Overclockers Take AMD A10-5800K APU to 7.87 GHz

[Guest]

Gigabyte's overclocking team was able to overclock AMD’s A10-5800K APU to a record 7.87 GHz, up from a stock 3.8 GHz.

Overclockers Take AMD A10-5800K APU to 7.87 GHz : Read more

 

[yialanliu]

That's cool and all that, but can it run Crysis? as in, did they double the graphics core speed as well? Which would rock!

I had to...sorry haha

 

[wanderer11]

I would really like to see a single benchmark from one of these overclocks to see how much of a difference this makes. Until then it is just a number in a cpuz screenshot.

 

[weaselman]

Take a close look at the bus speed though, it may be ok to clock a cpu up to or close to 8Ghz but it wont do much with a bus speed of 128Mhz or a front side bus of 129Mhz. bottle neck.

 

[jn77]

So, specs are only "half the story"...... In "real world" day to day use, my intel based computers out perform amd cpu's hands down...... (not that I want to support intel). So why bother. There is a balance of engergy use vs. performance...... You consume less electricity with amd and you get less performance., you suck your electric bill dry with intel, but you get the added benefit of the extra performance....

I will take my "faster" computer over a slow one, why do we upgrade our pc's in the first place? to make them slower? 🙂 right.....

 

[deadlockedworld]

So that makes it as fast as ... a sandy bridge i3?

 

[bustapr]

[citation][nom]jn77[/nom]So, specs are only "half the story"...... In "real world" day to day use, my intel based computers out perform amd cpu's hands down...... (not that I want to support intel). So why bother. There is a balance of engergy use vs. performance...... You consume less electricity with amd and you get less performance., you suck your electric bill dry with intel, but you get the added benefit of the extra performance....I will take my "faster" computer over a slow one, why do we upgrade our pc's in the first place? to make them slower? 🙂 right.....[/citation]
here, have a cookie

 

[twelve25]

[citation][nom]deadlockedworld[/nom]So that makes it as fast as ... a sandy bridge i3?[/citation]

A10 is already faster than i3 at most things at stock speed.

 

[arnoldlouie]

up on oc'ed benchmarks..or maybe it shut downs just after the screenshot...hehehe.. hey! I smell something burning...

 

[friskiest]

Through word of mouth, An AMD CPU overclocks to 7.87GHz,. its "fast",. that's what would probably get the low-techie into buying an AMD chip. The bigger the GB of a videocard, the faster it would be type of consumers.

Not to be troll, but I really don't think this would help AMD that much,. if only they could put more effort and resources in increasing the IPCs of their desktop CPUs, that would definitely put them in a better stand against Intel.

A 100W APU vs a 65W i3 is actually a significant consideration. A "dramatic" increase in the efficiency of their CPUs would make them an ideal for system builders- especially on ASIA where electricity charges is higher.

 

[dscudella]

Most of you are missing the point. This has nothing to do with trying to prove that AMD OC's better than Intel or that they're faster. This was a show of skill by the Overclocking team that did it, to prove they could do it.

In a real world setup this is not possible as I'm sure EXTREME cooling measures were in place. Liquid Nitrogen being #1. This just shows that anything is possible.

Good article.

 

[gilgamex]

[citation][nom]friskiest[/nom]Through word of mouth, An AMD CPU overclocks to 7.87GHz,. its "fast",. that's what would probably get the low-techie into buying an AMD chip. The bigger the GB of a videocard, the faster it would be type of consumers.Not to be troll, but I really don't think this would help AMD that much,. if only they could put more effort and resources in increasing the IPCs of their desktop CPUs, that would definitely put them in a better stand against Intel. A 100W APU vs a 65W i3 is actually a significant consideration. A "dramatic" increase in the efficiency of their CPUs would make them an ideal for system builders- especially on ASIA where electricity charges is higher.[/citation]

Dear lord, they are using liquid nitrogen for chrissake! It is not a sane benchmark, no one in their homes will be able to have a stable OC even remotely past 4.5 ghz (roughly). It is not done by AMD, it is done by Gigabyte and any other enthusiast team that tries to test the outer limits.

There is no appreciable marketing increase here for AMD at all, this is a tech crowd fun thing to do and is carried out with all the new chips for kicks. Have fun, get the dollar signs out of your mind, don't be suspicious of EVERYTHING

 

[Cryio]

Actually, I'm really curious of a 6-8 GHz benchmark between AMD A10, FX8350, Intel i3 3225 and a i7 3770k.

