AMD FX Sets a Guinness World Record 8.429 ghz

[MAC]

All frequency record attempts are done with cores disabled, it's nothing new or devious.

[chrisk]

2 cores? You gotta be kidding me. I was really excited when I saw this. I was already picturing AMD goodness in my rigs.

Why not shoot for 10GHZ on one core then. :/

I'm with Eldonko on this one. I wanna see some benches, encoding, and folding performance.

Damn I thought that was across all the cores.

[ccm001]

Originally Posted by MAC

All frequency record attempts are done with cores disabled, it's nothing new or devious.

Exactly! So don't get too bent out of shape about it peeps
Hopefully it will translate into some good real-world 8 core overclocks, we will see.

[NI3]

2 cores 2 threads, world record overclocks are done with the minimum amount of cores.

[ipaine]

While I know that they disable cores on these record setting runs, I don't agree with it. To me OCing a chip means to overclock the entire chip. I mean show me what you guys can do with a proper OC on all cores.

[chrisk]

Originally Posted by ipaine

While I know that they disable cores on these record setting runs, I don't agree with it. To me OCing a chip means to overclock the entire chip. I mean show me what you guys can do with a proper OC on all cores.

I honestly didn't realize they did this. I figured that HT would be turned off on Intel stuff, but not physical cores.

I agree with iPaine...you overclock all physical cores in my books (AMD fanboys chill...not a criticism of AMD here, just an overclocking practice criticism in general).

[Arinoth]

Originally Posted by Eldonko

Raw Mhz and shitty processing power FTL. :/

Yep, they could only accomplish this on 2 of the 8 threads/cores.

IF BD can hit 5GHz thats all fine and dandy, but if it can't do it with all the threads, what's the point of even 6ghz if you're running 2 threads where your competitor can run all 8 threads at 5GHz and beat you on anything that is multiple thread friendly

[chrisk]

The main hope/thing to take away here is that compared to other chips (Intel and AMD), even with only two cores BD did extremely well. While I am disappointed that it was not all cores (my assumption), this has to be good news.

But I will not get too excited until BD is released. Even with an OC like we see here, I don't know enough about this architecture to determine:

1. Single-threaded performance (how much work can be done per core..see the PIII vs. P4 difference in performance at similar clock speeds)

2. How picky the chips will be when all cores are stressed. 7GHZ on two cores is fun, but 4GHZ on all cores might bring BD to its knees, especially if the power requirements increase substantially per core.

Originally Posted by chrisk

Why not shoot for 10GHZ on one core then. :/

because that's not even possible because it's not a true 8 core. two "cores" to a modual which shares everything but the integer something or other. so it's gotta run as 2, 4, or 8. can't turn a core off in a modual because it's all interconnected.

[JJThomp]

Originally Posted by Arinoth

Yep, they could only accomplish this on 2 of the 8 threads/cores.

IF BD can hit 5GHz thats all fine and dandy, but if it can't do it with all the threads, what's the point of even 6ghz if you're running 2 threads where your competitor can run all 8 threads at 5GHz and beat you on anything that is multiple thread friendly

It sounded like they were talking about 5ghz on all cores with air.