Tbred oced at 2600-2700 (mhz or pr tbd...)

[MStakem]

<A HREF="http://thecoldshop.com/display.cfm?articleid=42&page=4" target="_new">http://thecoldshop.com/display.cfm?articleid=42&page=4</A>

""
But the more interesting point is that with their overclocking utility, Easy Tune 4, they were able to get a Thoroughbred 2200+ to 2.6-2.7 GHz, quite the impressive feat
""


gigabyte OCed a 2200+ by 50%...dunno if they were using a hand picked chip or not, even still this seems pretty cool to me.

MStakem<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by MStakem on 06/03/02 03:40 PM.</EM></FONT></P>

 

[johnnyx]

As Will smith said in independance day- "I have got to get me one of these!" True, true, sound slike I should wait til june 10, really sounds worth it!

If an orange was driving a racecar would it peel out? www.jxfiles.com

 

[Matisaro]

::smiles smugly::

" If this is the norm for these chips Pentium 4’s definitely have a run for their money."

If that is the norm for those chips not even a 3.5ghz p4 should be able to compete, 2.7ghz is what, pr 3500+, looks like my prediction has more weight now eh.

The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark

 

[MStakem]

I can't wait to get my hands on one of them...damn you june 10th come faster.

MStakem

 

[Kelledin]

Hmmmm....a backfilled Northwood (1.6GHz) typically gets a 50% overclock, and a near-top-end Northwood A (2.4GHz) typically gets a 40% overclock (if extreme cooling is applied). And here we have a top-end (1.8GHz) T-bred getting a 50% overclock. Imagine that...

(Note: I didn't mention Northwood B's because they are known to overclock rather worse than Northwood A's)

<pre>We now <b>return</b>(<font color=blue>-1</font color=blue>) to an irregular program scheduler.</pre><p>

 

[Matisaro]

And here we have a top-end (1.8GHz) T-bred getting a 50% overclock. Imagine that...

This particular chip was on the high end of the curve Id imagine, but it does demonstrate the core is capable of 2.5ghz+ core speeds as my theory stated, we will wait for more chips to be sure, but it looks as if my prediction was mostly correct.

The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark

 

[FUGGER]

"(Note: I didn't mention Northwood B's because they are known to overclock rather worse than Northwood A's)"

What a crock of [-peep-], 3+ Ghz is "worse" in your book. ROFL

My brothers friends oldest sons wifes brother also has a Tbred said he says that it will do 2.9Ghz. I read it on the net so it must be true.

With the lack of any new benchmarks and reviews of the tbred, I doubt any and all hallow tbred claims until release and known guru's have tortured them.

I was hoping to see a benchmark or sceenshot or something. G1

You are limited to what your mind can perceive.

 

[FUGGER]

On that webpage look on the left side at recent articles and you will find "price watch comparison 1/2/2002" as the most recent article besides this one.

Thats a real cutting edge site you found there. strange that no other people at the AMD tech tour seemed to notice the 2.6-2.7Ghz AMD machine, what a surprise.

You are limited to what your mind can perceive.

 

[Kelledin]

What a crock of [-peep-], 3+ Ghz is "worse" in your book. ROFL

Yes, 3GHz is "worse" when it's all a <b>2.53GHz CPU</b> can do. Northwood B's do overclock rather worse than Northwood A's, for two reasons:

1) Northwood B's are generally closer to the core's theoretical limit, both for FSB speed and clock speed.

2) To overclock a Northwood, you have to overclock other components (like the chipset) as well, simply because Northwoods can only be OC'd via FSB. The Northwood B's FSB pushes the chipset and possibly other components closer to their limits. Thus a Northwood B does not O/C as well as a Northwood A of similar stock clockspeed. Q.E.D.

My brothers friends oldest sons wifes brother also has a Tbred said he says that it will do 2.9Ghz. I read it on the net so it must be true.

You can whine and keep on saying that everyone who publishes pro-AMD info is lying, but it doesn't change reality much.

Your assertion that "CPU fans only last a year" didn't make my CPU fan fail any faster.

