7.2 GHz (overclocked P4)

[Zedric]

You registered to say that?........hehe... welcome to the forums.

He's been here since April by the looks of it. But never posted... :ermm:

 

[NetRyder]

Probably performs exactly the same as an AMD FX cpu.

Oh come on now. I know that clock speed doesn't mean everything, but that's just taking it too far. If you really had a 7.2GHz Intel (and it actually ran without shutting down), you can be sure it would steamroll the fastest AMD processor available today.

 

[zeke_mo]

Oh come on now. I know that clock speed doesn't mean everything, but that's just taking it too far. If you really had a 7.2GHz Intel (and it actually ran without shutting down), you can be sure it would steamroll the fastest AMD processor available today.

Way to miss the joke :crosseyed:

 

[falconguard]

If you take a look at the site, he can't get it to load windows beyond 6.6 but he had it stable enough to run sisandra and some other benchmarks. Truly fascinating.

 

[LeeJend]

You know me, trouble maker.

What do you get when you multiply 388x19?
or even
What do you get when you multiply 386x19?

Neither matches the 7228 it shows on the screen.

On the other hand I could not find any evidence of pixel manipulation in Photoshop.

Is it real or is it memorex?

 

[Aprox]

Oh come on now. I know that clock speed doesn't mean everything, but that's just taking it too far. If you really had a 7.2GHz Intel (and it actually ran without shutting down), you can be sure it would steamroll the fastest AMD processor available today.

Well, its party being sarcastic... and its could be true. Due to the nature of Intel Tree Prediction methods the fast the cpu goes the more likely it is to make a mistake... thus costing more cpu cycles to perform the same action a second time.. perhaps 3 or 4... etc etc. So it is possible for the "claimed" 7.2ghz cpu to perform less than the stock speed.

Or I could be talking out of my ass... who knows these days

 

[Tittles]

I wonder what the temp on that baby was/is?

 

[Treewolf]

You know me, trouble maker.

What do you get when you multiply 388x19?
or even
What do you get when you multiply 386x19?

Neither matches the 7228 it shows on the screen.

On the other hand I could not find any evidence of pixel manipulation in Photoshop.

Is it real or is it memorex?

they have multiplied 380 x 19 which is 7220

 

[zeke_mo]

they have multiplied 380 x 19 which is 7220

yeah, you misread that 0 for an 8 . The story is still hard to believe tho. Seems kinda fake

 

[Maveric169]

Well overclocks of this magnitude are not unheard of, but they are pointless. It is like building an car engine that can produce 5000 ft/lbs of torque and 8000 HP, that is great, only problem is you can't drive it because there is no tires in the world that can provide traction to use that power. Again Pointless.