2700K released - What do you expect with OC / binning of this chip?

[mrjoltcola]

2700K released today. I snagged one for science sake. Hopefully UPS will have it to me by Friday. Can't wait to play with it and see how it performs compared to the best 2600K I have which is doing 5.0Ghz @ 1.440v. I half expect it wont, but I told myself that I'd be first in line for once.

Over the years people have claimed that the best clockers were from the early batches? What merit is there to this argument? Does the 2700K count as a "batch"?

Whether you buy that theory or not, what do we know, or what do you think Intel did for the 2700K? Did they do new runs, or have they surplus, top binned silicon waiting for a 2700K stamp, or will these just be same bin as the 2600K?

 

[blackened23]

2700K released today. I snagged one for science sake. Hopefully UPS will have it to me by Friday. Can't wait to play with it and see how it performs compared to the best 2600K I have which is doing do 5.0Ghz @ 1.435v. I half expect it wont, but I told myself that I'd be first in line for once.

Over the years people have claimed that the best clockers were from the early batches? What merit is there to this argument? Does the 2700K count as a "batch"?

Whether you buy that theory or not, what do we know, or what do you think Intel did for the 2700K? Did they do new runs, or have they surplus, top binned silicon waiting to ship, or will these just be same bin as the 2600K?

Where'd you find it? Didn't see it on amazon. I'll join you in the overclocking experiment

 

[blackened23]

Nevermind, just found it Will report back in a few days

 

[Rvenger]

Im interested to know too.

 

[dac7nco]

It's probably to beat the FX-8150 on the very few benchmarks it won against a stock 2600K (Handbrake...etc.). The steppings are the same, it's almost certainly a 2600K with a 1-step multiplier bump.

Daimon

 

[mrjoltcola]

The good old egg had it. They claimed it was in stock when I submitted.

 

[blackened23]

It's probably to beat the FX-8150 on the very few benchmarks it won against a stock 2600K (Handbrake...etc.). The steppings are the same, it's almost certainly a 2600K with a 1-step multiplier bump.

Daimon

If i'm understanding you right, no, Intel doesn't simply relabel chips.

All of the perspective chips from a wafer are connected to a testing machine and put on the same transporting trays. This process is called "binning," which determines the maximum operating frequency of a processor, and batches are divided and sold according to stable specifications. They are connected to a "testing" machine that performs hundreds of tests and based on that result, determines which "bin" it makes. Therefore a 2600k will not be a 2700k. By default, a 2700k requires different paramaters while being tested to be binned as a 2700k. A 2700k on average will have better voltage tolerances than a 2600k.


Let's run through a binning example of Mobile Bartons

Let's assume you have three wafers:

1. All three processors can run @ 1.8 Ghz with only 1.45 Volts

2. Processor #1 can do 2.0 Ghz @ 1.5 volts, Processor #2 can run 2.0 Ghz @ 1.65 volts, and Processor #3 can run 2.0 Ghz @ stock volts.

Using such criteria (simply an example), AMD would label these chips accordingly:

Processor #1 would be packaged as a Mobile Barton 2500+. It clears 2.0 Ghz easily, but not with the lowest vcore possible.

Processor #2 would become a Mobile Barton 2400+ (45W or 35W). It too can hit 2.0 Ghz, but it requires a fairly moderate jump in the voltage.

Processor #3 would be labeled a Mobile Barton 2600+. Because it can hit the target clock using stock voltage, it is the highest binned processor out of the three.



Anyway, with all that out of the way - i'll be testing one of these bad boys. Many ES samples have achieved 5ghz+ at 1.35 vcore, which is damn near impossible for 2500/2600k...my own SB will not achieve 5ghz without 1.5vcore.

 

[mrjoltcola]

Nevermind, just found it Will report back in a few days

Thanks! I'll report as well. We'll see how these early orders pan out as time goes.

 

[Joseph F]

If i'm understanding you right, no, Intel doesn't simply relabel chips...

Are you completely forgetting the fact that EVERY 2600k will go to at least 4.2GHz?
Literally every 2600k would pass the binning process at 2700k specs. If there's one damn bit of difference between the two other than the multiplier, I'll eat my sandals.

 

[Arkaign]

Are you completely forgetting the fact that EVERY 2600k will go to at least 4.2GHz?
Literally every 2600k would pass the binning process at 2700k specs. If there's one damn bit of difference between the two other than the multiplier, I'll eat my sandals.

Sometimes it's just a newer stepping or improved yields, lowered leakage with existing steppings as time goes by.

Who knows

 

[MisterMac]

Reviews popping up saying it now matches the 8150 in multithreaded tests or beats it (Handbrake etc) - so it looks like pretty much just a "Yes, our mainstream flagship chip is just as good as AMD's flagship Extreme/Enthusiast Chip!".



One could hope this being the super high quality chips from the general production of sandy bridge - and it will be the sweetspot for us budget enthusiasts



On the other hand, if they clock easy to 5 ghz and above with low voltages, that puts alotta lot pressure on SB-E Wafer chips doesn't it?

They're 6 cores, but if they only do low 4's of ghz, people will be disappointed no?

 

[Keysplayr]

Are you completely forgetting the fact that EVERY 2600k will go to at least 4.2GHz?
Literally every 2600k would pass the binning process at 2700k specs. If there's one damn bit of difference between the two other than the multiplier, I'll eat my sandals.

Is the voltage different? Joe, would you like ketchup?
Seriously I dunno if it's different, just guessing.

 

[Puppies04]

Unless intel have been holding on to these "creme de la creme" chips since SB launched "which i doubt" then there are plenty of 2600ks out there that could have been 2700ks. Does that make sense?

 

[mrjoltcola]

Unless intel have been holding on to these "creme de la creme" chips since SB launched "which i doubt" then there are plenty of 2600ks out there that could have been 2700ks. Does that make sense?

That is what I think too, but I also wouldn't expect there to be a complete binning overlap between the two.

In my testing of 2600Ks there is a wide range of chip personality, so I see no reason why the bottom 10-20% of the common bin range could not be limited to 2600K, and the top 10-20% could not be limited to 2700K, even if the bulk falls in the middle, unless someone tells me that Intel only has 3 bins. We might be dealing with at least as many bins as there are retail product levels (2300, 2400, 2500, 2500K, 2600, 2600K, 2700K), possibly more.

 

[gdmk]

http://www.chiphell.com/thread-297060-1-1.html
5.5G on air.

6.3G on H2O,playing Assassin's Creed:Brotherhood for 2 hours without any problem.

 

[MrTransistorm]

http://img98.imageshack.us/img98/7185/35591320.jpg

Now wait a minute. x63 multiplier?

 

[mrjoltcola]

I'm sorry if I'm suspicious of those numbers, but I just am.

 

[ghost recon88]

http://www.chiphell.com/thread-297060-1-1.html
5.5G on air.

6.3G on H2O,playing Assassin's Creed:Brotherhood for 2 hours without any problem.

BS.

No way is that chipping running at 6.3GHz, much less on H20, and on top of that playing Assassin's Creed for hours Someone show me a 6.3GHz validation with one of these chips, if he's playing games on it he can surely provide a CPU-Z validation file. Me thinks a site just wants increased traffic and so they are BSing some numbers.

 

[Zap]

2700K released today. I snagged one for science sake.

 

[pantsaregood]

That's fake. No amount of binning is going to push SB to 6.3 GHz on H2O, or 5.5 GHz on air. Never mind the fact that, though Ivy Bridge is intended to have a maximum multiplier of 63x, I seriously doubt they would've taken the time to modify existing SBs to do so.

2500Ks and 2600Ks generally hit 4.5-4.7 GHz on air at <1.4v. I'd expect 2700K to possibly hit 4.6-4.9GHz if it really is binned higher.

A 5.5 GHz overclock just seems ridiculous. Expecting Ivy Bridge to hit that is unrealistic, much less the same stepping of SB that we've had for a year.

 

[mrjoltcola]

@Zap - *laughing* if you only knew

 

[mrjoltcola]

BS.

