 5Ghz on air, if it gets beat by a stock i7 2600k it's pointless.

I agree . Lots of fluff right now nothing indicating any performance at all .

 

[[H]@RD5TUFF]

Er, how is revving your 50cc motorbike/vespa to breaking point anything of interest. Seriously, if they had all 8 cores blowing and stable with world record benchmark numbers, then that would be worth noting. This isnt. Q. Can it run minesweeper? A. No.

Message to these boys: Listen. If you want to be a geeky nerd, fine. But do something to impress us. Don't have a camera focused on yourself like you are doing something that will put us in awe. When it didn't. Fail. Even bigger fail to AMD that thinks this is worthy. Corporate Fail. (And that's even worse!)

Gotta agree, this is a pretty fail attention grab.

 

[1Kurgan1]

I don't understand the flaming here. Anyone with half a brain knows this isn't a performance test, this isn't showing anything about what we will be receiving. They are just breaking a number that has stood for I believe 5 years or so, which is a long time for records to stand in the ever evolving PC world. You will see benches soon enough, if anyone was to go out and base their processor purchase (for daily use) on benching done using anything above water cooling, thats your own fault.

 

[DanishDevil]

IMO, if this news doesn't make your nuts tingle, you don't belong on this forum

 

[EarthDog]

I agree . Lots of fluff right now nothing indicating any performance at all .

Fluff

Fluff

Fluff

Fluff

Fluff

Fluff

Fluff

Fluff


Ok.. we get it.

IMO, if this news doesn't make your nuts tingle, you don't belong on this forum

OMG That is sig worthy!

 

[trickson]

What would WOW me is if they did this on all 8 cores ! Kind of seems a bit lacking when you have an 8 core CPU and have to disable all the cores but 2 to achieve some thing meaningless like this . But I guess if AMD wants to show off what they can do like this , They can . I want to be WOWED and this did nothing but piss me off . Show some real substance show some real performance not this BS fluff job ! AMD 8 core CPU can hit 8+ GHz if you have LN2 and all but 2 cores disabled ! WOW !

 

[linoliveira]

gotta agree... all the flaming for what? this is an enthusiast run there... isn't where we all interested in here? i did get impressed with the high freqs, now just wait for RL benches and stop flaming like an Intel fanboy who got crashed by a Bulldozer.

 

[cadaveca]

IMO, if this news makes your nuts tingle, you don't belong on this forum

Survey says:


Corrected!

 

[trickson]

IMO, if this news doesn't make your nuts tingle, you don't belong on this forum

LOL . Honestly just how many of these will get in the hands of US ? Nothing news worthy here . I mean yeah good job getting that CPU up there and all , I do not see how this is relevant to any end user .

 

[EarthDog]

LOL . Honestly just how many of these will get in the hands of US ? Nothing news worthy here . I mean yeah good job getting that CPU up there and all , I do not see how this is relevant to any end user .

This is clearly not for you...and you have made that abudently, flufflily, clear.

Some people, albeit a tiny minority are excited about this though.

 

[trickson]

This is clearly not for you...and you have made that abudently, flufflily, clear.

Some people, albeit a tiny minority are excited about this though.

I just do not see what is so exciting is all . I am really wanting this chip so I am looking at it with eyes wide open . And if you know me then yes I like a great over clocking Chip as in my sig my CPU now has been going strong at 4.2GHz ! I hope these will do that and more yes 24/7 fully stable .

 

[repman244]

I really can't believe some of the posts here....

First of all they need a design which they can improve (they don't have the money to make new designs all the time like Intel does) and a design where you can gain performance by increasing frequency and by doing small improvements (which are cheap!).
Second: a CPU to compete with mid-range CPU's (2500k for an example) because that's where the money is and not high-end $1k chips.

While doing all of that why not break a WR? I don't see a problem with this, are you all jealous of those clocks?
I think it's a nice way to promote the chip and don't see anything wrong with it.

All of those whining about that they only used 2 core...well did you even take a look at the current top 20 list? I guess not, so here you go: http://hwbot.org/benchmark/cpu_frequency/
Weird isn't it, all those celerons....
When you are after a frequency world record you do not care about the number of core (it is pointless...) all you care is the maximum you can get out of the CPU, that's how freq. WR's are set just deal with it.

Here comes the more important part:

This WR may be pointless to some but then again it shows just how much clock potential the CPU has for future (and this is only the beginning!).
Just like the first Phenom II's that barely made it to 6.4GHz on LN2 but at the end they got all the way up to 7.4GHz (and you could see that frequency increase on stock frequency at the same TDP).
If you think all of this is pointless, well you are on the wrong forum...

I could be wrong on this one but as far as I know JF-AMD said that IPC increases compared to the current Phenom II's, and if you combine that IPC increase with a much higher clock potential, isn't that a win?

 

[trickson]

OK I guess you are right . I am looking at this all wrong . AMD hit a WR overclock now that is great YES it is . The wow factor is there for sure .

