Go Back   Hardware Canucks > HARDWARE > CPU's and Motherboards

    
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old November 3, 2008, 07:34 AM
Iamcanadian7's Avatar
MVP
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Posts: 251
Default Core i7 review up on TH, dissapointing overcocking.

Tom's Hardware just posted a review of the new Core i7. Link below:

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...alem,2057.html

Looks like Intel will be limiting how far we can push these chips via a 130 watt limit before the processor begins throttling itself.

"if it exceeds a certain level, the processor automatically reduces its clock speed. Intel calls this feature "Overspeed Protection." The limits hard-wired into the core are 100 A and 130 watts. Only the Extreme Edition allows the user to increase these values as they like, effectively circumventing the protection mechanism altogether."

"Thus, it is entirely possible that a lower model Core i7 may offer excellent overclocking potential, but it will be constrained by the Overspeed Protection feature when its power dissipation triggers it. Obviously, Intel wants to prevent customers from buying an inexpensive processor and then overclocking it to very high or even extreme levels."

I'm very dissapointed that Intel would put something like this in place. However it wasn't unexpected and it's understandable why they would. Looks like I'll be sticking with the current platform for a while.
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old November 3, 2008, 08:04 AM
SKYMTL's Avatar
HardwareCanuck Review Editor
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Montreal
Posts: 11,835
Default

Quote:
100 A and 130 watts
Our review will be up later tonight but I wanted to address this ASAP.

100A and 130W are mutually exclusive in this case since as far as I know the i7 still uses +12VDC power. Therefore some people will assume, 130W @ 12VDC = 10.83A. But there is more to it than that.

It is VERY important to put some background as to where the figures come from before making blanket statements. I think Tom's needs to go into alot more detail regarding exactly what the 100A is refering to since there isn't a processor in the planet that uses 100A of current unless it is operating at a crazy-low voltage.

However if we are looking at the actual voltage the core is set at, things make a bit more sense. That means 1.3V (therefore 100A @ 1.3V = 130W) is the absolute max core voltage assuming there is a 100A current which is more than enough to get some pretty decent overclocks. We also can't forget that ALL of the current i7 processors are rated at 130W TDP...and TDP is NOT absolute power consumption. That means a 920 or 940 should be easily able to reach the speeds of the EE as long as voltage is kept low enough to stay under the 130W.

Personally, I don't see a problem with this at all.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old November 3, 2008, 08:32 AM
Mr. Gruntsworthy's Avatar
Allstar
F@H
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Courtice, ONT
Posts: 738
Default

I don't overclock anyways, so this is of no concern to me. If i build an i7 machine, it'll be just for the sake of having an up-to-date machine
__________________
MAIN RIG:
Case: Antec 900
CPU : Intel E8400 45nm Core 2 Duo @ 3GHz 1333MHz FSB
RAM : 4GB DDR2 800MHz (OCZ Platinum)
HDD : Main: 120GB SSD SATA2 (OCZ) Storage: 3TB SATA2 (WD Green) Backup: 500GB External USB (Hitatchi)
GFX : HD4850 (512MB)
PSU : 610W PC Power Silencer
MoBo: Asus P5Q SE
View : Acer H213H 21.5" @ 1920 x 1080

Oshawa Deathmatch Community -- An open group for Durham/Toronto Airsoft, Paintball, and Nerf players. Come join!

I am a Level/Game Designer! http://mikeseguin.webs.com/
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old November 3, 2008, 08:42 AM
Hall Of Fame
F@H
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Montreal
Posts: 1,792

My System Specs

Default

I can't wait to read the HWC review :D
__________________

Back up - Ebay (Inik1) or Heatware
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old November 3, 2008, 08:52 AM
Xilikon's Avatar
MVP
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Quebec City
Posts: 448
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SKYMTL View Post
Our review will be up later tonight but I wanted to address this ASAP.

100A and 130W are mutually exclusive in this case since as far as I know the i7 still uses +12VDC power. Therefore some people will assume, 130W @ 12VDC = 10.83A. But there is more to it than that.

It is VERY important to put some background as to where the figures come from before making blanket statements. I think Tom's needs to go into alot more detail regarding exactly what the 100A is refering to since there isn't a processor in the planet that uses 100A of current unless it is operating at a crazy-low voltage.

However if we are looking at the actual voltage the core is set at, things make a bit more sense. That means 1.3V (therefore 100A @ 1.3V = 130W) is the absolute max core voltage assuming there is a 100A current which is more than enough to get some pretty decent overclocks. We also can't forget that ALL of the current i7 processors are rated at 130W TDP...and TDP is NOT absolute power consumption. That means a 920 or 940 should be easily able to reach the speeds of the EE as long as voltage is kept low enough to stay under the 130W.

Personally, I don't see a problem with this at all.
Correct, the 100A is on the CPU voltage plane and not on the 12v plane. I saw some overclocking reports with a i7 920 and they seems to reach 4.0-4.2 GHz without too much hassle despite these limitations. I assume that as long as you don't reach those limitations, you still have some headroom.

Let's play devil's advocate... The Q9450 have a kind of limitation as well in the sense that if you want to reach 4 GHz that the QX9650 can do, you will have to do 8x500. The 500 GHz is a limitation and not a lot can reach this without a great hand-picked motherboard. The advantage of the QX9650 is that you can change the multiplier for 10x400 for a easy 4 GHz as long as cooling is adequate.

I can understand the point of Intel to limit the overclocking since there is more expensive EE processors for that purpose which doesn't sell well because the cheaper ones can reach or surpass the EE.
__________________
Xilikon - Team 33

Proud to be [H]ard !
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old November 3, 2008, 09:07 AM
SKYMTL's Avatar
HardwareCanuck Review Editor
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Montreal
Posts: 11,835
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Xilikon View Post
I can understand the point of Intel to limit the overclocking since there is more expensive EE processors for that purpose which doesn't sell well because the cheaper ones can reach or surpass the EE even with these "limitations".
Corrected.
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old November 3, 2008, 09:13 AM
Xilikon's Avatar
MVP
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Quebec City
Posts: 448
Default

Lol, yeah
__________________
Xilikon - Team 33

Proud to be [H]ard !
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old November 3, 2008, 09:13 AM
Hall Of Fame
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Calgary, AB
Posts: 3,344
Default

Review review.. HWC review by SKY hopefully.. *jumps in joy* :P
__________________
Intel E8400, Biostar TPower i45
G-Skill PC2-8500 4GB, Saphire HD4870 512mb
Cooler Master HAF 932, Enermax Galaxy DXX 1000W
Samsung 931BW 19" LCD, Logitech MX Revolution
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old November 3, 2008, 09:34 AM
"Quote This..."
F@H
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Hell
Posts: 3,833
Default

hmmmm, the i7 internally clocks itself up by 133mhz if only 2 cores are being used and 266mhz if only one is in use.
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old November 3, 2008, 09:38 AM
SKYMTL's Avatar
HardwareCanuck Review Editor
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Montreal
Posts: 11,835
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by miggs78 View Post
Review review.. HWC review by SKY hopefully.. *jumps in joy* :P
By MAC...just as good if not better.

We just got our review kit pretty late in the game so are trying to make up for lost time.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes