Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

Overclockers Take AMD A10-5800K APU to 7.87 GHz

By - Source: Tom's Hardware US | B 33 comments

Gigabyte's overclocking team was able to overclock AMD’s A10-5800K APU to a record 7.87 GHz, up from a stock 3.8 GHz.

Gigabyte's 'The Killers' team, which consisted of HiCookie, S.Dougal and John Lam, used a F2A85X-UP4 motherboard and demonstrated the CPU at an AMD Extreme OC show November 20 in Taipei. "We are extremely excited with this OC result because the F2A85X-UP4 is the first motherboard from Gigabyte to use our new Ultra Durable 5 technology - so the OC record is a testament to the high caliber of components that we use on our products," said Henry Kao, vice president of the company's Motherboard Business Unit, in a prepared statement.

Gigabyte said that The Killers also overclocked an AMD FX8350 processor to 8.47 GHz on a Gigabyte 990FXA-UD3 board.

 

Contact Us for News Tips, Corrections and Feedback

Discuss
Ask a Category Expert

Create a new thread in the News comments forum about this subject

Example: Notebook, Android, SSD hard drive

This thread is closed for comments
Top Comments
  • 25 Hide
    wanderer11 , November 28, 2012 12:16 PM
    I would really like to see a single benchmark from one of these overclocks to see how much of a difference this makes. Until then it is just a number in a cpuz screenshot.
  • 24 Hide
    twelve25 , November 28, 2012 1:59 PM
    deadlockedworldSo that makes it as fast as ... a sandy bridge i3?


    A10 is already faster than i3 at most things at stock speed.

  • 16 Hide
    dscudella , November 28, 2012 2:38 PM
    Most of you are missing the point. This has nothing to do with trying to prove that AMD OC's better than Intel or that they're faster. This was a show of skill by the Overclocking team that did it, to prove they could do it.

    In a real world setup this is not possible as I'm sure EXTREME cooling measures were in place. Liquid Nitrogen being #1. This just shows that anything is possible.

    Good article.
Other Comments
    Display all 33 comments.
  • -9 Hide
    yialanliu , November 28, 2012 12:12 PM
    That's cool and all that, but can it run Crysis? as in, did they double the graphics core speed as well? Which would rock!

    I had to...sorry haha
  • 25 Hide
    wanderer11 , November 28, 2012 12:16 PM
    I would really like to see a single benchmark from one of these overclocks to see how much of a difference this makes. Until then it is just a number in a cpuz screenshot.
  • 2 Hide
    weaselman , November 28, 2012 12:25 PM
    Take a close look at the bus speed though, it may be ok to clock a cpu up to or close to 8Ghz but it wont do much with a bus speed of 128Mhz or a front side bus of 129Mhz. bottle neck.
  • 11 Hide
    bustapr , November 28, 2012 1:56 PM
    jn77So, specs are only "half the story"...... In "real world" day to day use, my intel based computers out perform amd cpu's hands down...... (not that I want to support intel). So why bother. There is a balance of engergy use vs. performance...... You consume less electricity with amd and you get less performance., you suck your electric bill dry with intel, but you get the added benefit of the extra performance....I will take my "faster" computer over a slow one, why do we upgrade our pc's in the first place? to make them slower? :-) right.....

    here, have a cookie
  • 24 Hide
    twelve25 , November 28, 2012 1:59 PM
    deadlockedworldSo that makes it as fast as ... a sandy bridge i3?


    A10 is already faster than i3 at most things at stock speed.

  • -3 Hide
    arnoldlouie , November 28, 2012 2:21 PM
    up on oc'ed benchmarks..or maybe it shut downs just after the screenshot...hehehe.. hey! I smell something burning...
  • 16 Hide
    dscudella , November 28, 2012 2:38 PM
    Most of you are missing the point. This has nothing to do with trying to prove that AMD OC's better than Intel or that they're faster. This was a show of skill by the Overclocking team that did it, to prove they could do it.

    In a real world setup this is not possible as I'm sure EXTREME cooling measures were in place. Liquid Nitrogen being #1. This just shows that anything is possible.

    Good article.
  • 8 Hide
    gilgamex , November 28, 2012 2:41 PM
    friskiestThrough word of mouth, An AMD CPU overclocks to 7.87GHz,. its "fast",. that's what would probably get the low-techie into buying an AMD chip. The bigger the GB of a videocard, the faster it would be type of consumers.Not to be troll, but I really don't think this would help AMD that much,. if only they could put more effort and resources in increasing the IPCs of their desktop CPUs, that would definitely put them in a better stand against Intel. A 100W APU vs a 65W i3 is actually a significant consideration. A "dramatic" increase in the efficiency of their CPUs would make them an ideal for system builders- especially on ASIA where electricity charges is higher.


