Slashdot Mirror
Intel Core 2 Duo E6750 Sample Preview
MojoKid writes "Intel took the wraps off a new Core 2 Duo desktop chip today, dubbed the E6750. Though this chip shares the same basic clock speed as the Core 2 Duo E6700 at 2.66GHz, this new processor also runs on a faster 1,333MHz Front Side Bus. The new chip's additional bus bandwidth affords it up to a 5% performance advantage over standard 1066MHz FSB-based Core 2 chips. However, what's perhaps more promising is this new chip's
overclocking head-room of up to 3.92GH and beyond on standard air cooling."
The link to the article all on one page is http://www.hothardware.com/printarticle.aspx?artic leid=989
Why not just sell them rated at a higher clock speed? It would be funny to think they made a fast chip and purposefully rated it at a lower speed to grab some of the extra hobbiest market while simultaneously cutting down on support calls from overclockers who cause system instability by making the overclockers think they are overclocking. :)
Mmm, yummy... Much better than just playing with the multiplier.
....a coincidence: the overclocking article is from ->hothardware. yeah. i truly believe, that an ordinary aircooling and a C2D at 3.92GHz have really earned an article on a domain called like that.
overclockability. I believe those chips sent out for review are cherry picked by intel. Most of the reviews for the Core 2 Duo chips last year said the lower end chips could easily be overclocked to 3.5ghz+. That ended up not being the norm. I think something around 3ghz is pretty standard.
I thought we had finally put the "megahertz myth" behind us. But no, here we are again cheering on Intel for producing chips with their many megahertzes and gigahertzes.
We should lean on them to use a more sensible naming convention. AMD has led the way in this area. Consumers are much better served with descriptive product names such as, for example, "Turion 64 X2 TL56", rather than some arbitrary clock speed designations.
This is like sex, except im having it!
the reason some people measure the MTBF of their systems in weeks instead of years.
"To those who are overly cautious, everything is impossible. "
...the ",". It's pronounced "comma", and comes in very handy sometimes.
Thanks.
Great, so it's bloody fast. But can it complete 10+ hours of Prime95 and 32M digits of SuperPI without any errors? Simply booting and running a few benchmarks is hardly a means of stability testing.
Now what I would like to see advertised - but won't - is slower but highly reliable motherboards, processors and memory at commercial prices. How about a Core Duo Reliability Edition? I would reallyt like to be able to build a server and a few desktops from commodity hardware and almost be able to forget about them for 5 years. I can get HDDs that will do that, but where can I get the commodity silicon where the manufacturer will make a statement about long term reliability?
Pining for the fjords
Do people still overclock? It is such a focus on this in online hardware reviews, but none of the people I know still do it, even the gamers. Power consumption, heat and noise is much more important to them. Low sample number to draw any significant conclusions from, I know, but still... Perhaps the market has moved on a bit?
Also, whenever they do speed comparisons, I wish they would add in models from one and two years ago. I really don't care if a chip is 0,05% faster than its similarly priced competition, I want to know if it is a good time to upgrade my old computer.
Being bitter is drinking poison and hoping someone else will die
Over three billion Henries? That's a damn big coil. Yes, I have nothing better to do than nitpick. Why do you ask?
Some models of Xeons run at 1066 and 1333. Just off the specs on the article I'd say they released those Xeon CPUs as desktop model on the LGA775 socket. The larger cache, higher bus speed, thermal design and Smart Cache match up to the Xeon E51xx and E53xx.
Now your karma is in the toilet!
GP is a pretty tired joke by now...
Off topic, I know, but the geek in me loves to notice and dissect these things.
:) And don't get me started on video cards. *shudder*
With respect to BMW car naming conventions, the model number makes quite a bit of sense if you know how to break it down. The first number tells you which "series" the car belongs to (3 series, 5 series, etc). The second two numbers refer to engine displacement (25 is 2.5 liters). The trailing characters that are sometimes used refer to various options (i=inline engine, x=all wheel drive, etc). So if you were to ask me to decide between a 318 and a 320, I'd probably pick the 320 for the bigger engine. Then I'd smack myself for picking a car that hasn't been in production since 1982.
