The card clocks on the 27k run were like 540/435 on chiller and a pelt. The FX53 can almost do that on water and 510/410 card clocks. The 25k run is with my every day card clocks of 465/385.
The card clocks on the 27k run were like 540/435 on chiller and a pelt. The FX53 can almost do that on water and 510/410 card clocks. The 25k run is with my every day card clocks of 465/385.
Here you go charlie:
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...033#post486033
Hey charlie!:)
Where Ya' Goin', Man? :stick:
I Just GOT Here.(AMD!)
You Know you Can't Quit OCing :p: , It's Just TOO MUCH FUN!:banana:
You'll Be Back..................................But , In the Meantime,
Enjoy Your Rest!:toast:
Guys, I'd like to have an oppinion from you:
The "possible failure" so far, of these S939 systems, is it due to the lack of good MB or is it due to FX53 CPU?
What about the NF3 250 boards? Same story of the VIA boards?
Thank you for your feedback....
Quote:
Originally posted by StormPC
I'm pretty sure this formula is valid. S939=Crap!
I'm 100% sure of this formula. A8V=Crap!
I'll know more next weekend when I bench my FX-53, but it looks bad right now!
OPP had an A8V S939 rig he tested with cascade. What were his 3D results? Don't know. He didn't run anything worth publishing.
Jason was gonna break 38k with his new S939 rig with X800XT. Next thing you hear he's sold all his gear and become a monk (or was it a nun?).
Jeezuz H Christ.....are you still at it Storm!:rolleyes: You appear on every 939 thread ready to dole out back handed compliments and poo poo everything. My god, I've never ever seen anyone waste so much time, energy, and BBS space bashing hardware they know nothing about.
Get out from behind your wimpy "air cooled" excuse and do something real. Until you start handling and working the hardware at issue your opinions are worthless. And, by the tone of the responses you get on on this BBS, others agrees.
Quote:
Originally posted by ojdr2001
Guys, I'd like to have an oppinion from you:
The "possible failure" so far, of these S939 systems, is it due to the lack of good MB or is it due to FX53 CPU?
What about the NF3 250 boards? Same story of the VIA boards?
Thank you for your feedback....
My system is rocking. I have a Mach II for cooling. No volt mods, no OS tweaks, tons of background services and system tray apps, and all the other bloated goodies on a typical gaming rig. Without pushing anything to limit, easy 32Ks were acheived with the A8V, FX 53, and X800 Pro with very modest clocks. LOL...I got to number 11 on the ORB without even trying. Just basic OCing.
There is no doubt that the 939 platform is the fastest on the planet (regardless of what some armchair quarterback ORB worshippers think).
I think better boards are coming and will help. But, even so, this set up is faster and more stable than the orignal 940 platform I had last fall that I got rid of after a few weeks. It tooks some time for the 940 boards to amount to much in the beginning as well.
Charlie, was fsb were you trying to boot into windows with. I've noticed that on these boards, both the giga and the A8V, that when I set the mem voltage up, I can't boot into windows at 200. At 2.8 vdimm on the A8V I have to start at 210 and at 3.4 vdimm on the giga I have to start at 240ish. If I don't I get memory errors and it wont boot.
As I said before, I think it is VIA. The chipset (according to ASUS) has problems when you attempt to use the AGP/PCI locks, which is why the only way you can attempt to use them is with a beta BIOS. ASUS's official position is that the A8V DOES NOT support this feature. Others have told me that their boards were not very stable and did not overclock well even with the official released BIOS version but I can't confirm that.Quote:
Originally posted by ojdr2001
Guys, I'd like to have an oppinion from you:
The "possible failure" so far, of these S939 systems, is it due to the lack of good MB or is it due to FX53 CPU?
What about the NF3 250 boards? Same story of the VIA boards?
Thank you for your feedback....
I've had the S754 Gigabyte running for awhile now and I have a S939 board coming. I've heard complaints about those boards as well but we'll see. I plan on running the S939 and S754 with the exact same hardware including CPU cooling and VC. With identical hardware comparing performance will actually be meaningful. Should be fun.:D
mdzcpa
It is not Macci or OPP who need to "work on" things buddy.;)
OPP is practically my next door neighbor so I doubt you know more about what he's working than I.:rolleyes:
pkrew
"I can't boot into windows at 200. At 2.8 vdimm on the A8V I have to start at 210 and at 3.4 vdimm on the giga I have to start at 240ish. If I don't I get memory errors and it wont boot."
