SB - Ultimate clock 25Ghz

[SolMiester]

Right here!....

LOL, not sure if it will last a benchmark!...LMAO

 

[zebrax2]

Your BIOS or overclocking software might go up to 255x, but the CPU itself is limited to 57x and below.

http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/264499-29-multiplier-2600k

 

[psolord]

I bet it can run crysis (in software rendering mode) xD

 

[Idontcare]

Right here!....

LOL, not sure if it will last a benchmark!...LMAO

What are the world records for 2600K under LN2 and LHe? Do they max out the multiplier?

 

[tweakboy]

How did they do that. Soo we can go to 10Ghz and be happy ?

 

[gevorg]

What are the world records for 2600K under LN2 and LHe? Do they max out the multiplier?

Yep, +/- slight increase in BCLK:

http://hwbot.org/hardware/processor/core_i7_2600k/

 

[Idontcare]

Yep, +/- slight increase in BCLK:

http://hwbot.org/hardware/processor/core_i7_2600k/

Wow, lots of people hitting the cap with mere SS (single-stage phase, very light-weight sub-zero cooling)

Why did Intel pick such a low multi to cap SB at? Makes no sense

I mean, sure, for 99.8% of the market a max multi of 57 is not going to be a problem, but then again neither would a max multi of 47 or 67.

So if you are going to peg at an arbitrary max multi anyways why not go to one that is high enough that you know even the LHe extreme OC'ers aren't going to run into?

All I can say is this is typical Intel, I'm surprised and yet at the same time I know better than to be surprised.

 

[996GT2]

Wow, lots of people hitting the cap with mere SS (single-stage phase, very light-weight sub-zero cooling)

Why did Intel pick such a low multi to cap SB at? Makes no sense

I mean, sure, for 99.8% of the market a max multi of 57 is not going to be a problem, but then again neither would a max multi of 47 or 67.

So if you are going to peg at an arbitrary max multi anyways why not go to one that is high enough that you know even the LHe extreme OC'ers aren't going to run into?

All I can say is this is typical Intel, I'm surprised and yet at the same time I know better than to be surprised.

I think a 57X multiplier is way more than sufficient even for overclocking enthusiasts, since most 2600Ks will hit a wall at around 5 GHz anyway. Going beyond that requires crazy-high voltages.

I think Intel will eventually release an "Extreme Edition" Sandy Bridge CPU with a completely unlocked multiplier. Something like that should be able to do 7 GHz + since the max for a 980X is 6.9 GHz.

 

[GammaLaser]

I think Intel will eventually release an "Extreme Edition" Sandy Bridge CPU with a completely unlocked multiplier. Something like that should be able to do 7 GHz + since the max for a 980X is 6.9 GHz.

Hopefully that'll be the case with the first SB-E's that come out.

 

[tweakboy]

Sandy E , and then we retire it. I dont like Sandy, I had a gf named Sandy long time ago 10 years ago and she was a bit*h at the end...

how about

Jennifer Bridge or Ivory lol ?

Cant touch it even with a 10 foot poll. ty gg always

 

[skipsneeky2]

Wow, lots of people hitting the cap with mere SS (single-stage phase, very light-weight sub-zero cooling)

Why did Intel pick such a low multi to cap SB at? Makes no sense

I mean, sure, for 99.8% of the market a max multi of 57 is not going to be a problem, but then again neither would a max multi of 47 or 67.

So if you are going to peg at an arbitrary max multi anyways why not go to one that is high enough that you know even the LHe extreme OC'ers aren't going to run into?

All I can say is this is typical Intel, I'm surprised and yet at the same time I know better than to be surprised.

Maybe intel is saving the best for last with Ivy bridge

Stock Ivy blowing Sandy out of the water without even trying or we could all hope

 

[BonzaiDuck]

. . . . I think Intel will eventually release an "Extreme Edition" Sandy Bridge CPU with a completely unlocked multiplier. Something like that should be able to do 7 GHz + since the max for a 980X is 6.9 GHz.

It's hard to anticipate what they will do.

You imagine the possibility of another stepping. The one I have -- which must be current -- is the B3.

As for some additional socket-1155 processors, it might already be in the works, even as they announce planned release of socket-2011 and Ivy Bridge. But you wouldn't much know until they release anything additional for the 1155 socket.

You can't assume a pattern based on prior history -- you can only propose such a pattern as a possibility. For instance, the Wolfdale and Yorkfield cores were released in late '07 or early 08. New steppings for both, revisions like the "S" versions, and a spate of additional cores followed. They recycled a model-name from a Conroe dual-core and released the E6700 Wolfdale "Pentium" C2D in early 2010.

Socket 1155 seems new enough, that you'd hope there might follow any of the above.