Devils Canyon at 4.5GHz on passive cooling, how far can DC go?

My bad, They actually reached 4.70GHZ but with 1.36v, Sample straight from Intel.

Still though even if that's an average sample or even a poor sample that shouldn't happen when it's being touted as an "overclocking chip".

I wish they would of just skipped this stupid "Re-hash" and focused on proper upgrades instead of adding a few more capacitors and newer TIM to an existing CPU.

We need real progress not these incremental updates.
 
Last edited:
Meh the VRM management is still on the cpu's die, no amount of changeing the tim or adding spaceage polymer is going to change the fact that its going to make the cpu run hot and the oc'ing is going to suffer.
Thay need to stop that give that job back to the motherboard.
 
Dicehunter said:
My bad, They actually reached 4.70GHZ but with 1.36v, Sample straight from Intel.

Still though even if that's an average sample or even a poor sample that shouldn't happen when it's being touted as an "overclocking chip".

I wish they would of just skipped this stupid "Re-hash" and focused on proper upgrades instead of adding a few more capacitors and newer TIM to an existing CPU.

We need real progress not these incremental updates.
Click to expand...

Your forgetting that the temps of the PCPER DC sample was less at 4.7GHz @ 1.37v than the normal Haswell as 4.8ghz @ 1.25v, an impressive temperature decrease. With DC i would actually be comfortable running the chip at voltages above 1.3v.

As I said before DC should only be considered a decent upgrade by people with Sandy bridge or lower processors, well sandy is a bit of a streach perhaps.

For Haswell users, Devils Canyon is a side grade at best. It is definately worth buying over vanilla Haswell, but not worth switching out your haswell chip for.
 
I think people have the wrong idea about DC, they aren't a performance upgrade, they are just a Haswell refresh with better thermals.
I don't know why people are expecting them to be faster, that is not what these CPUs are aiming to do it is pretty obvious it isn't for upgrading to. :)

Well unless your main intention is for overclocking or if you are buying new.
 
having a read about this re-hash rubbish, i'm on haswell got a cpu that can hit 4.9 (unstable) but it get 4.8 easy but only run it at 4.4

so i'm going to stay with this cpu till Cannonlake or after..
 
MacLeod said:
Looks like it's a dud. Both HardOCP and PC Per have reviews out saying they can't get passed 4.7 GHz and are using high 1.35V. PC Per used a H80i but [H] used a high end Koolance system and still couldn't get passed 4.7. Guess I'll just drop a FX 8350 in and ride out the next hear and see what comes out.

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2014/06/10/intel_devils_canyon_good_bad_ugly#.U5Z7sZZyfFo

http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Processors/Intel-Core-i7-4790K-Devils-Canyon-Review-and-Overclocking
Click to expand...

Good morning, Yeah I just saw this, After Intel sees this they will most likely send the other reviewers cherry picked samples, Just you wait and see, OC3D is going to get a golden sample and then it's going to get the gold award ;)

Your going to like the 8350 though, Great chip, Very little between it and Intel in games, Benchmarks are another story but in my eyes games are more important than benchmarks :)
 
Last edited:
MacLeod said:
Looks like it's a dud. Both HardOCP and PC Per have reviews out saying they can't get passed 4.7 GHz and are using high 1.35V. PC Per used a H80i but [H] used a high end Koolance system and still couldn't get passed 4.7. Guess I'll just drop a FX 8350 in and ride out the next hear and see what comes out.

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2014/06/10/intel_devils_canyon_good_bad_ugly#.U5Z7sZZyfFo

http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Processors/Intel-Core-i7-4790K-Devils-Canyon-Review-and-Overclocking
Click to expand...
Well that certainly doesn't look good, given you'd imagine the reviewers would be the ones getting the cherry picked ones as is. I guess we'll have to wait and see what other reviewers throw up. I'd still buy it myself were I in line for an upgrade given the higher clock frequency but I don't really care about overclocking.

And say what you like about the FX-8350, but it does overclock quite well. I can coax 5.2GHz out of mine. ^_^
 
Zoot said:
And say what you like about the FX-8350, but it does overclock quite well. I can coax 5.2GHz out of mine. ^_^
Click to expand...

