What is Digg?176 Comments
- HelplessSEAL, on 06/06/2008, -4/+93Sounds like the turbo button that my old beige IBM used to have o_O
- sockpuppets, on 06/06/2008, -6/+70Uh my q6600 2.4 runs at 3.4 with a slight voltage bump. 2.8 to 3.2 isn't that astonishing.
- tonyscha, on 06/06/2008, -5/+52I want an AMD processor like the old days! They would smoke any Intel... I guess the tides have changed for now.
- Lixnig, on 06/06/2008, -17/+62It's too bad AMD needs a couple more aces up their sleeves. They are still not competitive with Intel, in general. I was really hoping that Phenom would kick ass. I was waiting for it for a couple of years.
- thepxc, on 06/06/2008, -5/+50You know guys, if you have cards up your sleeve it means you're cheating...
Bad AMD! - justice7, on 06/06/2008, -12/+54i have an Intel Core2Duo e4300 1.8Ghz , stock cooling .. running @ 3.0Ghz (9x333) -- AMDsayswhat?
- hokie47, on 06/06/2008, -0/+34I miss the Mhz displays
- BillGod, on 06/06/2008, -0/+33gotta digg up any comment that brings up the turbo button
- ExRe, on 06/06/2008, -6/+24This is their ace?
I'll have to call BS, since a simple OC is not going to help them. - inactive, on 06/06/2008, -2/+19LONG LIVE AMD
- Scott2, on 06/06/2008, -2/+19AMD would need major vendors to start OCing on a huge scale to capitalize on overclocking.
- inactive, on 06/06/2008, -0/+14If you have a 3.0 vcore i think your computer would be on fire
- ahhell, on 06/06/2008, -4/+17"It just does not get any more better than this. "
LOLZ - iRelinquish, on 06/06/2008, -0/+13turbo button
- Namco, on 06/06/2008, -0/+13Yeah, it's too bad that Intel has a full house, is the dealer , and makes the cards too.
- spaceman84, on 06/06/2008, -5/+18That CPU/mobo combination is still less powerful and more expensive than any 3.2GHz C2D configuration. AMD is going to have to try harder than that. Not to mention that hardly anyone bought those ridiculous "Black Edition" CPUs anyway.
- PhonicUK, on 06/06/2008, -2/+14I've got a Phenom 9850 BE clocked to 3.3GHz and this thing truley kicks ass.
Granted It wouldn't kick as much ass at its 2.5GHz stock speed, but 16K 3DMarks @ 3.3GHz isn't something to sniff at.
Bottom line however is the 9850BE at stock speed is basically a Q6800 - jks139, on 06/06/2008, -3/+14I concur. They'll need more than an ace up their sleeve come Fall 2008.
- lpmiller, on 06/06/2008, -2/+13they need money, R&D, and better marketing up their sleeves, not just easy overclocking. Dunno too many OEMs that buy processors for easy overclocking.
- slayernine, on 06/06/2008, -1/+12Dual core overclock speed != Quad core overclock speed.
You can overclock a dual core higher than a quad simply because 2 cores run cooler than 4. - OJXs, on 06/06/2008, -1/+12I've never overclocked before, randomly went to bios and in 5 seconds
my e4500 2.2Ghz went to 3.0Ghz
temps don't go over 58 load on a summer day :) - Namco, on 06/06/2008, -0/+10What is this compusa you speak of?
- sirmasterboy, on 06/06/2008, -3/+13Uh, my Q6600 runs stock at 2.4Ghz and i run it at 3.8Ghz on air with no expensive cooling or anything. Also gets me just over 20k in 3DMark06.
The q6600 also cost me only $180 brand new retail from compusa. - Barackalypse, on 06/06/2008, -1/+11My Conroe had simple overclocking too, I change the FSB from 266 to 400, reboot, and suddenly 2.1 Ghz becomes 3.2 Ghz and as an added bonus my DDR2 memory is running at its 800 Mhz spec..
- Raptor007, on 06/06/2008, -0/+10You're right, because the Intel at 3.2 is faster.
But I understand what you're saying... I remember when the P4 was around and its ridiculously high clock speeds meant absolutely nothing. But Intel's Core2 architecture is even more efficient than AMD's offerings. - Wolfspirittt, on 06/06/2008, -0/+10What you say?
- wush, on 06/06/2008, -4/+13Not such a big deal. It took me 10 seconds to bump a single value, the FSB, on this Core2Quad and it's ran at 3.2 GHz (from 2.66 GHz) since day one.
- ratedsar, on 06/06/2008, -2/+11This article/blog apparently has no research and misunderstands what ace up a sleeve means. AMD has long been a favorite for hobbyists because they left the multiplier unlocked longer than Intel did -- and when they locked it it was very simple to unlock. Not to mention AMD chips historically have a high tolerance to higher FSB speeds. Even more, there have been "black" editions for years!
If the article was researched it would mention SSE5 and on cpu gpus, two things that AMD has announced in their newest goals.
