P4 1.5 overclocked to 1728 MHz

Discussions about anything Computer Hardware Related. Overclocking, underclocking and talk about the latest or even the oldest technology. PCA Reviews feedback
LikeLinus
Posts: 1058
Joined: Wed Nov 22, 2000 6:06 pm
Contact:

Post by LikeLinus »

Anyone seen the reviews of people doing this lately? Damn i cant believe we are this close to 2 gigs already. I know people hate intel, but overclocking a 1.5 to 1728 MHz is pretty amazing. Additionally this makes the RDRAM run at 500+mhz instead of 400mhz!

Dont start flaming Intel, I just thought this was pretty cool.
User avatar
wvjohn
Posts: 9238
Joined: Wed Nov 22, 2000 7:09 am
Contact:

Post by wvjohn »

I guess that 2 ghz will be the new frontier, now that you can make 1 ghz with a $70 duron :)

too bad most of us won't be able to play with a p4 for a longgggg time. In somwe of the p4 articles they are suggesting a theoretical limit ~10 ghz one this core once the fab is brought down to 0.07 and at <1 volt- yikes - amazing what you could do with that kind of horsepower!
<a href="http://www.heatware.com/eval.php?id=123" target="_blank" >Heatware</a>
LikeLinus
Posts: 1058
Joined: Wed Nov 22, 2000 6:06 pm
Contact:

Post by LikeLinus »

hell 5 gigs would be amazing. 10gigs, i wouldnt know what to do with myself..lol

If Intel can just wait it out till 2002 when their RDRAM deal falls off...i think they will be back on track and release some great chips. But for the time being, they are way overpriced (even if they do include 128mb of ram). AMD seems the way to go in most cases.
User avatar
Kakarot
Golden Member
Posts: 1713
Joined: Wed Nov 22, 2000 8:26 am
Location: Chicago Land Area
Contact:

Post by Kakarot »

The thing I don't get is this. Intel moved the P4 to a 20 stage pipeline instead of the 10 stage of the P3(more stages means degraded performace)... and they did this because even tho the longer the pipeline, the less performance... its easier to ramp up the clock speeds. Why can't they get their P3 any faster than 1 gig? AMD doesn't seem to have any problems getting their thunderbirds to 1.2gig plus. And as far as I know the thunderbird runs on a 10 stage pipeline just like the P3. Seems to me AMD has better technology there. Am I wrong in my assesment?
"Why build only one when you can build two for twice the price?"
<a href="mailto:murphy@excaltech.com">Email</a>
<a target=NEW href="http://www.heatware.com/eval.php?id=377">Heatware evals</a>
User avatar
nexus_7
Posts: 10306
Joined: Wed Nov 22, 2000 12:09 pm
Location: chicago land area.
Contact:

Post by nexus_7 »

amd also plans to Keep the shorter pipeline in there next chip as well which Intel said was imposiable. only the feature holds the truth but Sounds Promising. and I think it shoud OC higher then that based on what kakerot said. Pathetic :)

Greg
<a href="http://www.pcabusers.org" target="_new"> <img src="http://www.pcabusers.org/images1/banner.jpg" border="0"></a>
<a target=NEW href="http://setiathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/stats/team/team_87793.html">JOIN the PCA Seti Team!</a>
LikeLinus
Posts: 1058
Joined: Wed Nov 22, 2000 6:06 pm
Contact:

Post by LikeLinus »

You are missing something. Intel has been using the P6 core since the Pentium Pro. AMD redesigned a whole new cpu for the Athlon. There are differences in the technology. AMD is using an older technology while Intel is using a newer. Yes it is a bit slower, but once you get to 1.5gigs you wont notice anymore. The Athlon is AMD's 6th generation CPU, while Intel has used the 6th generation CPU since what, 1994? P4 is Intels 7th generation CPU, who knows when AMD will have one. It's easy to build a CPU based on the 6th generation, how many years after its been released and you have whole new technology?

This is from Toms Hardware on a P4 vs Athlon

"Surprisingly enough, Athlon scores a lot better under Windows 2000, while Pentium 4 stays where it was at under Windows 98. Athlon is still not able to beat Pentium 4, even when it is overclocked to 1466/133 MHz. You can see that there is only a tiny difference in frame rate between Athlon 1200/133, 1400/133 and 1466/133. I consider this behavior to be the result of a clear bandwidth problem. I doubt that even an Athlon at 1.6 GHz on AMD760 could reach the results of Pentium 4 at 1.5 GHz. Athlon is suffering from either memory or bus bandwidth restrictions and Pentium 4 can take advantage of its high data bandwidths once more."

AMD is already going to run out of bandwith. Also AMD runs at a higher Voltage and creates more heat. Anyone know why AMD doesnt have a moble Athlon? Anyone know why they are going to release an "athlon" moble cpu which is actually going to be a duron in disguse? AMD is going to run into problems sooner or later. But for now AMD is the leader of price/performance, no doubt.

Both chips are good, both companies are good, Intel ****ed themeselves up by using RDRAM. Intel is releasing the 1.3mhz P4 w/ 128mb ram for 300$ Pricing wise this is REAL close to the 1.2gig AMD chip that DOESNT come with ram and will run 300 dollars. Maybe intel will smarten up. It'll be nice with there are DDR boards for the p4

Personally i'm waiting till summer next year. I want Dual CPU's over 1.5gigs each. It'll more than likely be AMD of course, with 256 DDR ram. I don't see Intel being able to provide this solution for a reasonable price. That type of system will kick some booty

[Edited by LikeLinus on 12-13-2000 at 03:47 PM]
User avatar
nexus_7
Posts: 10306
Joined: Wed Nov 22, 2000 12:09 pm
Location: chicago land area.
Contact:

Post by nexus_7 »

yea intel is lazy.

