Intel E8600 surpasses 6 GHz on DFI P35 board

helmutcheese · 8 Jul 2008 at 15:39

QUOTED :

" Intel's highest-clocked Wolfdale CPU, the E8600 hasn't even been officially introduced and it is already making waves in more Eastern parts of the world with its overclocking capabilities. Backed by a system consisting of a DFI LP UT P35 motherboard, 4GB of DDR2 memory and a Radeon HD 4870 card, and a big bucket of liquid nitrogen, the 3.33 GHz-clocked Core 2 Duo E8600 was able to reach a top speed of 6000.2 MHz and later on 6146.9 MHz.

Achieved by the guys at coolaler.com, the 6.14 GHz mark was possible by taking the processors' FSB (front side bus) all the way up to 614 MHz (the multiplier being of 10), from the 'standard' 333 MHz. These E0 revision Core 2 Duos are looking good already. "

http://www.tcmagazine.info/comments.php?shownews=20725&catid=2

Cairnsey · 8 Jul 2008 at 15:42

1.86V & Liquid nitrogen :cool:

helmutcheese · 8 Jul 2008 at 16:02

Not 100% sure, CPU-Z never has read any of my CPU volts correctly.

Indy500 · 8 Jul 2008 at 16:05

Wonder if they'll get near the Prescott that holds the record..

helmutcheese · 8 Jul 2008 at 16:09

Well Dino did 6GHZ+ on a E8500.

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=193739

kitfit1 · 8 Jul 2008 at 16:50

Just hoping we don't have to wait forever before we get these in the uk. 614 fsb is some going as well, with or without LN. The highest i have ever got mine CPUZ Verified is 586 fsb. A 5ghz stable everyday clock may well be doable for me with an E8600 on board

Monkeynut · 8 Jul 2008 at 17:14

Doesn't the max clock speed on a cpu go up by about 200mhz with each die shrink? Or do lower nm chips make the chip run just as fast 200mhz slower? Guys??

pastymuncher · 8 Jul 2008 at 17:18

That will be dead before too long at that voltage.

kitfit1 · 8 Jul 2008 at 17:34

pastymuncher said:
That will be dead before too long at that voltage.

Just for your info. The chip has been running since the day after they were released in January. No degredation, still ALIVE and in fact is now clocking at 4.8ghz on LESS Vcore than it needed in January when it would only do 4.6ghz stable and less than it needed at 4.7ghz. As you can see in fact it has got better as time has gone on. You see pastymuncher, in my opinion the deaths and degredation we have seen have got more to do with VTT, PLL and Fine Delay settings than Vcore.

Talrinys · 8 Jul 2008 at 18:45

Monkeynut said:
Doesn't the max clock speed on a cpu go up by about 200mhz with each die shrink? Or do lower nm chips make the chip run just as fast 200mhz slower? Guys??

It's able to do more in less space, the engineers can use that for power, more mhz etc. Die shrinks carry absolutely no IPC boost unless the architecture is also improved, C2D showed us how great that boost can really be, and Penryn further refined it. At 32nm we should see 4ghz at stock chips.

milkinc13 · 8 Jul 2008 at 19:33

that's impesssive
what would be the absolute max on nitrogen that core could achieve?

Wayne~ · 8 Jul 2008 at 21:50

Thats is absolutely ridiculous! Now just need something that requires close to that

p4radox · 8 Jul 2008 at 22:25

That's awesome. I genuinely hope AMD can counter this architecture sometime soon or the CPU market may well get very boring very quickly...

Indy500 · 8 Jul 2008 at 22:51

p4radox said:
That's awesome. I genuinely hope AMD can counter this architecture sometime soon or the CPU market may well get very boring very quickly...

Or Intel become competitive below the £50 mark, which is where most OEM processors (80% of the market) actually come from.

Having said that their brand identity helps them even though the C2D range on the whole is more expensive than the X2s.

kitfit1 · 8 Jul 2008 at 22:57

sr4470 said:
Or Intel become competitive below the £50 mark, which is where most OEM processors (80% of the market) actually come from. Having said that their brand identity helps them even though the C2D range on the whole is more expensive than the X2s.

Good point, and who's to say that they arn't already competitive below the £50 mark in the OEM market. Only the CEO's and finance directors of the OEM's and Intel know that

Indy500 · 8 Jul 2008 at 23:12

kitfit1 said:
Good point, and who's to say that they arn't already competitive below the £50 mark in the OEM market. Only the CEO's and finance directors of the OEM's and Intel know that

True, I'm not privy to what the OEMs pay per unit...

G_Wizz · 8 Jul 2008 at 23:20

sr4470 said:
True, I'm not privy to what the OEMs pay per unit...

Dell will probably get more than 10% discount for quantity

kitfit1 · 8 Jul 2008 at 23:54

G_Wizz said:
Dell will probably get more than 10% discount for quantity

Company's the size of Dell, are a bit like Supermarkets. They tell the manufacturer what they are going to pay, they don't take any notice of what the manufacturer says they want for the product.

dntbloodshot · 9 Jul 2008 at 00:57

kitfit1 said:
Company's the size of Dell, are a bit like Supermarkets. They tell the manufacturer what they are going to pay, they don't take any notice of what the manufacturer says they want for the product.

All that Dell tells Intel is "Yes" "Please" and "Thank You".

porta · 9 Jul 2008 at 08:14

kitfit1 said:
Just hoping we don't have to wait forever before we get these in the uk. 614 fsb is some going as well, with or without LN. The highest i have ever got mine CPUZ Verified is 586 fsb. A 5ghz stable everyday clock may well be doable for me with an E8600 on board

i hope we get it soon as well, had a 600fsb on rampage with e8200 hoping for more but the ram held it back only pc8500.