 |  |  |  |  |
the one and only thoroughbred 2200+
| |||||||||
|
the one and only thoroughbred 2200+
| | |||||||
 |
 |
| | Thread Tools |
10th June 2002, 12:15
| #1 |
| Member  Join Date: May 2002 Location: wherever the doom is
Posts: 3,171
 |  the one and only thoroughbred 2200+ I've been seeing lots of reviews on this processor today... and not all of them were winners Would anyone who happens to spot a review like to tell here how high it got, just to see what they get in average now... 1.hothardware got it from 1800 to 1917 stable... 2.Ace's hardware got it from 1800 to 1917-1984 (latter neing not stable and with a 6800 screaming deltafan) 3.Techreport got it from 1.80 to 1.89 4.Anandtech got the 1800 mhz to 1822 5.THG got the 1800 to 1890 with watercooling! 6.AMDzone got it to 2024 ((quote : We used the Koolance watercooling, the Thermaltake Volcano 7+ all copper heatsink, and the older Globalwin WBK38 all aluminum heatsink. What we found was that all of these cooling methods gave us similar overclocking results. The most likely hypothesis is that the small die of the Thoroughbred does not have enough surface area to take as much advantage of higher end cooling solutions as the Palomino could. Upping the voltage of the CPU from the default of 1.65V to 1.85V helped a bit, but when set to 1.95V the CPU quickly shot up in temperature resulting in BSODs before windows was fully loaded.)) 7.amdmb got an achievement and did this : Using the Epox 8K3A+ motherboard that I just recently reviewed, I was able to push the FSB and lower the multiplier to get a finishing speed of 2160 MHz or 2.16 GHz. This is a very nice 316 MHz overclock on the processor, that ran perfectly stable in all our burn-in tests in Windows XP. Look for more on overclocking the Thoroughbred core in a future article. 1.8-> 2.16 ghz was quite the marvel... so until now : it's a disappointment except for one truely unbelievable result...stable overclocks all go round 100-120 mhz which is...not what we expected after the 0.13 extreme-OCing p4's... let's wait and see... oppainter got his to 3.895 ghz  J/k
__________________ OC-2-the-death Where the Reverend is doing his Magick, all mortals be silent Doom over the world |
|
|
10th June 2002, 12:29
| #2 |
| Member  Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 3,711
| also read them, must discomforting = Now, overclocking is never a sure thing. Every chip is different, and you never know what will happen when you run a chip out of spec. So I'd better not draw any conclusions from our one-off, isolated experience with our very first T-bred sample. I shouldn't speculate that AMD might be having trouble producing these chips with really good yields. And I really shouldn't wonder out loud whether the Athlon XP's 10-stage pipeline is hitting a snag at some point along the way that limits the chip's peak clock speed. Most importantly of all, I shouldn't mention the gossip I heard to that effect from other folks who had tested T- breds when I talked with them at Computex this past week. Especially not from engineers. I really, really shouldn't do that. EDIT : we mustn't forget that later dated procs will probably do a lot better |
|
|
|
10th June 2002, 12:35
| #3 |
| Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: wherever the doom is
Posts: 3,171
| I know... but did you see the first samples of the p4's on n'wood core... they didn't get 80% overclocks... but they got 40% ones.... most of these get 6-8% overclocks... anandtech's 1822 mhz is about the most depressing line I've ever read... as is the fact some of these samples were tested with Koolance or custom watercooling setups...and still got no more than a 150 mhz overclock... Here come the big guns : [H]  this looks nice... will everybody please understand the effect of high fsb on 3dmark  the [H] says : "While the possibility of the lower clocked CPUs bringing some enthusiast value hangs in the scales, the AMD Thoroughbred may very well turn out to be the forgotten red-haired stepchild in the hierarchy to the throne." hexus met middelmatige aircooling en stabiel 
__________________ OC-2-the-death Where the Reverend is doing his Magick, all mortals be silent Doom over the world |
|
|
|
10th June 2002, 13:33
| #4 |
| Member Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 1,543
| gratias hombres, this is going to be one nifty newspost @ hw@sw  |
|
|
|
10th June 2002, 13:48
| #5 |
| Member Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 1,343
| isn't all that nifty ... let 's hope that these samples do not represent the final release cpu's ... that would mean i'd have to switch to PIV ... oh well, out with the XP1600+, in with ... something affordable with a N'wood core  |
|
|
|
10th June 2002, 14:03
| #6 | |
| Member Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 1,543
| Quote:
they will prolly have the skills to overclock it even higher.  Ow, another thing, these are first build samples, after a stepping or three, all should be much better | |
|
|
|
10th June 2002, 14:10
| #7 |
| Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: wherever the doom is
Posts: 3,171
| if they go to 2.4-2.5, we're gonna see them dripping in the orbtop10 again
__________________ OC-2-the-death Where the Reverend is doing his Magick, all mortals be silent Doom over the world |
|
|
|
10th June 2002, 14:30
| #8 |
| Member Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 1,343
| indeed ... "if" ... of course, best case scenario would be related to the PIV's -- up to a pretty good % OC just by aircooling ... seen most AMD OC'ers already own pretty good aircooling :^) |
|
|
|
10th June 2002, 14:39
| #9 |
| Member Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 1,543
| those with air cooling are boned the heat surface of an 0,13µ cpu is to small for decent aircooling, don't know how Intel does it with the P4's. I guess they enlarge the heat surface inside the chip (core is way bigger then AXP core )i'm sceptic... |
|
|
|
10th June 2002, 14:42
| #10 | |
| Member Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 3,711
| Quote:
But ... maybe a proper shim could resolve this issue ? | |
|
|
|
| Thread Tools | |
| |