And this doesn't bother you? Well it bothers me (and my customers) a lot. So I guess I could tell my customers that their $3000.00 highend gaming rig will run fine as long as they don't want to boot at the 200MHz default FSB. :rolleyes:
Really? I just didn't know that! Holy smokes! If I had known your Mom and Dad lived so close to OPP I would never have questioned your expert extreme "hands on" knowledge. I hear that just living in the same state as OPP gives you OC powers... LOL:rolleyes:Quote:
Originally posted by StormPC
mdzcpa
It is not Macci or OPP who need to "work on" things buddy.;)
OPP is practically my next door neighbor so I doubt you know more about what he's working than I.:rolleyes:
Please, how long have you known him? Eric have been friends for a long time now and have been sharing OC tips since the Slot A days (lol....probably long before you even had a driver license) :rotf: Frankly, I'd talk to him directly before opening your mouth and "name dropping" like that. I doubt he appreciates it.
BTW, I don't need to work on anything. I've been to the top of the ORB before. Have you? In fact, come to think of it, have you done anything extreme at all? Yep, that's what I thought. I mean c'mon, air cooled rigs....who cares:rolleyes: When you get to the top of the ORB someday...look me up. Until then your just a pleeb;)
Back to the topic. I'm sure we'll find 939 sytems at the top of the pack soon enough. It's been all of 3 weeks with no one with the time and right equipment necessary to do the job. Contrary to what Storm learned while having a cup of coffee with OPP this morning, there are indeed 939 systems in the works that will soon be at the top (ahhh, the beauty of the PM..lol)
Like I said, Macci and OPP are not the ones with issues here. Are you finished ranting? This isn't going anywhere, you know?:slap:
Who ever said they are having any issues?
And I am not the one coming into every 939 platform thread making negative comments about hardware I have not even used, not to mention tried anything more extreme than air cooling.
I haven't even started ranting :D
It is going somewhere too. There are too many eyes that visit these forums that may erroneously think you know what your talking about when it comes to the viability of the 939 platform. So I'll be here to remind them:D
As Rodney King once said, "Can't we all just get along?" :D Tweaking is part of the overclocking experience. I could run everything stock, but where's the fun in doing that? I could also have bought a phase change system and climbed even farther up the ORB. But I've chosen not to. Still, I've managed to make it into the top-20 of both 3DMark01 & 3DMark03 with less than 2.7GHz. So far, my A8V has given me no problems. None. Zilch.
It's still WAY TOO EARLY to draw any definite conclusions about the 939 platform.
Can I get a word in here :D
That's all I've been trying to say.Quote:
Originally posted by sierra_bound
It's still WAY TOO EARLY to draw any definite conclusions about the 939 platform.
I shouldn't let Storm (who is obviously afraid that his system is obsolete) get to me.
My apologies to everyone, even Storm.
Quote:
Originally posted by cowpuppy
Can I get a word in here :D
Nice to see you Jim!!
If only you had an X800 XT to go in there!!! Good work:toast:
Nice, cowpuppy. Benches often speak louder than words. :DQuote:
Originally posted by cowpuppy
Can I get a word in here :D
It doesn't bother me a bit storm and I doubt that it would bother your customers either. I can't imagine you're going to run 3.4v of vdimm for them. I highly suspect that they wont be overclocking at all. So frankly you could use the official bios and not need locks in the first place. If you're going to make an argument please make one that makes some sense.
No No....don't have him do that! We'll lose all the entertainment value;)Quote:
Originally posted by pkrew
If you're going to make an argument please make one that makes some sense.
/jk:D
hasn't worked yet.Quote:
Originally posted by sierra_bound
charlie, my understanding is that 1006.004 does not have the lock option. :( But xgman has a modded 1006 from Bigtoe. Haven't heard him yet.
That's too bad. I heard Asus is working on an official BIOS (1007) that supposedly has the lock option. I'll believe it when I see it. lol.Quote:
Originally posted by xgman
hasn't worked yet.
I have has 3 A8V's and one AV8 and one NF3 250-939 so far and as far as the via, I am convinced that we have not yet seen the revised version of the via chipset that should fix at least some of these problems. I know Abut has a revised version coming out as a rev. 1.1 board in a couple of weeks and I assume at some point so will asus, but lets face it the current Via KT800 pro chipset is FUBAR'ed,. And to make matters worse, the NF3-250 I tried was even worse.
I also am experiencing the weird voltage things when trying to overclock, for the record. It is juts simply impossible to do any meaningfully testing in the current state of affairs. 939 and stability simply don't exist yet with maybe a few lucky exceptions for whatever reason. Pretty pathetic really.
where did you hear that? And I hope it isn't like the abit where that new bios will only work on the next rev. board.Quote:
Originally posted by sierra_bound
That's too bad. I heard Asus is working on an official BIOS (1007) that supposedly has the lock option. I'll believe it when I see it. lol.
