****Official Bulldozer Overclocking Thread****

I'm going to hang fire - I think they may be on sale soon as rev.2 is due in Q1 2012

If I could get an 8120 then for around £100 I'll finally upgrade from my q6600 GO
 
So, in 19 days since the start of this thread, not one single person from this forum has clocked a BD ?

Me thinks that says all that needs to be said really. Just about the biggest CPU launch Fail in history.
 
gareth170 said:
i did..

4.5ghz with 1.35v
Click to expand...

Not posted it in this thread though Gareth, with Linx or Prime stable screenies.
But lets assume that you will........................................come on 1 person ?
That's a joke, if this was an Intel release there would be pages and pages of results of clocks by now.
 
kitfit1 said:
Not posted it in this thread though Gareth, with Linx or Prime stable screenies.
But lets assume that you will........................................come on 1 person ?
That's a joke, if this was a decent chip release there would be pages and pages of results of clocks by now.
Click to expand...

Fixed for you :)

BTW, the Phenom II thread got quite a few replies :p
 
The Phenom II got a bunch of stuff, so did the X6's, it's only because 1.) BD's in tiny quantities, and 2.) it's crap.

If this was a horrendous Intel launch, I'd hope it would go the same way, with people bashing the crap out of it.
 
phenom II 1090t with stock cpu nb
3dmark11
... ....

cinebench115
..... ....

heaven x11
.... .....

dvdfab


phenom II 1090t with 2600mhz cpu nb

3dmark11
..... .....

metro2033
..... .......

8150 results
heaven x11


metro2033


dvdfab


cinebench115


3dmark11



@ 4ghz
cpu-nb @ 2600mhz





4.5ghz



 
That's commendable for an 8150 Gareth. But Jokester was asking for IBT/LinX runs or Prime stable runs. I don't see any of those ?
 
kitfit1 said:
That's commendable for an 8150 Gareth. But Jokester was asking for IBT/LinX runs or Prime stable runs. I don't see any of those ?
Click to expand...

Don't thinkk anyone will post IBT/Linx scrennies as the gflops are extremely low.
An 8150 running at 4.6Ghz struggles to get 40 gflops.

Folks are more inclined to post CB scores, as in this bench the BD chips do reasonably well.

Also because of the huge power consumption at high clocks, running long P95
tests would be very unwise.

A member over on XS has reported that the 8pin power connector on his board melted and welded the plug and socket together running a stability test
at 4.75Ghz,

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums...-FX-Support-for-Crosshair-IV-890-boards/page3
 
Last edited:
The power consumption was so high it melted the 8pin...? Wow, so I guess it's best to stay away from very high clocks on these?
 
strangely enough has anyone noticed that in Cinebench the FX-8150 at stock gets almost double the score of the FX-6100 at stock, which 'marginally' beats the FX-4100, that shouldn't be happening surely? its not the only benchmark that throws out completely (seriously completely) random numbers for Bulldozer based chips, why would a four module, eight-core chip be getting almost double the score of a three module, six-core chip? :confused:

FryRender gives much much more normal results with the FX-8150 doing almost twice as well as the FX-4100 and the FX-6100 somewhere in between the two, but Cinebench seems bizarre, Mediashow Espresso is another weird one where teh FX-8150 is almost twice as fast as the FX-6100, 3D mark '06 again seems bogus, where the eight-core massively outperforms the six-core which again marginally beats the four-core, yet in Vantage there is a much more normal eight-core, six-core, four-core sort of scale. that shouldn't happen should it? :eek:
 
I'll bring this one back from the dead, my FX6100 is clocking like a beast so far, up to 4.6 with pretty much no effort. It's under water so temps aren't going above 40 under full load and it's not nearly as power hungry as it's been reported :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom