Haswell o'clock to 7.1Ghz...

[Noel 4,483]

 

http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/display/20130503174250_Intel_Core_i7_4770K_Haswell_Overclocked_to_7_01GHz_Report.html

 

Continues looking hopeful...

[psolk 3,037]

Some of the comments from the full article are what have me excited...

 

 

 

As you can see from this slightly more in-depth article, 2.65v must have been a mistake as you can hit 6.2GHz on just 1.2v. The memory overclock is just as impressive.

Plus for those that were wondering this was gone on a ASUS Maximus VI*Extreme Edition.

Reply

3. 

Also, 5GHz on just 1.008v which is simply stunning!!

http://cdn2.wccftech.com/...oads/2013/05/4770K-5G.png

[SAAB340 28]

Sorry, don't want to be a party pooper, but we got these reports running up to ivy-bridge as well...

 

http://en.ocworkbench.com/tech/intel-ivy-bridge-core-i7-3770k-is-capable-of-100-overclock-to-7ghz-using-dry-ice/

 

And we all know how that worked out in reality.

We should get real word reports on how well Haswell overclocks in a regular FSX computer within a few weeks. Until then I won't get my hopes up too much.

[drumsonly2002 3]

Be great if it would OC to 5.5 Ghz or 6.0. Perhaps one could reach 6.0 Ghz using a Phase Change cooling system. 6.0 Ghz and a Titan would be interesting for FSX. How well would FSX run at 6.0 Ghz and a Titan?

[foibles 0]

Sorry, don't want to be a party pooper, but we got these reports running up to ivy-bridge as well...

 

http://en.ocworkbench.com/tech/intel-ivy-bridge-core-i7-3770k-is-capable-of-100-overclock-to-7ghz-using-dry-ice/

 

And we all know how that worked out in reality.

We should get real word reports on how well Haswell overclocks in a regular FSX computer within a few weeks. Until then I won't get my hopes up too much.

 

Thanks for that reality check.   :lol:

[WotanUK 289]

Sorry, don't want to be a party pooper, but we got these reports running up to ivy-bridge as well...

 

http://en.ocworkbench.com/tech/intel-ivy-bridge-core-i7-3770k-is-capable-of-100-overclock-to-7ghz-using-dry-ice/

 

And we all know how that worked out in reality.

We should get real word reports on how well Haswell overclocks in a regular FSX computer within a few weeks. Until then I won't get my hopes up too much.

 

That was using dry ice.

 

There have been reports (amongst others) from Toms Hardware of stable 5Ghz on Air using the Noctura DH14

[foibles 0]

Sorry, don't want to be a party pooper, but we got these reports running up to ivy-bridge as well...

 

http://en.ocworkbench.com/tech/intel-ivy-bridge-core-i7-3770k-is-capable-of-100-overclock-to-7ghz-using-dry-ice/

 

And we all know how that worked out in reality.

We should get real word reports on how well Haswell overclocks in a regular FSX computer within a few weeks. Until then I won't get my hopes up too much.

 

I'd go a step further -- regilar FSX computer with a regular retail sample Haswell, not an engineering sample.

 

 

That was using dry ice.

 

There have been reports (amongst others) from Toms Hardware of stable 5Ghz on Air using the Noctura DH14

 

Who says these reports of high Haswell OC's aren't on liquid nitrogen?

[WotanUK 289]

Who says these reports of high Haswell OC's aren't on liquid nitrogen?

 

I am sure that the overclock of 6GHz+ are on dry ice or liquid cooling of some description. 

 

I was far more exicited by the on air performance

[Noel 4,483]

 

Some of the comments from the full article are what have me excited...

 

 

 

As you can see from this slightly more in-depth article, 2.65v must have been a mistake as you can hit 6.2GHz on just 1.2v. The memory overclock is just as impressive.

 

Plus for those that were wondering this was gone on a ASUS Maximus VI*Extreme Edition.

 

Reply

3. 

Also, 5GHz on just 1.008v which is simply stunning!!

 

http://cdn2.wccftech.com/...oads/2013/05/4770K-5G.png

 

Indeed this is looking promising!

[gizmosellsbunnys 106]

May gain 7% gain in performance feels like diminishing returns to me. At 15% and 20% gain it all depends on the price. I5 k is about the set point terms of performance that i7 not worth it. Days of big performance gains are over.

[Noel 4,483]

Days of big performance gains are over.

 

I tend to agree w/ that statement with the caveat that you're talking mainly about clock speed, which is why I'm intrigued by a new simulator (or improved XPlane 64) that can utilized more parallelism than FSX does.  I'd rather have a 16 core, duel CPU box that doesn't overclock and run software designed to exploit it maximally, than have a 4 core machine that has to have exotic cooling and overvolting to run well using FSX.

[SirStiggie 63]

Days of big performance gains are over.

 

I'm sure this is accurate in the context of FSX but is totally inaccurate with where hardware and software development is going.

 

 

 

 I'd rather have a 16 core, duel CPU box that doesn't overclock and run software designed to exploit it maximally, than have a 4 core machine that has to have exotic cooling and overvolting to run well using FSX.

 

Agreed. If FSX was written in the last 2 or even 3 years to take advantage of current processor technology as well as multi-core/multi-processor technology, we probably would not need to worry too much about overclocking. That being said, there are still those of us who want to max every setting and will probably overclock because they can.

 

A 12- or 16-core dual CPU setup would, indeed, be quite interesting. I suspect the GPU would, again, become the bottleneck.

 

I wonder of X-Plane could take advantage of a multi-processor environment?

[William J.S.S 173]

If you gauge performance gains in relation to a HIGH clock number, then ya, the days are probably over. But as the tech advances, HIGH oc numbers are not as needed, as they are making the chips more and more efficient with each round.

 

Dont look for huge numbers in the future, you will only be let down.

[Noel 4,483]

 

 

I wonder of X-Plane could take advantage of a multi-processor environment?

 

From their site:

 

X-Plane will take advantage of as many cores or distinct processors as you can afford. Having 16 cores split among 4 CPUs is not required by any means, but Version 10 would be able to use every one. No more than 4 GB of RAM is necessary, but the more VRAM you have, the better–X-Plane 10 can easily use 1.5 GB of VRAM at the maximum settings.

 

The Xeon E5-2687W processor runs at 3.8Ghz and I would love to see if it can run FSX adequately.  I'd consider building a dual proc system (16 cores total), I'd pick up maybe 64Gb of DDR3 1600 ram.  And in terms of bottlenecks, I'm going for the GTX Titan w/ 384-bit memory interface w/ 6GB of GDDR-5 VRAM.  This system would cost a hefty $6500 but as I say if it could run FSX reasonably well, I'd be building on the come for XPlane or another multithreaded simulator to come.  The only thing that's keeping me (and many other users) from jumping on board w/ XPlane 64 is the lack of basic airports and poor 3rd party support.  Once that changes, I'm jumping in wholesale.  Methinks the above system will run XPlane quite well ;o)

[foibles 0]

 

 

The only thing that's keeping me (and many other users) from jumping on board w/ XPlane 64 is the lack of basic airports and poor 3rd party support.

 

I've been saying that for 5 years. Any day now ...   :rolleyes:

 

I pretty much (98%) moved to Apple laptop 4 or 5 years ago. I thought, wow, there's finally a decent non-PC alternative to FSX (ie X-Plane, which you can run on an Apple). That fantasy lasted just a few days. The main reason I still put up with the endless headaches of the Windows world is FSX. As soon as somebody comes up with a viable (and afforable) alternative, I will be completely gone and won't look back.