World Record: Haswell CPU Overclocked to 7193.8 MHz
Chi-Kui Lam from Hong Kong has set a new overclocking world record.
Do you enjoy overclocking? It's fun if you do it right. One overclocker, Chi-Kui Lam, is probably having quite a lot of fun, as he just set a new world record for the Intel Core i7-4770K. Chi-Kui managed to overclock the chip to a very respectable 7193.8 MHz, which is the highest frequency recorded for any Haswell product to date.
Of course, there are certain costs to reaching such a high frequency. These include using liquid nitrogen for cooling as well as a staggering core voltage of 2.048 V. The CPU's Hyperthreading also had to be disabled, along with two of its cores.
Other hardware used included an Asus Maximus VII Gene motherboard, 256 GB OCZ Vertex SSD, Corsair Dominator memory and a High Current Pro 1300 W power supply from Antec. An Nvidia GT 630 took the graphics load off the iGPU.
Of course, there is no question that this is a completely useless exercise for everyday purposes, but it remains fun to see what certain hardware combinations are capable of.
Follow Niels Broekhuijsen @NBroekhuijsen. Follow us @tomshardware, on Facebook and on Google+.

If you disable half the cores and hyperthreading you have a highly advanced Pentium D.
No not a Pentium D, a Pentium G3258 20th Anniversary Edition.
It doesn't stop this being cool and all, just that if you're going to call something a world record, it really needs to be the world record for all comparable things. It's like saying that a station wagon set a world speed record, then finding out that it was only for station wagons.
If you disable half the cores and hyperthreading you have a highly advanced Pentium D.
If you disable half the cores and hyperthreading you have a highly advanced Pentium D.
It doesn't stop this being cool and all, just that if you're going to call something a world record, it really needs to be the world record for all comparable things. It's like saying that a station wagon set a world speed record, then finding out that it was only for station wagons.
Are you sure? As I understand it, the Pentium D was a true dual core Pentium 4 with hyper threading disabled and the P4 was architecturally quite different from the prior Pentium 3. IIRC Intel scrapped the P4 and went back to the design philosophy of the Pentium 3 when they designed the Core Duo CPUs and their successors.
If you disable half the cores and hyperthreading you have a highly advanced Pentium D.
No not a Pentium D, a Pentium G3258 20th Anniversary Edition.
If you disable half the cores and hyperthreading you have a highly advanced Pentium D.
No not a Pentium D, a Pentium G3258 20th Anniversary Edition.
Yup, that was exactly the first thing I wanted to post when I read the "news."
No point in getting an i7 to overclock if you are going to downgrade it to Pentium-level feature-wise to get there.
If you disable half the cores and hyperthreading you have a highly advanced Pentium D.
not really true. Cache is still bigger per core, still has more instruction sets (dedicated hardware).
Cache differentiates Core cpu's more than anything besides Hyper Threading.
Looks like you guys quit reading before the end of the article...
Of course if you only care about singlethreaded apps, but how many of those are really that demanding? Everything I'm waiting on is multithreaded (and almost perfectly parallel).
'Course he didn't do it for the performance, I get that. It just seems odd since he's only focusing on one small part of what performance is. Really nails how pervasive the "frequency = performance" is.
That's another problem with focusing on MHz exclusively - a 5GHz AMD CPU is in many ways equivalent to a 3-4GHz Intel CPU (depending on what strengths the application plays to).
Really, this could be considered a "14.4GHz CPU" (7.2GHz on two cores), which makes it a lot less impressive if you take a 3.9GHz i7 which would be a 15.6GHz CPU. Again, I'm a bit biased, because my most demanding applications scale almost linearly with the number of cores (and CPUs and workstations, for that matter).
So yeah, two fast cores, that a stock i7 from a couple years ago could beat in many applications...
Either way, wake me up when overclocking world-records translate into world-records in either benchmarks or real-world applications instead of merely large numbers in CPU-Z that cannot be used for any actual work.
There already is a standard. It has to boot into the OS and be able to screenshot a CPU-Z window.
Competitive overclocking is about the competition itself, it has nothing to do with real-world benchmark performance. Take it or leave it as it is. Yes, it is abstracted from the reality of how we use our processors, but then Usain Bolt's sprinting doesn't reflect how most of us use our legs, either.
But Bolt's legs do show a practical application of what the human body is capable of with extensive training and genetic luck-of-the-draw.
"Suicide overclocking" on the other hand is more like bodybuilders who cheat using steroids and end up ripping their muscles because they lacked sufficient conditioning from regular training to keep up with the strain... big muscles that cannot do any more useful work than people with half the muscular mass.
That is not the point.
The point is that those overclock records are doing nothing more than managing to boot into Windows without crashing. If you ran Prime95 or even real-world applications or game on them, they would likely crash before getting in-game proper... they are not proper overclocks; they are just-barely-working overclocks. They are not usable for anything beyond claiming a world record.