Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

2.13GHz E6400 Conroe at 3.1GHz

Tags:
Last response: in CPUs
Share
April 22, 2006 3:33:32 AM

The following should be taken with a bit of caution since the results appear to come from the the recent IDF although the translation makes it unclear whether it's Intel or an OEM who did the overclock.

http://www.hkepc.com/bbs/news.php?tid=587650

Translated:
http://babelfish.altavista.com/babelfish/trurl_pagecont...

In any case, they used the 2.13GHz E6400, which is the second lowest model, and overclocked it to a 388.7MHz base FSB (1554.9MHz result) yielding a 3109.7MHz clock speed. They then ran the 1M Super PI finishing in 16s which is supposedly comparable to a 6GHz Netburst. This was all based on the constraints of the current 130W FMB2 TDP specification for Presler. It gives an idea of what Conroe could accomplish if the thermal restraints were relaxed. It can't be independantly verified at this time though.
April 22, 2006 3:52:26 AM

Now as soon as they write a language that is based on PI and write games in that language we'll all be able to rocket along! Sure Conroe blows away pi, I know Conroe will put up a great fight, but I'm wating for real testing.
Related resources
April 22, 2006 3:59:27 AM

I agree with you of course, but in this case the Super PI result was more to confirm that the chip could run at 3.1GHz which was what was significant rather than the actual score. I'd like the NDA lifted too, but it probably won't be for a while yet.
April 22, 2006 8:39:01 AM

Without SuperPI validaton code I will consider the results as untrue...9-inch and MMM kind-a-style... :evil: 
Edit: Anyway I belive that Conroe will match that result for SPi1M.
If Yonah at 3083MHz can do SPi1M<20s, why not Conroe?
a b à CPUs
April 22, 2006 12:53:49 PM

That is quite encouraging, as none of the pics showed any exotic liquid nitrogen containers sitting on top of the core, etc....

It will indeed be interesting to see if this generation OCs as well as the P3600@900, Celeron 300A at 450, 366@550 era!

It will also be interesting to see jsut how well the 2M cache models at lower clock speeds perform in gaming vs. the FX60...
April 22, 2006 1:19:38 PM

2.13Ghz to 3.1Ghz was done by using only original Prescott FMB2 fan. Think about what is the limit when watercooling, ......
April 22, 2006 4:42:16 PM

Thats some nice scores
Heck, those scores are enormous!
April 22, 2006 5:31:43 PM

The latest hard overclock has the 2.16GHz T2600 Core Duo at 3.42GHz using subzero cooling. It completed the 1M Super PI in 17.75s which beats the current world record from a 7.2GHz 670. This result has been validated.

http://www.madshrimps.be/forums/showthread.php?s=&threa...

It doesn't exactly prove the Conroe result but it does offer some additional perspective.
April 22, 2006 5:58:01 PM

Here is another validated overclock (2.13Ghz clocked to 2.75Ghz):



Looking really really solid. This was just an air cooled overclock, nothing exotic at all. Good to see we are starting to see motherboards with proper support for Conroe out in the market. Closer than you think!
April 22, 2006 6:33:40 PM

He was talking about the systems.
- X1900 CrossFire
- D975XBX and DFI (ATi chipset) mobos
- timings for AMD are 2-2-2-2 (dunno how they did that, but thats what he said)
- timings for Intel were 4-4-4
- AMD system was equipped with the best stuff you could get on the market
- AMD processor was an FX-60 @ 2.8

And I got all that without knowing a single word of french (well... I know a tiny, tiny, tiny bit >_<)
April 22, 2006 6:41:27 PM

Quote:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-84485335598896...

anyone know ?wth? this guy is going on about Conroe for, please translate need to know?

I'm not sure why you are posting this in every thread. He was describing the systems and accurately comparing their performance in the benchmark he was presenting. That is all.
April 22, 2006 6:44:35 PM

it's only been 3 posts, just need to know what he's saying basically, i could understand words and things, but the french too fast for anyone who does'nt know how to speak or understand propperly to know what exactly he's saying, That Is All
April 22, 2006 7:24:14 PM

According to It_Comander_...., synthetic benchmarks (like super pi) means nothing against "real life" applications. In conclusion, this benchmark is useless. :wink:
April 22, 2006 7:48:48 PM

Quote:
According to It_Comander_...., synthetic benchmarks (like super pi) means nothing against "real life" applications. In conclusion, this benchmark is useless. :wink:


Means nothing is absolutely not true, for SuperPi is a very good indicator of raw computational capacity of a processor, which is utilized in a wide variety of applications.
But combine the results of many benchmarks of various areas of computing and you can get a pretty good gauge of performance, which teh Conroe seems to be coming out on top in all of them...
April 22, 2006 8:13:55 PM

You didn't read my earlier post to dorion did you?

