Overclockers Take AMD A10-5800K APU to 7.87 GHz

Status
Not open for further replies.

yialanliu

Honorable
Apr 23, 2012
184
0
10,690
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
 

weaselman

Honorable
Oct 27, 2012
1,146
0
11,360
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

Distinguished
Feb 14, 2007
587
0
18,990
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.....
 

bustapr

Distinguished
Jan 23, 2009
1,613
0
19,780
[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
 

friskiest

Distinguished
Dec 6, 2011
126
0
18,680
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

Honorable
Sep 10, 2012
892
0
11,060
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

Distinguished
Sep 28, 2010
106
0
18,690
[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
 

friskiest

Distinguished
Dec 6, 2011
126
0
18,680
[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

Distinguished
May 21, 2008
65
0
18,660
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

Honorable
Jul 3, 2012
323
0
10,790
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

Titan
Moderator
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.
 

basketcase87

Distinguished
Sep 19, 2011
88
0
18,630
[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

Distinguished
May 11, 2009
1,160
0
19,310
[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

Distinguished
Nov 25, 2011
2,256
0
19,790
[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

Distinguished
Oct 26, 2011
100
0
18,710
[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.

 

nazgron

Honorable
Apr 12, 2012
39
0
10,540
[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.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS