Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

Overclocking Benchmark, Continued

Overclocking Intel's Wolfdale E8000
By

Ask a Category Expert

Create a new thread in the UK Article comments forum about this subject

Example: Notebook, Android, SSD hard drive

Display all 5 comments.
This thread is closed for comments
  • 0 Hide
    mactronix , 23 February 2008 04:57
    I will admit to not really being a regular overclocker but isnt the whole point about getting the best out of your hardware and in essance getting something for nothing.
    from that view point i would have thought it would have made sence to at least include the 8200 for comparison, If not have done the whole article on it instead of the 8500. Or am i missing the point?
  • 0 Hide
    wild9 , 24 February 2008 08:02
    Quote:
    Unlike AMD, which must produce its 90-nm processors closer to their technical and thermal limits to stay competitive, Intel plays on its manufacturing prowess, which is at least 12 months ahead of that of AMD.


    Intel has no dedicated inter-connect, no onboard MMU. All inter-core communication for both dual and quad-core CPU's has to go via the FSB. Intel is late catching up because it got complacent.

    Also, AMD CPU's at the bottom end still overclock well and are very cheap. I don't think everything is in Intel's favour ;) 
  • 0 Hide
    wild9 , 24 February 2008 08:21
    Quote:
    However, AMD’s overclocking margins haven’t been as large compared to what Intel’s modern processors offer.


    Socket 939 90nm Athlon64 3200+ (2.0GHz) can hit 2.7GHz or more on air. Same for Socket AM2 65nm Athlon64x2 4000+ (2.1GHz).

    ..not bad considering it's a generation before C2D.
  • 0 Hide
    wild9 , 25 February 2008 04:54
    Is it me or doesn't there appear ot be much of a difference between the 266 and newer 333MHz FSB speed?
  • 0 Hide
    darthpoik , 26 February 2008 17:28
    wild9 Intel has no dedicated inter-connect, no onboard MMU. All inter-core communication for both dual and quad-core CPU's has to go via the FSB. Intel is late catching up because it got complacent.Also, AMD CPU's at the bottom end still overclock well and are very cheap. I don't think everything is in Intel's favour


    Am I wrong in thinking the intel dual core does have inter core communication on chip. It is the quad core that communicates via the fsb for but only between the two core 2 duo dies.