No way is that chipping running at 6.3GHz, much less on H20, and on top of that playing Assassin's Creed for hours Someone show me a 6.3GHz validation with one of these chips, if he's playing games on it he can surely provide a CPU-Z validation file. Me thinks a site just wants increased traffic and so they are BSing some numbers.

I agree.

I find 5.5 @ 1.30v harder to believe than 6.3 on H2O

Sort of reminds me of Kim Jong II's 11 hole-in-ones during a 34 under par round? I guess if you are gonna fake, fake it big, eh?

 

[Phynaz]

Faked. HP computer - no overclocking.

 

[mrjoltcola]

Preliminary results for my 2700K:

Stable 4.6 Ghz @ 1.280v
Stable 4.8 Ghz @ 1.344v
Stable 5.0 Ghz @ 1.456v - Prime95 one full pass @ 73C, Crysis 2 - 15 minutes @ 48C - Uncrashable for 60 minutes
Gaming stable 5.2 Ghz @ 1.512v - Crysis 2 for 20 minutes @ 53C, Prime95 gets too hot, shut it down at 75C (yeh I'm a pansy, but I just spent $360 too).

I have not tried to push it higher. It is time to move the rig out of the 600T case and into the 650D so I can properly setup the H100; I'm also planning a better cooling system. I want to try to keep the chip in 55C range under load at 5.2-5.3 and see how it runs Prime95. I don't like to run Prime95 with temps passing Tcase (72.6) for more than a couple of minutes, and as usual, a chip that is "game stable" will often crash with 5-10 minutes of Prime95. Still 5.2Ghz is good for gaming!

Summary: The 2700K didn't disappoint nor did it surprise me. It passes for a cherry 2600K, but doesn't beat my best 2600K which only requires 1.440v for 5.0 or 1.460v for 5.1. What remains to be seen is what the average performance of 2700K is. If the 2700K binning proves to provide an automatic 5.0Ghz at around 1.45v, I think it is worth the price for folks wanting top performance for 1/3 the price of top SB-E, considering how many 2600Ks I've heard some people try before getting a top overclocker.

I consider any Sandy Bridge i7 that goes 5.1 Ghz at under 1.5v to be a good chip.

 

[MisterMac]

Preliminary results for my 2700K:

Stable 4.6 Ghz @ 1.280v
Stable 4.8 Ghz @ 1.344v
Stable 5.0 Ghz @ 1.456v - Prime95 one full pass @ 73C, Crysis 2 - 15 minutes @ 48C - Uncrashable for 60 minutes
Gaming stable 5.2 Ghz @ 1.512v - Crysis 2 for 20 minutes @ 53C, Prime95 gets too hot, shut it down at 75C (yeh I'm a pansy, but I just spent $360 too).

I have not tried to push it higher. It is time to move the rig out of the 600T case and into the 650D so I can properly setup the H100; I'm also planning a better cooling system. I want to try to keep the chip in 55C range under load at 5.2-5.3 and see how it runs Prime95. I don't like to run Prime95 with temps passing Tcase (72.6) for more than a couple of minutes, and as usual, a chip that is "game stable" will often crash with 5-10 minutes of Prime95. Still 5.2Ghz is good for gaming!

Summary: The 2700K didn't disappoint nor did it surprise me. It passes for a cherry 2600K, but doesn't beat my best 2600K which only requires 1.440v for 5.0 or 1.460v for 5.1. What remains to be seen is what the average performance of 2700K is. If the 2700K binning proves to provide an automatic 5.0Ghz at around 1.45v, I think it is worth the price for folks wanting top performance for 1/3 the price of top SB-E, considering how many 2600Ks I've heard some people try before getting a top overclocker.

I consider any Sandy Bridge i7 that goes 5.1 Ghz at under 1.5v to be a good chip.

Roughly what looks like slightly better yielded chips than 2600k, but obviously not by much.

If i'm reading you correct?


Will need more reports obviously, but on average it looks like slightly cherry picked yields from the "i7" process.

Sadly the cherry picking seems to not really give much on average :C