Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

AMD FX-8150 Breaks New Clock Speed Record at 8.8 GHz

By - Source: HWBOT | B 87 comments

An overclocker going by the name ksin claims to have hit a new record clock for AMD's Bulldozer CPU.

A clock speed of 8,805.64 MHz appears to be a new record for the processor. The most recent record was 8,584.8 MHz, set back in November of last year.

Like the previous record holder Andre Young, ksin also used a Asus Crosshair V Formula motherboard and only two cores were active during the test run. The core voltage was lower at 1.86 volts versus 2.076 volts, but ksin used a significantly higher base clock of 303.64 MHz with a 29x multiplier versus the 276.9 MHz and a 31x multiplier applied by Young.

There was no further information on the system such as cooling techniques used. However, if the submission is accurate, there is enough reason to believe that Bulldozer can still add a few more MHz.

Display 87 Comments.
This thread is closed for comments
Top Comments
  • 37 Hide
    subasteve5800 , May 29, 2012 5:10 PM
    We get it. If you disable most of the chip and submerge the rest in LN2, you can achieve a ridiculously high overclock. It's completely unrealistic and useless, but you can do it.

    When you get an FX chip (with all cores enabled) running at 8.8 GHz and it can run Prime95 for 24 hours, I'll be impressed.
  • 36 Hide
    bawchicawawa , May 29, 2012 5:22 PM
    darkenmoon97How do we know it's stable?


    You're new to suicide overclocking, aren't you?
  • 25 Hide
    gamerk316 , May 29, 2012 5:04 PM
    Note the core count: only 1 BD module enabled.
Other Comments
  • 3 Hide
    thatguychuck , May 29, 2012 4:55 PM
    And FSX still lags...
  • 25 Hide
    gamerk316 , May 29, 2012 5:04 PM
    Note the core count: only 1 BD module enabled.
  • 2 Hide
    hellfire24 , May 29, 2012 5:08 PM
    bu still a 3.3 ghz 2500k will beat it :p 
  • 37 Hide
    subasteve5800 , May 29, 2012 5:10 PM
    We get it. If you disable most of the chip and submerge the rest in LN2, you can achieve a ridiculously high overclock. It's completely unrealistic and useless, but you can do it.

    When you get an FX chip (with all cores enabled) running at 8.8 GHz and it can run Prime95 for 24 hours, I'll be impressed.
  • 11 Hide
    rohitbaran , May 29, 2012 5:14 PM
    Meh. Beat a SandyBridge first and then we will talk.
  • 20 Hide
    DarkenMoon97 , May 29, 2012 5:17 PM
    How do we know it's stable?
  • 36 Hide
    bawchicawawa , May 29, 2012 5:22 PM
    darkenmoon97How do we know it's stable?


    You're new to suicide overclocking, aren't you?
  • 24 Hide
    redyellowblueblast , May 29, 2012 5:32 PM
    I use a AMD-FX machine with Linux on it and I don't see any of the performance problems that I did on Windows 7. Which leads me top believe that the problem is more with Windows 7 not understanding the BD architecture, and not the architecture itself. The Linux kernel seems to be better suited at the moment at understanding the chip. Hopefully Windows 8 will fix it. (that is if Windows 8 will even be worth it.) And I'm still waiting on my Piledriver upgrade, AMD!
  • 1 Hide
    jryan388 , May 29, 2012 5:34 PM
    @subasteve5800 it's prolly liquid helium; I think they use ln2 initially and then after it's at n2 boiling point switch to helium which has a much lower boiling point (something like 4k)
  • 6 Hide
    serendipiti , May 29, 2012 5:37 PM
    subasteve5800We get it. If you disable most of the chip and submerge the rest in LN2, you can achieve a ridiculously high overclock. It's completely unrealistic and useless, but you can do it.When you get an FX chip (with all cores enabled) running at 8.8 GHz and it can run Prime95 for 24 hours, I'll be impressed.


    Well, at least started windows... And 24 hours it's just a question of enough LN... ;) ...
    I suppose it is more realistic to look at maximum OC with air cooling / liquid cooling (you can get into Liquid cooling just for the money you save over a Core i5, and keep that platform investment over different MB).
    I don't think is completely useless, as having some max. clock reference it is at least an indicator of process quality...
    Sorry, surely I have a partial review because I can't stop thinking of my first 8088 PC-XT running at 4.77Mhz with a 8Mhz Turbo... And so we got to 1000 times that clock...
    I don't think that Pentium 4s architecture is useful to make any conclusion over the AMD chips...
  • 9 Hide
    chimera201 , May 29, 2012 5:39 PM
    Do they get money for doing this stuff? or medals?
  • 21 Hide
    CaedenV , May 29, 2012 5:51 PM
    chimera201Do they get money for doing this stuff? or medals?

    they get to say that they did it. Nothing about is practical or useful. It is just cool :) 
    Think of it along the lines of 1/2 the stuff done on Top Gear. No, nobody in the real world does this kind of stuff... but it is still pretty damn cool!
  • -7 Hide
    chimera201 , May 29, 2012 5:54 PM
    CaedenVthey get to say that they did it. Nothing about is practical or useful. It is just cool Think of it along the lines of 1/2 the stuff done on Top Gear. No, nobody in the real world does this kind of stuff... but it is still pretty damn cool!


    Then i don't care . And I think it is HOT not cool.
  • 13 Hide
    kartu , May 29, 2012 5:55 PM
    hellfire24bu still a 3.3 ghz 2500k will beat it

    Bullshit.
  • 9 Hide
    razor512 , May 29, 2012 6:06 PM
    an 8 core AMD CPU when overclocked to around 4.8GHz, can perform similarly to a core i7 2600k (and even beat it in many cases when the task is highly threaded (mainly workstation stuff that can efficiently use 8 cores)

    the core i7 still has the better per core performance, but the AMD makes up for it by the 4 extra half cores.

    depending on the board, if you crank up the vcore voltage, pll voltage, htt voltage, with a good chip, you can get a decent overclock on the bus, northbridge, htt, and hit a CPU clock speed of above 5GHz on the 8 "cores"

    Benchmarks will always show poor scaling because these CPU's don't have 8 true cores, it is basically clusters consisting of 1.5 cores each (kinda like intels hyperthreading but a little more effective)


    if you want core i7 performance out of an 8 core AMD CPU, then overclock to around 4.8-5GHz and you will get mostly the same performance (though you will only be getting about the same performance as a core i7 2600k on stock settings)
  • 4 Hide
    K2N hater , May 29, 2012 6:14 PM
    Wonder what's the long-term limit on phase + water...
Display more comments