Try CH5 on your Gigabyte man ;)Quote:
Originally posted by xgman
I have has 3 A8V's and one AV8 and one NF3 250-939 so far and as far as the via, I am convinced that we have not yet seen the revised version of the via chipset that should fix at least some of these problems. I know Abut has a revised version coming out as a rev. 1.1 board in a couple of weeks and I assume at some point so will asus, but lets face it the current Via KT800 pro chipset is FUBAR'ed,. And to make matters worse, the NF3-250 I tried was even worse.
I also am experiencing the weird voltage things when trying to overclock, for the record. It is juts simply impossible to do any meaningfully testing in the current state of affairs. 939 and stability simply don't exist yet with maybe a few lucky exceptions for whatever reason. Pretty pathetic really.
gigabyte has gone back. Maybe I'll try the DFI version again. I think they also have a via version planned.
Someone on another forum sent an email to Asus asking about the AGP/PCI lock and that was the reply the person got. Here's an excerpt:Quote:
Originally posted by xgman
where did you hear that? And I hope it isn't like the abit where that new bios will only work on the next rev. board.
"This is a problem that we are currently addressing on this board. It should be corrected and fully operational on the next official BIOS revision. The revision will be 1007 and should be out within the next few weeks. Thanks."
So can't one of the Xtreme guru's get a hold of a beta copy of this? I'm dieing here! :(
You've certainly had a run of bad luck. Of the boards I've tested, which include 2 A8Vs, 1 AV8, and the giga board. I would have to say that the giga board is easily the most stable, followed by the Asus and the Abit would be a distant 3rd
aparently im one of the lucky ones with stable s939. been running 233x10 since i got my 3700EB other than when i fubared my bios somehow. back on the 1005.020's and all good again.
i dunno what stormPC's beef with s939 is. mine seems to be putting power down just fine. nearly 28k with below x800xtpe stock clocks and 250x10 and zero tweaks. if i could get 260x10 1:1 out of my memory i would expect to get pretty damn close to 30k all factory cooled on air, i expect 29k at 250x10 with a slight overclock, 535/567 or so, on my modded pro. chip will do 2.6ghz with a cool 60F ambient temp, i just cant get there with any kind of decent ram speed.
Well to show how inconsistant this whole thing is, I have the exact opposite order where the unlikely Abit was the most stable except for missing the multis and flakey temps sensors, then the asus and lastly the giga. And I don't think it has much to do with luck, just but bad workmanship. Hell, maybe it's the AMD 939 cpu's that are the common problem here.Quote:
Originally posted by pkrew
You've certainly had a run of bad luck. Of the boards I've tested, which include 2 A8Vs, 1 AV8, and the giga board. I would have to say that the giga board is easily the most stable, followed by the Asus and the Abit would be a distant 3rd
I wonder what the low ram voltage thing is really about. I'll reboot and try low ram voltage and see what happens.
Yup, there is something defiinetly wrong with the way this board is handling ddr voltage on it's own. I have a OCZ booster device on the way and I'll try that method as soon as it arrives on the 3700EB's.
Consider me another "lucky" 939 user. I've only tried the Asus and Abit. I love the Asus. The Abit stinks.
Everything is stable and smooth. I'm only an X800 XT away from 34K+. No volt mods or special tweaks either. All OS service running with a system tray full of S*it. Just the Mach II and whatever the factory gave me for a CPU, mobo, ram, and VC.
Oh well, its nice to be "lucky".
yea, im just going to be watercooled on my cpu, hopefully i'll be able to get 2.8ghz out of her. 250x11 should be easy. and i'll have a swifty+tec on my x800pro modded to xt and ramsinks. hopefully i'll be able to push into that 32~33k range. With anyluck the ocz booster will get me into 260~275 1:1 range. depends on if a xlr 120 rad and a dtek WW block will have enough ass to run 260x11.
:thumbsup:
BTW, Where'd you find the booster for sale?
Just my personal experience using water. I don't know if you'll be able to run 2.8 stable. I can get screenshots up to around 2.79 but I can't bench at that speed. There are a few people who have trouble running above 2.8 with phase change. Water will be a definite benefit to your video card.Quote:
Originally posted by Mongoose420
yea, im just going to be watercooled on my cpu, hopefully i'll be able to get 2.8ghz out of her. 250x11 should be easy. and i'll have a swifty+tec on my x800pro modded to xt and ramsinks. hopefully i'll be able to push into that 32~33k range. With anyluck the ocz booster will get me into 260~275 1:1 range. depends on if a xlr 120 rad and a dtek WW block will have enough ass to run 260x11.
If you can reach 2.8, that's great. But take a look at the top-20 3DMark01 scores. Just about every one with 32K or higher has phase change or cascade cooling.