Implying that you can still buy 8350s that could do that :(. F*** the 9590. Taking all the decent 8350s out of the proper price point. I still need to really push my 8320 now its not my main machine.
 
barnsley said:
Implying that you can still buy 8350s that could do that :(. F*** the 9590. Taking all the decent 8350s out of the proper price point. I still need to really push my 8320 now its not my main machine.
Click to expand...

That is true. All the top binned FX chips are now being sold as 9000 series which my motherboard doesn't support and are still a little overpriced in my opinion. Oh well I figure I should at least get one that'll equal my 8150's 4.5 and at equal clocks that'll still be a 10-15% upgrade. And it'll cure my boredom by giving me something new to play with while I wait for something that makes me do a platform change.
 
I was actually considering getting an FX-9590 just for the laugh if nothing else. Although the problem is I'd need a new motherboard since the rev of the Gigabyte 990FX board I have is pretty old; it doesn't even support the 8350 out of the box - I had to use my trusty old 955 to flash it.

But really, if I was to go down the road of getting a new motherboard and CPU, I may as well get a Z97 board and the 4790k. I think I might just get an AM1 board and 5350 and break out the soldering iron to do some DIY fan control with an LDO regulator or something.
 
Yeah the 4790K is still a good chip as a refresh which is all its supposed to be. It overclocks slightly better and runs slightly cooler so as a "refresh" it's about right. It's all this talk from Intel of 5.0 overclocks as far as the eye can see bullshit that's causing all the stink. Other than that, it's really a very good CPU especially since it costs about the same as a 4770K.
 
LOL, people reminiscing about AMD chips, god I miss the 1090t days :P

Back on topic, maybe Intel marketed these CPUs a little wrong, they gave us (maybe just me) the impression there would be quite the difference in performance due to much better OC ability... right now it seems the only really good thing to come out of this is the Unlocked Dual core :D
 
iBeInspire said:
Back on topic, maybe Intel marketed these CPUs a little wrong, they gave us (maybe just me) the impression there would be quite the difference in performance due to much better OC ability... right now it seems the only really good thing to come out of this is the Unlocked Dual core :D
Click to expand...

My brother they did a lot more than give an impression. They flat out said there would be 5.0 overclocks with these and then there was this tweet saying if you can't get 5 gig ON AIR with one of these then you're doing it wrong.

So this was more than a misunderstanding, this was flat out lies which is kinda weird. Not like Intel to come out saying an upcoming product will do A, B and C only to have the product come out and be nowhere near that claim. It'll be interesting to hear Intel's response. Hopefully they just come out and say the marketing dept got a little carried away and own up to it.
 
I've preordered the unlocked pentium. Scan claims it OCs up to 4.5 ghz. Thats probably BS but I'll hold them to it :)
 
Permafrost said:
having a read about this re-hash rubbish, i'm on haswell got a cpu that can hit 4.9 (unstable) but it get 4.8 easy but only run it at 4.4

so i'm going to stay with this cpu till Cannonlake or after..
Click to expand...

You sir, suck! Your avatar and sig GIF made me curious and look up what the hell is a Grimmjow. I've now used most of my 2GB Verizon data can watching those videos on YouTube. That fight that your GIF is taken from is bad ass. I don't have enough time to take on another show. :p

Yeah I know. :offtopic: :ban:
 
Some top overclockers who have delidded the 4790K have confirmed Intel did not change the TIM at all, It is the same stuff, Intel completely lied.
 
The_Governour said:
Source? If they did not change the TIM then how come the better thermal performance? :huh:
Click to expand...

The heat spreader is thinner and the TIM is applied differently to the 4770K hence the temp difference but it is the same stuff, The source is from another overclocking site which is a little at odds with this one, Just do a search and you'll find it no problem.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

deigima
Mobo/cpu update and cooler advice
Replies
1
Views
5K
Excalabur50
Excalabur50
Master&Puppet
9900k Settings
Replies
1
Views
4K
Ofan
Ofan
W
Best odds reaching a stable 5+ GHz overclock on all cores
Replies
6
Views
2K
WebMaximus
W
A
Fractal Design Define C - An OC3D Themed Case Mod
Replies
6
Views
7K
WillSK
WillSK
mihapiha
Overclocking AMD Threadripper 24/7
Replies
9
Views
2K
mihapiha
mihapiha
Back
Top