Your protests against the purported existence of 760MP test boards didn't render them nonexistent, or keep the released 760MP from trouncing anything Intel had to offer.

Funny how you only question reality when it falls in AMD's favor. :tongue:

<pre>We now <b>return</b>(<font color=blue>-1</font color=blue>) to an irregular program scheduler.</pre><p>

 

[Kennyshin]

Thank you.

Seems very hopeful.

<b> Searching for the true, the beautiful, and the eternal </b>

 

[Siddhartha]

I wonder if the writer meant 2600-2700+ instead of 2.6-2.7 gHz?

"Just the facts ma'am"

 

[Matisaro]

Pretty big mistake if he did, but that is a possibility.

The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark

 

[Copenhagen]

<blockquote><font size=1>Svar på:</font><hr><p>but it looks as if my prediction was mostly correct.
<p><hr></blockquote><p>Don't jump your guns on one single undocumented claim. It sounds incredible, and I would like to see some hard proof to back it up.

Even if I'm not too optimistic about the OC'ability of TBred, I've decided to wait and see what it offers. It's silly to buy a system now, with only about one week to the official launch of TBred. I'll wait until some trustworthy overclocking reports starts to emerge before I make my choice. If the above claim turns out to be the general picture, I would not hesitate to switch over to AMD for the first time in my life.


<i>/Copenhagen - Clockspeed will make the difference... in the end</i>

 

[Siddhartha]

Has anyone used Easy Tune 4?

"Just the facts ma'am"

 

[Matisaro]

I didnt, both of my other posts showed caution, and note I said if this is true my predictions are right.

Not jumping the gun at all.

The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark

 

[Copenhagen]

<blockquote><font size=1>Svar på:</font><hr><p>(Note: I didn't mention Northwood B's because they are known to overclock rather worse than Northwood A's)<p><hr></blockquote><p>Actually that's not true. According to xbitlabs the core of the 'B' versions are different from the 'A' ones. Apparently Intel took the liberty to make some enhancements (shrinked the core by 10% and made some re-arrangements) which should make the 'B' versions able to go past 3GHz. These enhanced cores are "primarily going to be used in 533MHz versions", but may also later be used for the 400MHz versions. (Do I have to mention how much I would like to get my hands on a 1.6A with the above mentioned enhancements. :tongue: )

For this reason I've put my eyes on 2.26B as my next CPU instead of the 2.0A. Price-difference is not overwhelming. But to make it all worthwhile, it has to be paired with (expensive) PC1066 validated RDRAM which should have some OC headroom.

My goals would then be:

2.55GHz @ PC1200
or
3.02GHz @ PC1060 (using memory divider)


<i>/Copenhagen - Clockspeed will make the difference... in the end</i>

 

[Kelledin]

Actually that's not true. According to xbitlabs the core of the 'B' versions are different from the 'A' ones.

That doesn't cover other components, though. Since the FSB has to go up for the clockspeed to go up, this is a bit of a problem. As you noted, better components are necessary--higher binned chipset parts, and possibly better memory as well.

<pre>We now <b>return</b>(<font color=blue>-1</font color=blue>) to an irregular program scheduler.</pre><p>

 

[Kennyshin]

I wonder if the writer meant 2600-2700+ instead of 2.6-2.7 gHz?

I think it's unlikely since Athlon 2200+ runs at 1800MHz and 2600-2700+ is about only 2066-2133MHz, that is, 266 to 333MHz difference. Not worth mention at all.


<b> Searching for the true, the beautiful, and the eternal </b>

 

[Kennyshin]

I think it's unlikely since Athlon 2200+ runs at 1800MHz and 2600-2700+ is about only 2066-2133MHz, that is, 266 to 333MHz difference. Not worth mention at all.

Just some calculations as examples.

