Phenom 2 at 6.5 gigh. New 3d mark record.

And that benefits us average Joe's how? Anyway cool but it doesn't really tell anything.

no, it tells how much you can overclock with liquid nitrogen. overclocking is going to be like any other cpu. there will be variances by batch in how high one can be stable 24/7 overclocked. the milestone here is the fact it can overclock pretty decent compared to the previous gen phenom.

Wait wait wait wait there just one minute. This is the same cherry picked CPU that AMD was using to hype the crap out of Phenom II? Whats the use? Most review sites have not even been able to hit 4GHz on air like AMD did with this chip.

Hell Anand did a bit more tweaking and got from 3.8GHz to 3.9GHz but still no further.

This was just hype. AMD found one really really good CPU and used it to hype the living jebus out of Phenom II.

Nice record but it will be broken soon. Cooliaer tends to break thos very easily with anything and ATI GPUs that he OCs like crazy.

Plus its AMDs YouTube channel. Not to be trusted 100% just like Intels YouTube channel is not. Although I enjoy the sort of presentations Intel has on their page about the new tech they are doing like the HK/MG one. Interesting stuffs.

bit of e-peen envy there jimmy.

The cold does tend to shrink things matey ...

AMD did not say their Chip can hit 4GHz on air that is why Intel Core 2 Quad is still the way to go. AMD says you could hit 3.9GHz on air and maybe 4.2GHz on water.

Something in the back of my mind tells me Intels i7 cpus can beat that 3dmark score on a much lower clock speed

wierd..
cant find it there anywhere. somebody help me out here lol. i dont trust videos when the result should be on their site.
http://www.futuremark.com/communit [...] rformance/

why? that is an outdated, unoptimized test. i am not busting balls werxen. i just expected to see it in Vantage since it is the most current, updated 3dmark app. in truth, it needs updated BADLY. those apps tend to be easily manipulated which is why i don't give them the credence i used to. i would be nipping if this were the i7 so dont feel like i am nit-picking. there was one of those terrible P4's that could go over 7Ghz and didnt and still doesnt impress me.

I see it did clock highest but did not achieve the highest score over here:
http://ripping.org/benchmarks.php? [...] c=3DMark05

then we look at the newer version:
http://ripping.org/benchmarks.php? [...] c=3DMark06

now in fairness, there may be a reason they have not ran 3dm6. i still think Vantage would be a better measure myself. i would imagine we will see them appear there before long.

fair enough. now they need to run Vantage. it will be more telling on the CPU side.

http://service.futuremark.com/sear [...] ystem=-100

straight from the real website werxen, kind of have to believe that...

Is it me or does the website say the Phenom is @ 4481 Mhz and not 6.5 Ghz?

Too bad they didn't use approved video drivers so that their result would have actually been validated. You can read this inside of that result:

But since they didn't then werxen is correct... they have the world record.

The world record in any Futuremark score is just that and nothing more. It translates poorly into real world results. Phenom II and i7 overclocking on air, or even with water cooling is what's pertinent to everyone's experience, and then give me real framerates in games people actually play nowadays.

That said, my recession anxiety's past and I'm ordering a Phenom II 940 on February 6, but I'm not sure how it would overclock on an SB700 board.

Even if I don't overclock 3.0 gigahertz with higher IPC and four cores should make a difference.

Good luck with your purchase yipsl! i am sure you will love it. i am way behind where i wanted to be on gett
ing one but the bitter disappointment of no BIOS for the board i returned soured me on it for the time being.

rest of your message is spot on. orb tests amount to crap anymore. they are not up to date. this is the equivalent to using UT99 or Quake3 to show off GPU performance of a 4870x2 or a GTX 295. it doesnt take advantage of the 4 cores so it is deriving the score purely from the overclock speed. not real telling if you ask me other than the fact it overclocks high if you have liquid helium or LN2 sitting around for a suicide run. that test is 3 generations old so i have to wonder if it can deliver on the newer, modern (relatively speaking) versions.