3.86 ghz X6800 vs. 3.05 ghz Fx-62

2006-08-02 13:13:40

#1

Maj.Do: Member; +85|7054|good old CA

something i found on tomshardware.com
http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/08/02/thg_tuning_test/

Wow you can oc a conroe up to 3.86

Last edited by Maj.Do (2006-08-02 13:16:21)

2006-08-02 13:18:58

#2

MECtallica: Member; +73|6806|jalalabad

you can OC a proc up to 7GHZ, 3.86GHZ is nothing for a hardcore overclocker.

2006-08-02 13:20:03

#3

Maj.Do: Member; +85|7054|good old CA

MECtallica wrote:
you can OC a proc up to 7GHZ, 3.86GHZ is nothing for a hardcore overclocker.

i know that but arent they using air?

2006-08-02 13:22:05

#4

Cybargs: Moderated; +2,285|7018

Maj.Do wrote:
MECtallica wrote:
you can OC a proc up to 7GHZ, 3.86GHZ is nothing for a hardcore overclocker.
i know that but arent they using air?

7GHZ is impossible... conroe can go to 4GHZ on tuniq tower 120. coolaler hit 5.5ghz w/ LN2

https://cache.www.gametracker.com/server_info/203.46.105.23:21300/b_350_20_692108_381007_FFFFFF_000000.png

2006-08-02 13:22:29

#5

The Stillhouse Kid: Licensed Televulcanologist; +126|6944|Deep In The South Of Texas

MECtallica wrote:
you can OC a proc up to 7GHZ, 3.86GHZ is nothing for a hardcore overclocker.

Depends on the cooling. 7GHz on phasechange, fair enough. But 3.86GHz on air or water is pretty impressive.

2006-08-03 11:05:40

#6

Kmar: Truth is my Bitch; +5,695|6903|132 and Bush

Clock speed is not really something that should be focused on so much. That's why intel got it's butt kicked for so many years. But alas the conroe has arrived.

I have had mine running stable at 4.42. (That was my old ati card in the ati tool) i know have an x1900 xtx

https://www.oe-hq.com/gal/albums/userpics/10001/ss1.gif

Xbone Stormsurgezz

2006-08-03 11:06:59

#7

Brasso: member; +1,549|6932

I've seen 5.something using liquid nitrogen as cooling.

Last edited by haffeysucks (2006-08-03 11:07:06)

"people in ny have a general idea of how to drive. one of the pedals goes forward the other one prevents you from dying"

2006-08-03 11:06:59

#8

kessel!: Peruvian Cocaine; +261|7067|Toronto Canada

1333337

2006-08-03 11:34:08

#9

ts-madchild: Member; +5|7091

cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:
7GHZ is impossible...

uhh WRONG.

CPU-Z GHZ RECORD HOLDER 7.47 GHZ

CPU-Z GHZ 2ND HIGHEST 7.2 GHZ

2006-08-03 11:50:33

#10

elmo1337: Banned; +186|6861|The real world

How far do you reckon you can overclock the cheapest one for me (E6600)

And what exactly does overclocking do for gaming performance?

2006-08-03 12:03:37

#11

Agent_Dung_Bomb: Member; +302|7038|Salt Lake City

elmo1337 wrote:
How far do you reckon you can overclock the cheapest one for me (E6600)

And what exactly does overclocking do for gaming performance?

Conroe is fast enough that o/c it will do little for game performance. Overclocking your video card will yield better performance results.

2006-08-03 12:42:50

#12

Kmar: Truth is my Bitch; +5,695|6903|132 and Bush

Agent_Dung_Bomb wrote:
elmo1337 wrote:
How far do you reckon you can overclock the cheapest one for me (E6600)

And what exactly does overclocking do for gaming performance?
Conroe is fast enough that o/c it will do little for game performance. Overclocking your video card will yield better performance results.

Quoted for the truth.

Xbone Stormsurgezz

2006-08-03 14:24:05

#13

stryyker: bad touch; +1,682|7022|California

ts-madchild wrote:
cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:
7GHZ is impossible...
uhh WRONG.

CPU-Z GHZ RECORD HOLDER 7.47 GHZ

CPU-Z GHZ 2ND HIGHEST 7.2 GHZ

...thats not a conroe, though..

2006-08-03 14:27:10

#14

Cybargs: Moderated; +2,285|7018

stryyker wrote:
ts-madchild wrote:
cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:
7GHZ is impossible...
uhh WRONG.

CPU-Z GHZ RECORD HOLDER 7.47 GHZ

CPU-Z GHZ 2ND HIGHEST 7.2 GHZ
...thats not a conroe, though..

exactly, conroes wont be reaching 7ghz anytime soon

2006-08-03 14:27:26

#15

Kmar: Truth is my Bitch; +5,695|6903|132 and Bush

stryyker wrote:
ts-madchild wrote:
cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:
7GHZ is impossible...
uhh WRONG.

