Intel E8400 easily hits 4.4GHz @ 1.6v!

[hermeticist]

What`s the life expectancy at 4.4GHZ - they seem to be suggesting 1.6V, though it shows as 1.56V.

They do however seem to have both cores reporting almost identical temperature.

Have Fudzilla done their homework, I thought it was 1.4ish max or a dead CPU?

Fudzilla - Intel E8400 easily hits 4.4GHz

[EarlGrey]

45nm CPUs are going to have a very short life expentency at 1.6V. Enough said.

[atmadden]

What`s the life expectancy at 4.4GHZ - they seem to be suggesting 1.6V, though it shows as 1.56V.

They do however seem to have both cores reporting almost identical temperature.

Have Fudzilla done their homework, I thought it was 1.4ish max or a dead CPU?

Fudzilla - Intel E8400 easily hits 4.4GHz

Well I am running 4.37ghz at 1.45v for normal use. I need 1.6v for 4.5ghz although mine is watercooled but wouldn't want to run that high a voltage for normal use just to be safe.

[Fraz]

1.45V is the absolute max recommended by Intel. 1.6V is definitely not going to be very good for them...

[switchmode]

Well that sounds like a "How quick can I kill my CPU" attitude to me. I wonder how reliable these will be Overclocked to the Max ?

45 nano meter is a lot smaller than 200 nano meter which was the standard a few years ago, what I'm trying to say is as the die shrinks is it going to be more fragile ?
I would expect Intel to have built a reliable CPU range but when Overclocked I'm going to let someone else test it out before I jump in.

[staffsMike]

If anyone is considering this just ask yourself this,

When you're at the urinal, do you look straight ahead or left and right? ..

3.0GHz+ everything becomes much of a muchness. 3.5GHz is more than enough. If you can reasonably hit 4.0GHz then go for it but you don't need it..especially if it's just for gaming which seems to be the only justicification for these duals over the Q6600 at the moment.

[sjbuck]

If anyone is considering this just ask yourself this,

When you're at the urinal, do you look straight ahead or left and right? ..

3.0GHz+ everything becomes much of a muchness. 3.5GHz is more than enough. If you can reasonably hit 4.0GHz then go for it but you don't need it..especially if it's just for gaming which seems to be the only justicification for these duals over the Q6600 at the moment.

Agreed

The situation might change when nvidia releases it's superduper new cards, but until then I find that my so called multi-threaded games and my 8800GTX to be the bottleneck rather than my CPU.

[Mblaster]

'Easily' and '@ 1.6v' don't really go together too well ... That's about a 150% increase.

[hermeticist]

I don`t suppose many people would be happy putting 1.6V through 65NM.

I think there was a recent thread on here about max. Volts on E8*** series & early deaths (CPU!) @ Xtremesystems, can`t remember the recommended volts, but a lot lower than Conroe.

[Blitzen]

What`s the life expectancy at 4.4GHZ - they seem to be suggesting 1.6V, though it shows as 1.56V.

They do however seem to have both cores reporting almost identical temperature.

Have Fudzilla done their homework, I thought it was 1.4ish max or a dead CPU?

Fudzilla - Intel E8400 easily hits 4.4GHz

The E*** series, although good overclockers have a bad reports of very low life expectancies under volt increases whether being slight or heavy.

With 45nm architecture, this sets the alarm bells ringing straight away as they just cant cope with more than normal operating voltages for very long. Thats why i went for the Q6600......the 65nm will allow a decent, stable overclock with only a small % of hardware detrement.

The Woldales just arent built for it.

Its all very off putting.

[merdat]

Some say that for the '45's' 1.45v is too much, even though intel say that is max. Some may find that they run ok for a couple of months at 1.45v then one day the machine won't post. Very fragile things these 45's . Think it's going to have to be 'big pockets and fat wallets' for massive overclocks from now on in

[Agent]

If anyone is considering this just ask yourself this,

When you're at the urinal, do you look straight ahead or left and right? ..

3.0GHz+ everything becomes much of a muchness. 3.5GHz is more than enough. If you can reasonably hit 4.0GHz then go for it but you don't need it..especially if it's just for gaming which seems to be the only justicification for these duals over the Q6600 at the moment.

Yeah, but not all of us just game. Thats a somewhat silly statement
A 3.0GHz to 4.0GHz clock speed increase in encoding / rendering / other CPU bound work will make a big difference.

Have Fudzilla done their homework

I pretty much ignore everything from FUDZilla - There has been a huge number of mistakes in the past and the site is always under fire from people in the know.
The guy who owned it wrote up an article (on the reg. or inq. - I forget) on how Vista had a new feature and he would investigate it further. This new feature turned out to be STR, which was at least 5 years old at the time of printing.

They just make big headlines like that to grab peoples attention. The actual content is poor (all IMO of course).

[staffsMike]

Yeah, but not all of us just game. Thats a somewhat silly statement
A 3.0GHz to 4.0GHz clock speed increase in encoding / rendering / other CPU bound work will make a big difference.

Sure but what I said is that most people are justifying the dual over the quad simply for gaming. I agree with you about rendering, encoding etc.. but if you are going to do that then you buy the quad. If you can afford one you should be able to afford the other.

[atmadden]

Sure but what I said is that most people are justifying the dual over the quad simply for gaming. I agree with you about rendering, encoding etc.. but if you are going to do that then you buy the quad. If you can afford one you should be able to afford the other.

There is another major drawback to the Q6600 and that is its power consumption. That was the reason I ditched it in the end. A 460w power supply just wasn't enough.

[Clunk]

4382Mhz with a 380w Seasonic S12.

[Blitzen]

There is another major drawback to the Q6600 and that is its power consumption. That was the reason I ditched it in the end. A 460w power supply just wasn't enough.

If it was a decent 460W it would be enough.

Im running mine on a 500W and the rails are rock steady under load.