No. Way.

25 answers Last reply
More about tomshardware
  1. Quote:


    The better question is WHY?
  2. Photoshop?
  3. Chopped / heavily modded.
  4. Quote:

    *Looks at his own Pentium 2*

    Quote:
    Photoshop?

    Not on the validation database.
  5. Quote:


    The better question is WHY?
    more likely, why not?

    that is as amazing as hell. if only it were stable...
  6. I would not have thought that to be possible.
  7. Dayamn! I still have a PII 300 and a PIII 500... haha! now I have questions. Oh how I hate info like this sometimes.
  8. There's something fishy here... since when did Pentium II's have SSE, let alone SSE2 and SSE3?

    But, if it's true, then maybe my K6-2 500MHz is still worth something...

    EDIT: According to Wikipedia, the Klamath Pentium II came in flavors of 233MHz, 266MHz, and 300MHz, but not 333MHz.
  9. Come to think about it, thats true... the only instruction set the P2's had was MMX, not even MMX2. And the highest multi you can find on a P2 is 4.5 not 5. Besides that, what slot 1 board could support that massive FSB? Even a P965 can only get up to 600MHz give or take 50MHz. This is easily twice that speed.

    And...

    vs
    http://www.nordichardware.com/image3.php?id=2620
    vs
    http://www.nordichardware.com/image3.php?id=2629

    The last two are real, and wide know, but the top one isn't as reported...
  10. That's a joke, it can't be.
    Yeah, SSE were introduced with the Pentium 3... and such a clock speed, not even at 0°K :lol: :lol:
  11. Quote:


    The better question is WHY?
    more likely, why not?

    that is as amazing as hell. if only it were stable...

    Don't get me wrong, it is pretty amazing news... just kind of curious as to why someone would take an ancient processor like that to extreme frequencies? It has no real world purpose and could only serve as bragging rights.

    So, I guess, that is the answer to why. Next we'll find someone taking a 4004 to 300 MHz. Or maybe a Z-80 to 1 GHz to be a bit more current.
  12. It is fake!
    Like Pipero said, SSE/SSE2/SSE3 are not included in P2.
    1500MHz FSB clcok on i440FX is SF!
  13. look at ram frequency....
    :P

    BTW, hello all, new to the forum but long time reader :)
  14. Why?
    Well, an 8GHz P2 would be a very fast CPU.
    Faster than a P4 at the same clock, except in test which use SSEx.
    Heck, i'd say, it could be faster than a 6GHz Conroe, in single threaded apps :lol: :lol:
  15. I wonder how they tricked CPU-Z like that?

    At that frequency, the electrical pulses couldn't even move across that slot processor's PCB fast enough....

    It's not even feasible on a PII.....
  16. they didnt coz validation failed - see pic.
  17. Hehe, yeah I was wondering about those instructions. Not even my Northwood has SSE3.
  18. You see, they would have to bury this 2 miles under the permafrost in Antarctica... so id call ... ive always wanted to say this.. 'This Myth is Busted'.


    Dont sue me!
  19. Quote:
    they didnt coz validation failed - see pic.
    It was validated when this thread was started. :?
  20. Great use of Photoshop.
  21. Trivial, but the higest multiplier put out on a desktop Pentium II was 5x, ala the 333 MHz Pentium II, made on the Deschutes core. It was also an unlocked multiplier CPU. I'm currently running one at 4.5x multi on 100 fsb and 2.0v vcore, in a friend's Gateway computer.
  22. I can't see how that one is possible either. The higest mulitplier I've ever seen on a socket 7 board is 5.5x. And a super socket 7 board usually couldn't go over 120MHz.

    I could see 600-700 MHz on extreme cooling, but 2+Ghz?
  23. From what I've heard from a co-worker here who told me about this earlier today, it was a P4 631 overclocked, and that cpu-z just got confused and couldn't read it as such, and for whatever reason labeled it as a P2.
  24. Now I really wonder how they are getting through the verification process.....Dang CPU-Z.....
    (seriously though.....the first post WAS verified when the thread was first posted I saw it with my own eyes. 8O )
Ask a new question

Read More

CPUs