Yorkfield overclock on air! INSANE!

[Amon]

I'm a bit skeptical. That may just be a high-yield sample to create an impression such as this

Originally Posted by Wankerfx

If I recall correctly; most retail C2D's did better than the ES chips.

The late ES chips stomped all over the balls of the early (and late) retail chips.

[Wankerfx]

Originally Posted by Misoprostol

The late ES chips stomped all over the balls of the early (and late) retail chips.

That's correct, I could have bought an E6400 ES a few days before the C2D lineup came out, and it was only capable of doing 3.2ghz with 1.5V, because it was one of the early ones.

[Eldonko]

Coolaler did a comparison of 45nm INTEL QX9650 VS 65nm INTEL QX6850, 9650 is better in every bench by the following %s:

1M: 11.7%
32M: 2.5%
Cinnabench 10: 8.7%
3DMark06: 8.3%
Winrar: 12.0%

Source: OCX

[r00tman]

Originally Posted by Wankerfx

It's crazy, running at 4.3ghz with only 1.36V is basically unheard of. AMD better show something to the community quick, before it's their trampled.

It's too late - they've already been trampled since comming out with that gawd aweful Quad FX platform, lol.

[Empty_Quarter]

Im so glad I got a P35 board, im so ready for these chips! bring it on!!!

And they are pretty reasonably priced too :P!

[omgwtf]

rip amd..

[Victor5]

is there any s-spec that is preferred for the QX9650?

on Intel's site they show only one s-spec: SLAN3 (stepping = C0)

i noticed in your CPU-Z screenshot it says the stepping is 6.... is that correct?

-v

[Wankerfx]

Unfortunately, it's not my chip or work. I don't know of any preferred steppings online, but all the retail chips have the C0 stepping.

Originally Posted by Victor5

is there any s-spec that is preferred for the QX9650?

on Intel's site they show only one s-spec: SLAN3 (stepping = C0)

i noticed in your CPU-Z screenshot it says the stepping is 6.... is that correct?

-v