2200+ 1800MHz Athlon = 133 MHz FSB x 13.5x multiplier

2600+ 2066MHz Athlon = 133 MHz FSB x 15.5x multiplier

3400+ 2600MHz Athlon = 133 MHz FSB x 19.5x multiplier

3600+ 2700MHz Athlon = 133 MHz FSB x 20.0x multiplier



<b> Searching for the true, the beautiful, and the eternal </b>

 

[Kennyshin]

Trying to imagine the mongrels covered with all those foam...

<b>Did we come here to laugh or to cry? Are we dying or being reborn?</b>

 

[The_MaguS]

I guess everyone who plans on buying Tbred will be unlocking to OC? Doesn't seem likely.

<font color=blue> There's no such thing as hell, but you can make it if you try.</font color=blue>

 

[Matisaro]

I guess everyone who plans on buying Tbred will be unlocking to OC? Doesn't seem likely.

The fact they can is a huge advantage, however for the p4 what kelledin is trying to say is that a northwood b starts at 133fsb, and its lower multiplier gives it less core mhz per unit of fsb increase, and you will hit the limit of your fsb and system buses before you reach the cores limit.

Therefore a northwood A, which will have the same improvements that any b's have as soon as the old stock is exhausted(if the nw b's have any improvement at all) will be able to attain a higher overclock simply because the jump from 100 to 133 included, and the fact that a NW A@2ghz gains 20mhz per 1mhz fsb, whereas a 2ghz nwb(for example) Would only gain 15mhz per fsb increase.

If your motherboard/ram limits you to say 155fsb, a northwood A will give you a net total of 3.1ghz, whereas the northwood B will give you 2.180 ghz(due to the lower multiplier both chips start@2ghz in this hypothetical example) and since the fsb will most likely limit the total oc(unless you refridgerate everything and hax0r your motherboard) and you cannot change the p4's multiplier, the northwood b is a bad idea for overclocking, period.

So while the chip may(at this time) have improvements which enable it to hit 3ghz+(over a NW a), in order to take advantage of it you need to get the very fastest ones for the high multiplier(such as the 2.53b thus negating the point of overclocking the cheaper chip), or you need to be able to run your fsb@200mhz, which isnt happening all that often.


That I believe is what kelledin is trying to say, and he is right.

The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark

 

[AMD_Man]

Actually, Matisaro, in this case, you're wrong. The FSB is almost never the limit in motherboards that lock the PCI/AGP bus. As long as the northbridge doesn't overheat then you're fine. The true limit is the RDRAM. Again, with the 3X multiplier rather than 4, I'd say the FSB limit with good Samsung RDRAM to be around ~180MHz.


However, if you look at, either way, the Northwood As are the overclocking champions, not the Northwood Bs.

Higher FSB translates into higher IPC. So a ~2.6GHz P4 (overclocked from say 1.6A) might in fact be faster than a 3GHz P4 (overclocked from 2.53GHz).

<b><i>"A penny saved is a penny earned!"</i></b>

 

[Matisaro]

Actually, Matisaro, in this case, you're wrong. The FSB is almost never the limit in motherboards that lock the PCI/AGP bus.

Thats what, one, two motherboards?

How come fugger cant get past 177fsb, and remember, with pc800rdram your already at 3/4 divider with the ram, you can only go so far when you start at 133.

The true limit is the RDRAM. Again, with the 3X multiplier rather than 4, I'd say the FSB limit with good Samsung RDRAM to be around ~180MHz.

Fuggers stuck at 172 iirc, and he has hand picked crap. The fsb/memory is ALWAYS the limit on p4 overclocks, rarely its the chip itself, theres always leg room left from what I have read.

Fatburger is topped at 155, his agp/pci is locked, he started at 100fsb, he has a 55% overclock, a person who starts at 133fsb with his same ram/mobo will have all of a what, 8% overclock? And it will cost more, and perform worse!

The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark

 

[Kennyshin]

Thats what, one, two motherboards?

How come fugger cant get past 177fsb, and remember, with pc800rdram your already at 3/4 divider with the ram, you can only go so far when you start at 133.

Are there only one or two motherboards that lock the PCI/AGP bus? How come almost everyone has one around me?

<b>Did we come here to laugh or to cry? Are we dying or being reborn?</b>