Intel's Core i7-4770K Overclocked to 8.0 GHz; See Video!
It appears that someone might have managed to overclock Intel's soon to be released i7-4770K to a staggering 8.0 GHz.
Earlier, we showed you a screenshot of Intel's Haswell Core i7-4770K overclocked to a massive 7.0 GHz, but now we have a piece of video showing the CPU overclocked all the way to 8.0 GHz. Theoretically, the CPU shouldn't be able to go above 8 GHz due to restrictions with the multiplier and base clock, even on the "*K" version.
The video shows the CPU with only two cores enabled and HyperThreading disabled. The voltage of the CPU reaches 2.259 V as the CPU's clock speed is gradually increased.
Sadly, it shows nothing about temperatures, and for all we know, this video might well be a crafted fake, nothing but numerous edited screenshots in a slideshow, filmed to trick us into thinking otherwise. We cannot be certain, but the video below is still impressive.
2 cores, 2 threads? i7 4770k is 4 cores, 8 threads; or if you disable hyperthreading its 4 threads.
Many motherboards actually do allow on-the-fly FSB/BCLK frequency change using a Windows-based UI: on my P4P800-M, this was the only method to overclock it since the BIOS did not have any overclocking option; just had to find software that could access the Winbond clock generator over the SMBus to edit PLL register values. My old laptop used an Nvidia chipset and I could use NVTune to change the CPU's FSB clock from Windows too. Many motherboard manufacturers provide tuning software for Windows that do the same thing for many of their models.
Not sure if the Ks allow messing with the max multiplier between boots but SpeedStep definitely knocks the core multiplier up/down depending on load so the CPU is certainly capable of handling practically on-the-fly multiplier changes.
For memory and other multipliers though, I do not remember ever seeing an option to change those outside of BIOS.
Next you'll be spoiling us with edit buttons.
Considering how Haswell has ~10X lower idle power than Ivy Bridge, I would not be too surprised if that enabled Haswell to remain at much lower core temperatures during such idle overclocking and enable some ridiculous idle overclocks... but then you are only proving that the chip can do no useful amount of work at ridiculously high clock rates, which is pointless.
Assuming those overclocks are legit, I bet they would instantaneously crash under load.
To me, a genuine overclock record should require passing a burn-in test with all chip features enabled. None of that core/thread/cache/etc. disabling silliness. An overclock is pointless if you cannot make it do any meaningful amount of work or the overclocked chip is so heavily crippled that it under-performs its fully-enabled stock-clocked state.