AMD was able to rank their chips differently because they have an x86 to RISC translator that made a 1.3ghz AMD perform like a 2ghz Intel. AMD is advancing this towards a new standard, SSE5, which will be even quicker. Intel just bunches together similar instructions from the pipeline, AMD translates it to more efficient code.
Then, they also plan on building GPUs into CPUs meaning no bottleneck of a pci-e bus and that rendering data can all be processed at the cpu level with fast cache and hypertransport access to the ram. This is planned for use in laptops with built in video. This is what the ATI acquisition is being used for.
Since I mentioned it, Hypertransport is the other thing that AMD does for speed that Intel is hesitant to do. Direct, High Speed memory access is even used in VIA chips!
All of these things are what make and will make AMD chips of equal mhz always faster than the Intel version. - GMorgan, on 06/06/2008, -0/+8Intel are trying to make fast processors now rather than pushing up clock rate and relying on marketing.
The previous model left AMD slowly eating more and more of their lunch. Now Intel have good processors and all is well. - str1fe, on 06/06/2008, -2/+10I'm quite confident that it's around the same price as an Intel of equivalent price.
- justice7, on 06/06/2008, -1/+9i remember seeing an ad in PC Gamer back in the day.. a speed limit "90 Mhz" roadsign with a bullet through it; a whopping 100Mhz was available. "Pentium" class. Those were the days.
- shtonkalot, on 06/06/2008, -1/+8Go on then, prove everyone wrong.. get some screenies and post them up and make a digg story out of it.
You could title it something like "Overclocking legend runs Core2 Quad at 3.0 Volts without burning down house!!!"
You do it, I'll dig it.
But I bet you don't... - inactive, on 06/06/2008, -1/+8I loved my AMD Clawhammer. It was so much better than anything Intel had out at the time. But, times change. And I'm now running a Q6600 on an Intel Bad Axe 2.
Maybe some day AMD will burst ahead with something new, and I really hope they do. The competition keeps everyone involved innovating. - DevilSpawn, on 06/06/2008, -3/+10if you werer running 3.0vcore i dont think you would be able to post a message let alone boot up your destroyed pc.
*rolls eyes* - Grummond, on 06/06/2008, -0/+7What what?
- SSUK, on 06/06/2008, -0/+6I'm running on Jesus. He doesn't play Crysis...
- inactive, on 08/26/2008, -0/+6In the butt?
- LordPhilMil, on 06/06/2008, -3/+8TURBO button...yes!!
I don't think AMD said this is their ace... I believe that will come when they unleash the fury of the Fusion...
or something like that - Zlorp, on 06/06/2008, -2/+7AMD is toast when Nehalem hits later this year. amazing performance increase clock for clock in a lot of cases over the penryn even on very early hardware
http://anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/intel/showdoc.asp ... - mrBitch, on 06/07/2008, -0/+5You can thank AMD for the fact that Intel core2 chips are so much better than the crap Intel would force feed the market a few years ago.
- redneckblues, on 06/06/2008, -2/+7and OGCing too, musn't forget that.
- Zlorp, on 06/06/2008, -0/+5sorry, corrected link
http://anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/intel/showdoc.asp ... - ratedsar, on 06/06/2008, -0/+5Yes, and Intel got caught for their anti competitive practices. Even when AMD processors were faster and better, Intel made big threats to any vendor that would switch which means Intel had the marketing ame down.
- stone2020, on 06/06/2008, -0/+5Lots of people have bought the X2 5000+ Black Edition and the Phenom 9850 Black Edition. In fact AMD is thinking of not doing FX chips anymore because the Black Edition is so popular. They are both good values especially for people that already have decent cpu coolers. (Black Edition doesn't come with cooler)
- Namco, on 06/07/2008, -0/+5Very true, very true. If there were no AMD, we'd be still be running some crappy variant of the P4 core.
- gn0stik, on 06/06/2008, -0/+5I fired up my quantum core this morning and it did my 2010 taxes... yesterday.
- pilot101, on 06/06/2008, -4/+8mere peanuts, but man amd needs to do a lot more than this to start kicking intels butt again. Even in hiding, I'm still rooting for ya!
- ratedsar, on 06/06/2008, -0/+4O, and AMD does have a true quad core. Toms Hardware Guide has a full review comparing it to Core Quad Duos. The Phenom only outperforms in idle watts used and large memory (this is where hypertransport plays) operations like converting HD Video.
Yes, AMD is behind Intel currently, and has been for a while in the pure mhz race. Having a close competitor does ensure that Intel and AMD will both be trying to produce the best for a while. Without competition there is limited innovation. - mikedoth, on 06/06/2008, -1/+5I'd buy as long as the price is descent. It's about brand loyalty. I don't think many in the forums think like that though. I've always bought AMD and always will as long as the speeds don't fall too low.
- justice7, on 06/06/2008, -1/+5At this point, my little sub $100 chip will outperform many of those. Put a new aftermarket heatsink on there and i can push 3.6Ghz with the C2D chip. That is a true 100% overclock -- you're right.. apples and oranges right? I'll stick with my c2d for now.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 176 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is