    Dear lord, they are using liquid nitrogen for chrissake! It is not a sane benchmark, no one in their homes will be able to have a stable OC even remotely past 4.5 ghz (roughly). It is not done by AMD, it is done by Gigabyte and any other enthusiast team that tries to test the outer limits.

    There is no appreciable marketing increase here for AMD at all, this is a tech crowd fun thing to do and is carried out with all the new chips for kicks. Have fun, get the dollar signs out of your mind, don't be suspicious of EVERYTHING
  • 9 Hide
    Cryio , November 28, 2012 3:11 PM
    Actually, I'm really curious of a 6-8 GHz benchmark between AMD A10, FX8350, Intel i3 3225 and a i7 3770k.
  • -4 Hide
    mikenygmail , November 28, 2012 3:14 PM
    Finally, an APU can run Crysis at max settings! :)  heh
  • -7 Hide
    friskiest , November 28, 2012 3:28 PM
    gilgamexDear lord, they are using liquid nitrogen for chrissake! It is not a sane benchmark, no one in their homes will be able to have a stable OC even remotely past 4.5 ghz (roughly). It is not done by AMD, it is done by Gigabyte and any other enthusiast team that tries to test the outer limits.There is no appreciable marketing increase here for AMD at all, this is a tech crowd fun thing to do and is carried out with all the new chips for kicks. Have fun, get the dollar signs out of your mind, don't be suspicious of EVERYTHING


    Where did I say that they (the consumers) will be overclocking? The overclocking & "fast" reference is only used to signify that some people still base their CPU buying to brand association with GHz numbers (like in here where, the 7.87GHz and AMD).

    I'm just concerned about what's been happening at AMD for awhile now, lots of layoffs and weakening shares at both entry level and enthusiast markets,. thats compounded by the fact that Intel bests AMD in both processing and thermal performance.

    The reality is that MONEY IS EVERYTHING for AMD right now,. they're are pretty close to the cliff so any news directly or indirectly related to them must bring confidence to buyers rooting for them.


  • 6 Hide
    DEVILVSANGEL00 , November 28, 2012 3:35 PM
    Great job by the overclocking team, would be great if they could some how come up with a low cost contained endothermic chemical reaction that would somehow work in conjunction with the standard air coolers most of us use today, if that was possible we would be hitting 5GHz overclocks at home with big smiles on our faces,

    if only......
  • 14 Hide
    azraa , November 28, 2012 3:50 PM
    Quit your AMD vs Intel crap, kids, jeez.
    This article shows the Gigabyte's OC team success, that's it.

    Besides, it is well known that these crazy overclocks are just a way to demonstrate how 'tough' and how far you can push a chip without it crashing. Thats it, get performance and value market out of your minds with these kind of things. This only shows that AMD once again proved their chips to be reliable at extreme conditions... which is well known fact up to this point, no bias in saying that.
  • 0 Hide
    InvalidError , November 28, 2012 5:55 PM
    They may have managed to overclock beyond 8GHz but they had to disable half the cores to get there only to prove that they could actually get there. The real question: can the system do any useful work at that speed without crashing?

    Not much point in boasting about an incredible overclock if it is only stable at/near idle with half the cores disabled. I would be more interested in the highest overclock without crippling the CPU (disabling cores) and running something like 3DMark.
  • 1 Hide
    SuperVeloce , November 28, 2012 6:45 PM
    2volts? last time we saw that on our computers, transistor count was 5million and 300mhz :) . It's a miracle cpu even survived
  • 1 Hide
    basketcase87 , November 28, 2012 6:55 PM
    dscudellaMost of you are missing the point. This has nothing to do with trying to prove that AMD OC's better than Intel or that they're faster. This was a show of skill by the Overclocking team that did it, to prove they could do it. In a real world setup this is not possible as I'm sure EXTREME cooling measures were in place. Liquid Nitrogen being #1. This just shows that anything is possible.Good article.

    Liquid Nitrogen is for n00bs. The team that hit 8.4 last year blasted their processor with liquid helium :) .
  • -3 Hide
    stingstang , November 28, 2012 7:10 PM
    dscudellaMost of you are missing the point. This has nothing to do with trying to prove that AMD OC's better than Intel or that they're faster. This was a show of skill by the Overclocking team that did it, to prove they could do it. In a real world setup this is not possible as I'm sure EXTREME cooling measures were in place. Liquid Nitrogen being #1. This just shows that anything is possible.Good article.

    I like overclockers, but I still can't see this as being a skill. What do they do, other than a simple trial and error process with the same old cooling techniques of a copper tube full of LN2 over the apu?
    There's no finesse, or number crunching going on. The only balancing act is keeping the temps or voltages under the killing point.
Display more comments