Over clock Amd Athlon64 2.8 ghz

[Atolsammeek]

I founds this on Ace hardware http://www.aceshardware.com/read.jsp?id=60000268
It speed wise it look pritty good.

 

[ChipDeath]

<A HREF="http://www.aceshardware.com/read.jsp?id=60000268" target="_new">Clickatron</A>

shame they couldn't use similar extreme cooling on the P4EE. I know they do an estimate saying the P4 would need to be @4.7Ghz to match it, but there's no substitute for actually having a chip running at that speed...

Mind you, if the A64 needs such extreme cooling to reach 2.8Ghz, AMD had better not drag their heels on the move to 90nm.

---
<font color=red>The preceding text is assembled from information stored in an unreliable organic storage medium. As such it may be innacurate, incomplete, or completely wrong</font color=red>

 

[speeduk]

Dont forget these are early chips. The 2500 bartons would need 1.9v in some cases to reach just 2.2ghz. 6 months down the line and they do 2.4ghz stock voltage and upto 2.8ghz watercooled now. And thats a 1.8ghz default 1.65 chip. these are lower voltage 2ghz chips. Give it 3-6 months and some better motherboards that allow a multi change and 2.5ghz will be easy and 2.6-2.8 on watercooling.....

<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=7000747" target="_new"> 3D-2001 </A>
<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=1284380" target="_new"> 3D-03 </A>
<font color=red> 120% overclocker </font color=red> (cheapskate)

 

[ChipDeath]

Good point.... I'm going to be using watercooling for my next PC, so I am interested in OC results with that level of cooling... (I'm not actually going to build for a good few months though, probably wait until may '04 or so)

---
<font color=red>The preceding text is assembled from information stored in an unreliable organic storage medium. As such it may be innacurate, incomplete, or completely wrong</font color=red>

 

[slvr_phoenix]

had better not drag their heels on the move to 90nm.

It should be interesting to see if AMD has the same problems that Intel has or if SOI solves them nicely. It could possibly be the justification for switching to SOI.

<pre><A HREF="http://ars.userfriendly.org/cartoons/?id=20030905" target="_new"><font color=black>People don't understand how hard being a dark god can be. - Hastur</font color=black></A></pre><p>

 

[pIII_Man]

some better motherboards that allow a multi change

since the k8 has an on-die memory controllor the clock speed can be asynchronous from the memory speed, meaning there are no multiplyers...


If it isn't a P6 then it isn't a procesor
110% BX fanboy

 

[speeduk]

The cpu's are not locked, they just need a bios that lets you change the multiplier. The 3200 A64 runs at 200x10 giving 2000mhz. With a better bios using 200x13 would mean you could have low latency timings on the memory and have 2.6ghz instead of paying for super fast memory. I believe its explained in the overclocking article in the first post or am I wrong on this one?

<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=7000747" target="_new"> 3D-2001 </A>
<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=1284380" target="_new"> 3D-03 </A>
<font color=red> 120% overclocker </font color=red> (cheapskate)

 

[speeduk]

When working with this system, a few interesting facts popped up. The system was actually running at 14 x 200 MHz, and could be set at multipliers ranging from 4 (800 MHz) to 14 (2.8 GHz). All AMD Athlon 64 FX are de facto unlocked and it seems that the maximum multiplier for this stepping is 14.

<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=7000747" target="_new"> 3D-2001 </A>
<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=1284380" target="_new"> 3D-03 </A>
<font color=red> 120% overclocker </font color=red> (cheapskate)