God only knows why the chip manufacturers use the names they pick, though
find / -name "*.sig" | xargs rm
I've had no real problems with either AMD or Intel, but none of our recent boxes have been around long enough to be sure. What I would like to know is the likely life upfront, that's the problem.
By the way, though I agree with you in general, as many fans as possible is not always a good idea. It makes a lot of difference where they are placed, and the thing you do not want to do is to create internal vortices. As a matter of principle I pay attention to getting heat away from the CPU and graphics, but it is important to get a good flow over the HDDs and sometimes you find that large coolers actually have a bad effect on the board chipset by blocking flow. My preferred technique is not to use cheap fans but to buy good ones, especially now Muffin fans are available again and there are some really good 5W 120mm ones from Papst. These just produce a huge flow (over a cubic metre per minute) without being too noisy, and with so much air available it is easy to ensure it is going everywhere. The main thing to ensure is that they support the power supply rather than oppose it.
In fact, the last two causes of system failure we had have been a PSU fail (3V going out of regulation) and a SATA chip throw intermittent errors - which wrecked a mirrored setup. Talk about common mode failure. Overclocking is all very well, but not if you actually need to do any real work.
Pining for the fjords
Of course people overclock. instead of buying the 2.6GHz Core 2 Duo, you just buy the 1.8GHz version and pay half the money ($160 insted of $320).
Now just overclock it back up to 2.6GHz.
You may want to do a little 2 corner testing (Voltage and Temp), just to make sure you are within stable regime.
As long as you dont overvoltage the chip, there is really no reason not to max out the clock rate. As soon as the CPU idles, it underclocks automatically anyway, so you get the boost only when you need it.
If you do any home video decoding, the difference is huge.
To make the point clear: You can burn out a power transistor if you run it too hard, but this is not possible on a CPU. It will hang long before it even gets close to be damaged. If the chip overheats and/or is driven at a too high clock, it just hangs. Reset and cool, and it is good as new.
don't cut it off www.mgmbill.org
I guess it features a 1.333GHz front side bus, not 1.333MHz.
But can it complete 10+ hours of Prime95 and 32M digits of SuperPI without any errors?
That's a good question, in principle.
The error rate of the CPU increases when you overclock it, undoubtedly, but you have to remember that a device running at its rated speed has a non-zero error rate too.
A more precise question would be to what extent the error rate has worsened by overclocking the device, and that is related to the decrease in signal to noise margins, which is quantifiable. The CPU manufacturers must have these figures internally, but we're extremely unlikely to see them, unfortunately.
Running a CINEbench that lasts 18 seconds is not a decent test of stability. Even hobbyist overclockers ultimately aim to end up with a system that they can use day in, day out for several hours at a time.
I've got a C2D E6700 cooled with a modified freezer system (Vapochill) which cools it down to -40 or so. Despite the fact I could boot it into Windows at 4.5Ghz, it was not stable at these speeds. I have to "make do" with 4.3Ghz for daily running.
Whilst I can just about believe that 3.9Ghz would be achievable with very high-end air cooling, I don't think it's feasible with the standard Intel cooler. Intel may have made subtle changes to the silicon but at the end of the day it's still the same package with the same core technology.
Man, with them putting these suckers in Nicholas Negroponte's One Laptop Per Child they are going to really rock!
i think that intel is just trying to get their core 2 chips into as many hands as they can so that amd has the same kind of barrier in front of them that they did several years ago... except that this time, intel has a good product
Just get in contact with Sandia National Lab to get a hold one of their Radiation-hardened line of processors and MBs and you are all set.
o ry.htm/
http://www.sandia.gov/LabNews/LN12-18-98/intel_st
Since it's hard to replace/repair stuff once a probe is launched, the hardwares on those have to be extremely stable. Of course, it's going to be expensive and from prior generations of technology.