 

[mikenygmail]

Finally, an APU can run Crysis at max settings! heh

 

[friskiest]

[citation][nom]gilgamex[/nom]Dear lord, they are using liquid nitrogen for chrissake! It is not a sane benchmark, no one in their homes will be able to have a stable OC even remotely past 4.5 ghz (roughly). It is not done by AMD, it is done by Gigabyte and any other enthusiast team that tries to test the outer limits.There is no appreciable marketing increase here for AMD at all, this is a tech crowd fun thing to do and is carried out with all the new chips for kicks. Have fun, get the dollar signs out of your mind, don't be suspicious of EVERYTHING[/citation]

Where did I say that they (the consumers) will be overclocking? The overclocking & "fast" reference is only used to signify that some people still base their CPU buying to brand association with GHz numbers (like in here where, the 7.87GHz and AMD).

I'm just concerned about what's been happening at AMD for awhile now, lots of layoffs and weakening shares at both entry level and enthusiast markets,. thats compounded by the fact that Intel bests AMD in both processing and thermal performance.

The reality is that MONEY IS EVERYTHING for AMD right now,. they're are pretty close to the cliff so any news directly or indirectly related to them must bring confidence to buyers rooting for them.

 

[DEVILVSANGEL00]

Great job by the overclocking team, would be great if they could some how come up with a low cost contained endothermic chemical reaction that would somehow work in conjunction with the standard air coolers most of us use today, if that was possible we would be hitting 5GHz overclocks at home with big smiles on our faces,

if only......

 

[azraa]

Quit your AMD vs Intel crap, kids, jeez.
This article shows the Gigabyte's OC team success, that's it.

Besides, it is well known that these crazy overclocks are just a way to demonstrate how 'tough' and how far you can push a chip without it crashing. Thats it, get performance and value market out of your minds with these kind of things. This only shows that AMD once again proved their chips to be reliable at extreme conditions... which is well known fact up to this point, no bias in saying that.

 

[InvalidError]

They may have managed to overclock beyond 8GHz but they had to disable half the cores to get there only to prove that they could actually get there. The real question: can the system do any useful work at that speed without crashing?

Not much point in boasting about an incredible overclock if it is only stable at/near idle with half the cores disabled. I would be more interested in the highest overclock without crippling the CPU (disabling cores) and running something like 3DMark.

 

[SuperVeloce]

2volts? last time we saw that on our computers, transistor count was 5million and 300mhz . It's a miracle cpu even survived

 

[basketcase87]

[citation][nom]dscudella[/nom]Most of you are missing the point. This has nothing to do with trying to prove that AMD OC's better than Intel or that they're faster. This was a show of skill by the Overclocking team that did it, to prove they could do it. In a real world setup this is not possible as I'm sure EXTREME cooling measures were in place. Liquid Nitrogen being #1. This just shows that anything is possible.Good article.[/citation]
Liquid Nitrogen is for n00bs. The team that hit 8.4 last year blasted their processor with liquid helium .

 

[stingstang]

[citation][nom]dscudella[/nom]Most of you are missing the point. This has nothing to do with trying to prove that AMD OC's better than Intel or that they're faster. This was a show of skill by the Overclocking team that did it, to prove they could do it. In a real world setup this is not possible as I'm sure EXTREME cooling measures were in place. Liquid Nitrogen being #1. This just shows that anything is possible.Good article.[/citation]
I like overclockers, but I still can't see this as being a skill. What do they do, other than a simple trial and error process with the same old cooling techniques of a copper tube full of LN2 over the apu?
There's no finesse, or number crunching going on. The only balancing act is keeping the temps or voltages under the killing point.

 

[A Bad Day]

[citation][nom]stingstang[/nom]I like overclockers, but I still can't see this as being a skill. What do they do, other than a simple trial and error process with the same old cooling techniques of a copper tube full of LN2 over the apu?There's no finesse, or number crunching going on. The only balancing act is keeping the temps or voltages under the killing point.[/citation]

NASCAR:

What is the point of it? The drivers drive in a circle at high speed. So what?

 

[Scar89]

[citation][nom]jn77[/nom] You consume less electricity with amd and you get less performance., you suck your electric bill dry with intel, but you get the added benefit of the extra performance[/citation]
Errr... actually it seems like AMDs are slower and use more power atm...These APU's do however, have a much better GPU and if you were to replace a CPU+dedicated GPU combo with one there could be some power savings there. These aren't really designed for the best CPU performance, that's what the FX series is (supposed to be)for.

 

[amuffin]

Not a "real" overclock...they turned off 2 cores.

 

[nazgron]

[citation][nom]amuffin[/nom]Not a "real" overclock...they turned off 2 cores.[/citation]
Yeah remember when i7-3770k got a max OC in a speed of 7102MHz (ONE core / ONE thread).

Let's talking about the chip's quality & stability instead of talking about how fast or how efficiency this speed is.
Not to mention they used a $130 mainboard.