 

[Steevo]

If you look at raw integer performance on the server chips compared to the same core architecture in server chips Intel is making we see they are still behind in CORE IPC, but in threaded IPC they are 30% ahead at the same clock rate from my math.

So multithreaded applications will benefit from these new chips, single threaded applications will require a higher frequency than the competitive Intel chip to attain the same performance. Single threaded apps currently are going the way of the dodo, and those still in use can be ran effectively by older processor, meaning current gen processors have more than enough to run them fine.

So at the end of the day, what does this mean?

I will take a overclockable 5+Ghz 8 core chip that offers superior performance than a 4 core hyper-threading chip, and does it at a lower price any day. Especially when the whole platform costs less than the equivalent platform from Intel.

 

[repman244]

So multithreaded applications will benefit from these new chips, single threaded applications will require a higher frequency than the competitive Intel chip to attain the same performance

Yes, IMO that's how it's going to be, the aggressive high frequency turbo is there for the ST workloads.

I think everyone should be happy with performance that is close to 2500k-2600k at same/lower price. I mean look how much behind SB Phenom II is...they are really doing a massive leap in performance to come close to it (everyone is comparing the FX chips to SB but no one compares them to Phenom II).

 

[trickson]

Yes, IMO that's how it's going to be, the aggressive high frequency turbo is there for the ST workloads.

I think everyone should be happy with performance that is close to 2500k-2600k at same/lower price. I mean look how much behind SB Phenom II is...they are really doing a massive leap in performance to come close to it (everyone is comparing the FX chips to SB but no one compares them to Phenom II).

Now I am getting all excited . My new build will be so cool BD !

 

[repman244]

LOL . Honestly just how many of these will get in the hands of US ? Nothing news worthy here . I mean yeah good job getting that CPU up there and all , I do not see how this is relevant to any end user .

Well you might be interested in this then, directly from chew*:

I would not go as far as to say cherry picked. I blind pulled with no windows testing 24 chips based on there VID, the 4th chip we tested (note not a pretested ever chip ) did 8.4

We still had twenty chips left to try out but really didn't care after the 4th one.......

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums...-info-fans-!&p=4948757&viewfull=1#post4948757

 

[EarthDog]

Glad you/he posted that. I knew that tidbit but wasnt sure if I could share.

 

[exodusprime1337]

It's not bashing, it's observing a few inconsistencies. Is it not true that most of the chip is disabled? Is it not true that it says there on the validation page "2 cores, 2 threads"?

Wooden screws can be used in many instances, nVidia does not hold the IP on those. A "fanboi" would be someone blinded by their infatuation, 2 out of 8 is just 25%, and that's a big difference.

Wasn't AMD that complained recently about "dark silicon"? ( <== now that's bashing)

It's completely valid and it's how it's done on both teams amd and intel. I personally know chew who is in that video and i've been to his house and benched with him. The validation is only to see how hi the chip goes under any condidition, each core is raised independently of each other to find the one that goes the highest, then when they find that, they push that one the hardest. intell does the same thing.

 

[TheMailMan78]

I don't understand the flaming here. Anyone with half a brain knows this isn't a performance test, this isn't showing anything about what we will be receiving. They are just breaking a number that has stood for I believe 5 years or so, which is a long time for records to stand in the ever evolving PC world. You will see benches soon enough, if anyone was to go out and base their processor purchase (for daily use) on benching done using anything above water cooling, thats your own fault.

IMO, if this news doesn't make your nuts tingle, you don't belong on this forum

If this was an Intel chip the tune on here would be much different. But hey, thats life. I mean in the end its just a record which is in no way indicative of consumer performance. Its like drag racing is no way indicative of an every day driving experience.

However I do find it funny how defensive people get of one brand showing off something that couldn't count for less against another brand. I had no idea this forum was so eat up with fanboys. To much new blood.

This post made me lol
http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2393800&postcount=2

Thats EXACTLY how it should be taken.

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

imho its just nice to get some rock solid facts goin on, cant be long now untill we all Know what they will do in benches

 

[NC37]

I wonder if this FX also suffers from Intel cold / flu when Intel i7 reaches 18C or lower and starts to work worse than above 18C or something like that.

AMD CPUs won't. One of the reasons they are behind in tech is because they make their CPUs able to handle temperature extremes, extreme cold mostly. I remember reading it takes extra work for them to keep designing for this. Intel doesn't do this. But this is more of a thing scientists would care about.

 

[TheMailMan78]

AMD CPUs won't. One of the reasons they are behind in tech is because they make their CPUs able to handle temperature extremes, extreme cold mostly. I remember reading it takes extra work for them to keep designing for this. Intel doesn't do this. But this is more of a thing scientists would care about.

You don't think it has anything to do with the fact Intels R&D department has a budget the size of an aircraft carrier?

 

[Lionheart]

GO AMD woooo

 

[lashton]

really?

Peop,e are completely missing the point it shows the FX could (possibly) iverclock better than the 2600K but intel fanboys just shuddered in thier pants at this news