CPU-Z GHZ RECORD HOLDER 7.47 GHZ

CPU-Z GHZ 2ND HIGHEST 7.2 GHZ
...thats not a conroe, though..

We are reffering to the chip in the topic title.. E6600

Try not to focus on clock speeds..very decieving.

Last edited by Kmarion (2006-08-03 14:28:24)

Xbone Stormsurgezz

2006-08-03 14:28:49

#16

stryyker: bad touch; +1,682|7022|California

Kmarion wrote:
stryyker wrote:
ts-madchild wrote:

uhh WRONG.

CPU-Z GHZ RECORD HOLDER 7.47 GHZ

CPU-Z GHZ 2ND HIGHEST 7.2 GHZ
...thats not a conroe, though..
We are reffering to the chip in the topic title.. E6600

Core : Prescott (90 nm)
Core : Presler (65 nm)

last years cores ftW!

2006-08-03 16:11:16

#17

a fly: Member; +105|6946|The netherlands

Kmarion wrote:
Clock speed is not really something that should be focused on so much. That's why intel got it's butt kicked for so many years. But alas the conroe has arrived.

I have had mine running stable at 4.42. (That was my old ati card in the ati tool) i know have an x1900 xtx

http://www.oe-hq.com/gal/albums/userpics/10001/ss1.gif

what card was it?

2006-08-03 16:53:03

#18

Kmar: Truth is my Bitch; +5,695|6903|132 and Bush

Radeon X850 was the gpu at the time of the ss

Xbone Stormsurgezz

2006-08-03 17:00:49

#19

ts-madchild: Member; +5|7091

Kmarion wrote:
stryyker wrote:
ts-madchild wrote:

uhh WRONG.

CPU-Z GHZ RECORD HOLDER 7.47 GHZ

CPU-Z GHZ 2ND HIGHEST 7.2 GHZ
...thats not a conroe, though..
We are reffering to the chip in the topic title.. E6600

Try not to focus on clock speeds..very decieving.

my post was based on the premise of your claim that "7Ghz is impossible" It may not be realistic at this point because Core2 Duo has yet to see the real world, but Im sure within a few years (like it took the Prescott) the "conroe" chip will be touching the 7Ghz area.. Ive come to realize not to say "impossible" when referring to computer technology... shit I remember just a few years back when Bill Gates said nobody will ever need more than 64Mb of ram...

2006-08-03 17:06:55

#20

a fly: Member; +105|6946|The netherlands

Kmarion wrote:
Radeon X850 was the gpu at the time of the ss

thats not a very high overclock, i got my X800 at a higher mem clock lol.... only the core wont go sofar

2006-08-03 20:35:49

#21

K0rnifIcati0N: Member; +2|6779

ts-madchild wrote:
It may not be realistic at this point because Core2 Duo has yet to see the real world

uhh....no

Conroe

The first Intel Core 2 Duo processor core, codenamed Conroe, was launched on 27 July 2006. This processor is built on a 65 nm process and is intended for desktops, replacing the Pentium 4 and Pentium D. Intel has claimed that Conroe provides 40% more performance at 40% less power compared to the Pentium D.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Core_2

2006-08-03 22:27:28

#22

ts-madchild: Member; +5|7091

I know it was "released" on July 27th... but do you know anybody who's got one? Have you seen it for sale on Newegg? or any other site (other that the extreme 6800) for that matter? The real world wont start seeing the first chips until after the 7th of august. I say real word because the so called "average joe" doesnt have one yet.

2006-08-03 22:28:35

#23

stryyker: bad touch; +1,682|7022|California

they should be in full retail distrobution by the end of the month.

2006-08-04 06:32:28

#24

Kmar: Truth is my Bitch; +5,695|6903|132 and Bush

a fly wrote:
Kmarion wrote:
Radeon X850 was the gpu at the time of the ss
thats not a very high overclock, i got my X800 at a higher mem clock lol.... only the core wont go sofar

Yea I wasn't pushing the vid it was more about the cpu at the time, I'm sure I had it higher.

My bud's conroe is supposed to ship today, we will see.

Last edited by Kmarion (2006-08-04 06:33:46)

Xbone Stormsurgezz

2006-08-04 07:23:26

#25

fierce: I love [fiSh]; +167|6870

ts-madchild wrote:
but do you know anybody who's got one?

Yeah, sure - me, myself and i.

BF2S Forums 3.86 ghz X6800 vs. 3.05 ghz Fx-62

MECtallica wrote:

Maj.Do wrote:

MECtallica wrote:

MECtallica wrote:

cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:

elmo1337 wrote:

Agent_Dung_Bomb wrote:

elmo1337 wrote:

ts-madchild wrote:

cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:

stryyker wrote:

ts-madchild wrote:

cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:

stryyker wrote:

ts-madchild wrote:

cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

stryyker wrote:

ts-madchild wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

stryyker wrote:

ts-madchild wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

ts-madchild wrote:

a fly wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

ts-madchild wrote:

Board footer