Quote:
I agree with you of course, but in this case the Super PI result was more to confirm that the chip could run at 3.1GHz which was what was significant rather than the actual score. I'd like the NDA lifted too, but it probably won't be for a while yet.

The point was not to flaunt the Super PI scores, but to use them to show that the chip could run at said overclocked speed. You did notice that the thread title is about the overclock rather than the Super PI score.

The second Super PI score I posted was for a overclocked Core Duo.

Quote:
It doesn't exactly prove the Conroe result but it does offer some additional perspective.

Once again, I mentioned that the point was not the score, but to add perspective to the validity of my original Conroe overclock post.

Quote:
In conclusion, this benchmark is useless.

In conclusion, the benchmark is not useless, because it's not being used to substitute for real world application performance, rather to confirm the overclock.
April 23, 2006 2:12:49 AM

Quote:
It doesn't exactly prove the Conroe result but it does offer some additional perspective.


And, here's some more additional perspective:

http://gomeler.com/2006/04/05/conroe-65watts-of-goodness/

redirected from the original tester, Victor Wang's website:

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=95021&page=1

Interestingly, this Victor Wang is a much praised chap in the Journal of Ellusive Small-bits Computing (humm... I guess I'm loosing some bits here... or... am I dyslexic?) which, à propos, also has a nice B-series post on "AMD poised to exit 2006 with 55% market share (run rate)" at:

http://sharikou.blogspot.com/2006/03/amd-poised-to-exit-2006-with-55-market.html

For those interested, theeere you have it.


Cheers!
April 23, 2006 3:14:51 AM

Good links.

Once again the sharikou guy is proving himself blind to say the least.

Quote:
To be more specific, Intel has only two 65nm production FABs and two 90nm production FABs.

Then he attaches the Intel manufacturing PDF and forgets to read it.

http://www.intel.com/pressroom/kits/manufacturing/manuf...

According to that Intel produces 65nm chips at Fab 12, Fab 24-2, D1D, and will have 65nm production by late 2006 at D2, and D1C. That's 5 65nm fabs in production by the time AMD switches to 65nm. They also have 3 45nm fabs under development. The number of 90nm fabs is 5 although some are converting to 65nm which isn't exactly a bad thing.
April 23, 2006 3:25:49 AM

Quote:
Good links.

Once again the sharikou guy is proving himself blind to say the least.

To be more specific, Intel has only two 65nm production FABs and two 90nm production FABs.

Then he attaches the Intel manufacturing PDF and forgets to read it.

http://www.intel.com/pressroom/kits/manufacturing/manuf...

Exactly.


Cheers!
April 23, 2006 4:14:04 AM

Quote:


Hey, I kinda like Mr. Sharickaboobabbooob blog, it makes me laugh. :) 



Yes, I must agree its quite entertaining indeed. I especially like the part where he believes AMD will have 55% marketshare by the end of this year. I got a good laugh on that one!
April 23, 2006 4:51:00 PM

Quote:
Hey, I kinda like Mr. Sharickaboobabbooob blog, it makes me laugh. :) 


Yes, that's why I go there, from time to time. Just for a good laugh!
However, and as a side note, I wonder why such a guy would throw his reputation overboard, being a Ph.D. as he claims to be (he goes only as far as a "free-lance journalist on IT matters"...); his name [apparently] is Sha Rikou (although I prefer those you use :lol:  ); I took some time to google it...
What's really sad is that, he seems to have the connections, some knowledge & time to do much better... but, I understand: the man has his mind completely tweaked. As a matter of fact, some people seem to suffer baddly from this Intel's syndrome (I would dare to say that they even choose their shrinks by the CPU brand...).
I'll just stick to the "Journal of Ellusive Small-bits Computing"; 'find it more adequate, for now. :wink: :D 


Cheers!
!