When is going to be released AMD LE-1660 (2.8 Ghz) ?????

[DeafB4Dishonor]

sseyler i appreciate your comment but i never said there is anything wrong in particular in AMD platform.all i comment is that Intel OC better and will offer more performance.

and further proved anything above 3.2Ghz is rarely achievable in the current 2 gen of AMD.and i have use AMD long time ago when P4 just suck big time.but C2D arrive and AMD dont stand a chance,even 2 years down the road until now.otherwise B-Unit and Wisecracker will be bashing about their great OC now!!!

Lmfao, I bet you were making the same posts about Intel a couple years back, It really shows you're a bandwagon fan, and yes you did, you went on and on about how 3.2 ghz is impossible on a lower end chipset, how their technology is aging and so on and so forth, before saying you were asking about AMD's overclocking ability(Which you claim to know very strongly) before saying you worked with AMDs for years..just quit the bs. http://www.amdgeeks.net/ there you go, a bunch of AMDs running at 3.2+. And Intel is still better clock for clock. But this is a Athlon thread.

 

[iggybeans]

To further this attempt to quell any hard feelings, I fully apologize for the use of the term "idiot". Most people using either AMD or Intel processors aren't aware that as AMD products mature they tend to overclock better. The last K6 processors, the K6-2+ and K6-III+ would easily overclock from 450MHz to 550 or 600MHz. A few years ago when AMD moved most of its higher end processors to the Socket939 platform, I had a Socket754 4000+ DTR processor that would run at 2.8GHz. The only reason we are seeing better overclocks from A64 X2 processor now is that the current 65nm processor are relatively mature. Admittedly, current Phenom processors are horrible at overclocking. This isn't like to change until the 45nm processors are introduced. And yes Gill, Intel clearly own overclocking at this point. Further, I rather dread the introduction of Intel's Nehalem (since demo at speeds below 3GHz already appear to destroy ALL competition).
However, as has been said before, what does all this have to do with a single-core low watt A64?

 

[amdfangirl]

sseyler i appreciate your comment but i never said there is anything wrong in particular in AMD platform.all i comment is that Intel OC better and will offer more performance.

and further proved anything above 3.2Ghz is rarely achievable in the current 2 gen of AMD.and i have use AMD long time ago when P4 just suck big time.but C2D arrive and AMD dont stand a chance,even 2 years down the road until now.otherwise B-Unit and Wisecracker will be bashing about their great OC now!!!

You sound like the polar opposite of thunderman...
Anyways I can kinda agree with you but AMD's not that bad for OC'ing. Now before you call me an amd fangirl, I am one so rubbing it in won't help...

I can get 3.6GHz on a 5000+ BE on a Sempron cooler and still get windows to boot (or 3.2GHz if I want it to last Prime 95)

Just flaming the thread like this is plain wrong, the OP wanted to know something, to get some help and all you say is "Oh AMD's bad at overclocking you shouldn't buy AMD". Seriously not everybody in this world OCs. Who knows, the OP may have wanted a HTPC or a work computer.

Personally I keep my rig @ 1.7 @ 0.9v. There's no reason why it can't reach at least 2.8GHz but I just don't overclock on any of my computers (that was for a friend).

Besides AMD still offers better performance on some AMD-optimised applications and it still scales better than comparable multi-socket intel systems...

Please don't take this negatively, but AMD's worth alot more than you think, but so is Intel to me. I mean like my Core 2 Macbook really does some awesome encoding...

 

[xx12amanxx]

i never said there isnt any who over 3Ghz.but how many in a 100?i think i shouold have put it "in the overall AMD CPU"

and your chipset is the top AMD chipset.how bout others who on medium chipset like 780 or lower( equal to intel P35)?you can guarranteen they OC 3.2Ghz as well?

Rig-in-Sig

Oc'ed cpu to 3.4 and ran 3dmark 06 on it fine...currently running 3.3 24/7 never going above 53 celceius.

 

[joefriday]

It used to be the case that a 3.0GHz+ K8 was a rare find, but that was back in the days of 2005/early 2006. Once AMD got their 65nm process off the ground and truly refined their 90nm process, 3.0GHz speeds started to become readily achievable. Back in 2005 my Sempron 2800 on a Tforce 6100 mobo was lucky to break 2.6 GHz at 1.5 volt. Nowadays, 3.0GHz is getting to be pretty common, especially on the 65nm cores, as long as one has a decent overclocking motherboard and/or a decently high stock cpu multiplier.

It's good to see people still supporting single core CPUs in this age of multicore. I'm surprisingly quite happy with this 1.6 GHz Celeron 420 so far, although it is a bit of a downgrade compared to my d805, the quieter fan and decreased power consumption are worth it. Besides, I realized that now that I have a dedicated HTPC, my need for a dual core CPU is virtually nonexistent at this time.

 

[saezito]

Back to the matter at hand ...

but when is going to be released?

Everything I can find says LE-1660 this month - probably still trying to clear all the Sempys out of the channel ...

The LE-1660 is popping up on shop-bots but none are listed at retail anywhere I can find. It also is popping up on mobo cpu support lists.

Sorry we can't be anymore help to you. Try to be patient

thanks man, i will wait for news!

 

[saezito]

someone know news about release date 😛?????

 

[saezito]

news news news of release date? ???? 🙁

 

[qwertymac93]

its already on newegg

 

[kazuya-kun]

excuse me 3.6Ghz i asked.almost any noob can OC a C2D to 3.2ghz without much of a problem.

if im an idiot what are you then?worse than a idiot?pfft

I'm using a Q6600 G0 with a good VID of 1.2375 Hell clocking up it to 3.6 ghz is hard unless you've got some decent watercooling. You can push it to 3.6 but to get it stable you'll need insane cooling with the amount of voltage your running through it.

Not worth it... I don't know what "easily" means according to you but to me, 3.6 ghz is rather difficult so I'm sticking with 3.2 ghz like what the other 90% of what everyone's using.

PS. In reality only a very small number of people actually HAVE their Q6600 clocked so high simply because keeping it stable/running cool enough at that frequency is rather difficult.