Greg
<a href="http://www.pcabusers.org" target="_new"> <img src="http://www.pcabusers.org/images1/banner.jpg" border="0"></a>
<a target=NEW href="http://setiathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/stats/team/team_87793.html">JOIN the PCA Seti Team!</a>
LikeLinus
Posts: 1058
Joined: Wed Nov 22, 2000 6:06 pm
Contact:

Post by LikeLinus »

that and they have such a hold of the market they can continue to charge outrageous prices and people still buy them : :: shrug :: : i'll keep my cpu for now, ive not come close to maxing out 933mhz.
pidge
Posts: 294
Joined: Wed Nov 22, 2000 3:14 am
Contact:

Post by pidge »

I am running a PIII at 933MHz. If Intel can manufacture PIII's at .13 micron, then I will keep using PIII's. If not, then I will go AMD, unless Intel switches to DDR very soon. I will not sue RDRAM, especially since they might sue NVIDIA. Bastards
<embed src="http://www.chhimi.com/Movie1.swf" quality=high width="159" height="159">
User avatar
Demrok
Posts: 1078
Joined: Thu Nov 23, 2000 2:28 am
Location: Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
Contact:

Post by Demrok »

crapola that's fast stuff! 450 here!
[align=center]Image[/align]
[align=center]<B>Member of the Ukrainian PC ABUSERS POSSE<B/>[/align]
User avatar
Reg Kmet
Golden Member
Posts: 1693
Joined: Wed Nov 22, 2000 4:02 am
Location: Gimli, Manitoba
Contact:

Post by Reg Kmet »

you said it dude, thats fast! i thought you had a 600?
Heatware Evals
mailto:?subject=&body=
The BLACKBIRD

STILL Canada's PREMIER Trader and FOUNDER of the Ukrainian PC ABUSERS POSSE baby!
User avatar
Demrok
Posts: 1078
Joined: Thu Nov 23, 2000 2:28 am
Location: Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
Contact:

Post by Demrok »

bugger ! I did not post that ! you did ! check who you're posting as !!! actually...I just won't post off your puter no more :)

and I do have a 450...it's just doin 504 right now :up
[align=center]Image[/align]
[align=center]<B>Member of the Ukrainian PC ABUSERS POSSE<B/>[/align]
User avatar
Kakarot
Golden Member
Posts: 1713
Joined: Wed Nov 22, 2000 8:26 am
Location: Chicago Land Area
Contact:

Post by Kakarot »

That was a nice story LikeLinus.. but I asked why are AMD chips able to get up to the 1.4ghz mark with out a problem... where as the P3 is pretty much maxed out at 1ghz. I mean, if its so hard to get a cpu with a 10 stage pipeline up that high why is the lowly AMD able to do it without much of a problem and the mighty intel not able too? Bus bandwidth and overall system performance aside. And the athlon isn't a 6th generation cpu.. its their 7th.. hence the code name of it was "K7" and the 6th generation one for them was the "K6". Granted the K6 fell way short on FPU performance compared to the P2.. it was still a 6th generation core. And you're right.. intel has been running on their PPro core(original 6th generation core) for a long time now. That's just another reason I can't stand them. They don't innovate crap. They come out with a very good design however long ago and just tweak it for the next several years. Woohoo... a 900mhz pentium pro.. weee.
"Why build only one when you can build two for twice the price?"
<a href="mailto:murphy@excaltech.com">Email</a>
<a target=NEW href="http://www.heatware.com/eval.php?id=377">Heatware evals</a>
LikeLinus
Posts: 1058
Joined: Wed Nov 22, 2000 6:06 pm
Contact:

Post by LikeLinus »

Uh i answered your question Kakarot. Just reread what i wrote. Its all in the technology. Intel is using an architecture they developed back in 93-94. AMD is using the same type of arch, but developed in 98! Things have evolved since then.

Why does ford have a 5.0 engine that makes 375 horsepower, and also a 5.0 that can make only 225hp? Same engine right? Its all in how it is utilized.

Why would intel keep using an ageing architecture just cause AMD can keep ramping up the power? Intel is doing the smart thing by planning for future upgrade paths. Did you hear that AMD is having to resort to a new silicone for anything over 1.5-1.7gigs? AMD chips also run hotter, higher voltage, have to have special ram and higher wattage powersupplies. They also cant even make a moble chip! How innovative is that? Also AMD's 7th generation CPU cant make it over 1.7...where is an Intel 7th generation cpu can overclock to 1.7 right now!!! (1728 to be exact). You aren't making a very good case.

Regardless of what you say and feel, its kinda silly. Cause you say "woo hoo 900mhz pentium pro" So you are also saying that my aging architecture can keep up with AMD's 7th generation CPU? Clock for clock a p3 hangs with an T-Bird.

Also as far as saying they dont innovate crap...well i think they've help bring personal computers a very long way.

As i said, i knew you'd make this a flame intel post, i just thought it was cool we are able to hit 1.7 now. Figured this would happen. Cant just let a post go.

[Edited by LikeLinus on 12-14-2000 at 04:46 PM]
User avatar
Executioner
Life Member
Posts: 10133
Joined: Wed Nov 22, 2000 11:34 am
Location: Woodland, CA USA

Post by Executioner »

I thought that the limitations were mainly due to the onboard cache? Remember the P2's, as you could disable the onboard cache and crank the MHz up much higher because the onboard cache was disabled?
Post Reply