Slashdot Mirror
Pentium 4 631 Overclocked to 8 GHz
Andreas writes "There are always those who are willing to take things one step further than others. A group of guys known as OC Team Italy is one of them. They recently pushed an Intel Pentium 4 631 to over 8000MHz using an ASUS P5B with modified voltage regulation and liquid nitrogen. Overclocking is cool and all, but this extends beyond what some would perhaps call useful. Still a milestone though."
All the trouble those Italians do to cook sausage without burning it.
To save thoughs who just want to see the setup pictures
Thats just in time!
Vista is released in a couple of days, we need at least one machine up to spec.
liqbase
It's also how fast your circuits can switch, and how fast the signal can travel on the wires. The execution core of a Pentium 4 also happens to be double-pumped (i.e., it performs operations on both edges of the clock signal). Essentially, those ALUs would be switching at 16GHz ... I, personally, take this with a grain of salt.
The Raven
Get with it guys, now it is about making silent fanless but powerful systems....
Not creating a CPU that sucks down 300W+, has one core and generally sucks.
Indeed. Light travels just under 2 centimetres in the 16 GHz period. The Pentium 4 core is not much smaller than this... it seems like they're pushing their luck on order-of-magnitude estimates alone.
setup2
Thermometer at -192 deg.C
photo of screen at 8000.7MHz
CPU-Z verified
The extreme cooling they are doing is not just for removing the heat generated by the chip. As temperature decreases, the mobility of charge carriers increases, allowing for a faster circuit. In fact, if they were to run a supercooled chip at the nominal clock frequency, they would have hold time violations and the chip would not work. In other words, the data would propagate so quickly that it would corrupt the previous piece of data.
Is 8000 MHz supposed to sound more impressive than 8 GHz?
I'm just confused as to why it was worded so oddly.
Funny the pack of cigarettes with the government mandatory sign: "Il fumo uccide" (smoking kills...) besides the smoking board...
>> Overclocking is cool and all, but [8Ghz] extends beyond what some would perhaps call useful.
:)
> Come back in a decade or two and trying saying that.
Oh, I'm sure noone would ever need more than 8gHz...
I think you have a misconception of how dual processor machines work. I do not think it means what you think it means.
If you don't vote, you don't matter, so don't waste your time telling me your opinion
f = 16 GHz = 16 × 10^9 1/s gives a period t = 1/f = 0.0625 × 10^(–9) s. Distance x = ct = 3.00 × 10^8 m/s × 0.0625 × 10^(–9) s = 0.019 m. But yes, a THz chip would be seriously up-fucked.
Obligatory Google Calculator link
Everyone knows bigger MHZ is still king. It's just scale. How much you can do with the given clock cycle. I think they meant that it is not practical to run a processor at 3x it's normal rating using Liquid N as a coolant. It's only useful for the duration of the Liquid N supply, and that is a small Finite amount of time. Secondly, they overclocked the CPU but not Ram(according to CPUV which showed the ram @ 533 mhz) So we have the old bottleneck situation again...
The real question here is "Does MC Lag during battle?"
How much is your data worth? Back it up now.
It's about performance, not MHz. Let's use SPECint as the metric. SPECint_rate scales almost perfectly with both clockspeed and core count. A P4 gets about 6.5 SPECint_rate/GHz/core, while a Core 2 gets about 11.5 SPECint_rate/GHz/core. So an 8 GHz P4 would get a score of 51.68, while a 3.4 GHz Core 2 would get 78.2.
The P4's single-core results would be substantially higher than the Core 2's single-core results, though. Interestingly, it points to what the P4 was originally designed to do: achieve high performance through high clockspeed. If process technology had met Intel's original projections, we'd have 6+ GHz P4s by now that would have been competitive with current Core 2 chips.
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
Tm
Support TBI Research: http://www.raisinhope.org
The speed of light in a vacuum (c) is the absolute maximum speed at which information can travel. It doesn't matter how much you cool the chip or what materials you make it out of, given our current understanding of physics* you can't push anything through it faster than 3*10**8 m/s. That gives you an absolute cannot-be-bettered upper limit for the distance that your signal can move in one cycle.
(* which might be wrong, but no-one's managed to prove it wrong yet)
*Light* has nothing to do with it, it's relativity and the *speed* of light in a vacuum that's important.
It's official. Most of you are morons.
Because a P4 at 8ghz benches close to an athlon at 2.
The "speed of light," by definition, is the speed at which all electric fields propagate (not just optical ones). Even though the wire is treated as an object with constant voltage on it, physically, the electric field which creates that voltage is outside of the wire. In fact, you'll find that as long as the conductance of the wire is sufficiently high, it has little effect on the speed of signal propagation. This is because at the frequencies being discussed, the wires behave more like transmission lines than the ideal, lumped-element model used in circuit analysis.
What's actually more important to the propagation speed is the permittivity and permeability of the dielectric (insulator) surrounding the wire. As it turns out, the speed of signal propagation is identically equal to the speed of light in the dielectric medium (not by coincidence, of course). I may be wrong about this, but I believe that modern processors still use undoped silicon as the interconnect dielectric medium, which means that the signal propagation speed is c/3.4.
The interconnect dielectric is usually silicon dioxide, with a relative dielectric constant of 3.9. This puts the propagation speed at about c/2.
Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
Actually there is a way to get around the whole 'speed of light' issue - don't use light.
... now that is 'hauling ass fast', also known as immeasurably fast. When you turn on a light by flipping a switch - the light takes a measurable amount of time to get to you, but when does the light actually turn on? The instant you flip that switch - ahhh, the magic of electricity running at immeasurable speeds over wire.
Yea, the 'photonic computer' guys didn't think that one all the way through, did they?
Use electricity instead, have it run on little traces cut in silicon like the old days, but then seal the silicon in a dark ceramic casing so no light gets in, and put the whole thing in a computer case WITHOUT the clear panels - have to keep out the light.
Light is fast, no doubt, but it is measurably fast (186,000 miles per second, as I recall) - but regular electricity running in the dark across wires (or traces on silicon)
Think about it - every scientist in the past century has measured the speed of light - but how many have been able to measure the speed of electricity in a wire?
None?
Bingo!
And what kind of tools do they use to measure the speed of light?
Electronic tools made with electricity running on wires?
Bingo!
Glonoinha the MebiByte Slayer
Check out these Australian cigarette packets.
... and then they built the supercollider.