I Would Definitely Like to Know Also, Since Emailing OCZ has gotten me no responce about where to buy it!:(Quote:
Originally posted by mdzcpa
BTW, Where'd you find the booster for sale?
yea 2.8 is going to be a challenge, but i can run 2.6 on the retail cooler so anything is possable. 2.8 or more is great, i only expect 2.75 or there abouts. 31k is my goal but i think 32k is doable with a wc cpu and a wc+pelt on the gpu. Ive still got to break 30k first tho i'll have to get 600/600 type clocks at least to to get there tho i imagine. that will require a vmod on my memory i think but it depends on how much going to that level of cooling on the gpu will effect the memory. ive only done regular WC before, this will be my first pelt, and the first time ive watercooled my vga card. still gathering information on it but if i want to get up with the 2nd tier of guys i'll have to.Quote:
Originally posted by sierra_bound
Just my personal experience using water. I don't know if you'll be able to run 2.8 stable. I can get screenshots up to around 2.79 but I can't bench at that speed. There are a few people who have trouble running above 2.8 with phase change. Water will be a definite benefit to your video card.
If you can reach 2.8, that's great. But take a look at the top-20 3DMark01 scores. Just about every one with 32K or higher has phase change or cascade cooling.
with a ocz booster 275x10 1:1 3-2-2-8 would rake in some nice scores:D the board doesnt like more than 3.1vdimm aparently with a hardmod so lets just plan on 3.1v being usable. with 250 at 2.8 270 or so seems possable on 3.1v if they respond to voltage like there supposed to.
Reading this thread, some people may get impression that A8V is a bad board. But my experience using this board is so much better than using Gigabyte nF3 board. Giga is very unstable for me - keep crashing sudddenly even at stock speed. I have to concur with xgman on this one
so what bios and what ddr voltage/htt are you now set at?Quote:
Originally posted by mdzcpa
Consider me another "lucky" 939 user. I've only tried the Asus and Abit. I love the Asus. The Abit stinks.
Everything is stable and smooth. I'm only an X800 XT away from 34K+. No volt mods or special tweaks either. All OS service running with a system tray full of S*it. Just the Mach II and whatever the factory gave me for a CPU, mobo, ram, and VC.
Oh well, its nice to be "lucky".
It's not yet. Just a sample. The factory wired one of the molex plugs on the adapter backward and they have to fix that before they ship. I'll probably receive it mid week and I am concerned that we may have to remove or change one of their heatsinks to fit, and that is if we use the black slots which the manual says not to for dual ch, but I think dual should still work anyway. I don't think there is enough room on the business side of the booster to fit next to the ram if the ram is in the blue slots.Quote:
Originally posted by mdzcpa
BTW, Where'd you find the booster for sale?
Finally some corroboration. :DQuote:
Originally posted by H2OGun
Reading this thread, some people may get impression that A8V is a bad board. But my experience using this board is so much better than using Gigabyte nF3 board. Giga is very unstable for me - keep crashing sudddenly even at stock speed. I have to concur with xgman on this one
I have found that my main problem with the A8V has been solved by leaving the ddr voltage in bios set to auto. Anything else will freeze up. Very odd, and this is with 3700EB or Corsair XL.
Well, I'm still pretty new with this A8V/FX-53, and I want to get as far as I can with stock air/no mods, and a stock 9800XT before I consider going to Vdimm,Vcore mods/6800 Ultra/ and eventually my Cascade Setup, But here's what I have so far...............
Any Good, Do Ya' Think?
http://hallowen.freehosting.net/capture_016b.jpg
Finally things are getting back to normal.
I'm using 1005.21.Quote:
Originally posted by xgman
so what bios and what ddr voltage/htt are you now set at?
DDR is set to 2.8v. I haven't had any problems that need me to set it to auto. What is the issue for you? A no boot? Random freezing?
HT is set to x4 (which is forced with the locks on anyway).
HTT is set to 217mhz. Mem is 1:1 at 2.0-2-2-5
Running 13.5 x 217 for 2932 at the moment.
Not having the issue with my XL. What are those symptoms again? Random freezes, or quick freezes after boot up? Under load only?Quote:
Originally posted by xgman
I have found that my main problem with the A8V has been solved by leaving the ddr voltage in bios set to auto. Anything else will freeze up. Very odd, and this is with 3700EB or Corsair XL.
No apology necessary for me, as I never take anything personally, not even from people (like Eric) that I know, but especially NOT from someone I don't (you).Quote:
Originally posted by mdzcpa
I shouldn't let Storm (who is obviously afraid that his system is obsolete) get to me.
My apologies to everyone, even Storm.
Which one of my systems is obsolete? I don't know where you get the idea that I have only one system, but it was not from me. I guess it's normal for certain persons (usually small ones) to assume that what they believe and truth are one and the same. Anybody who has read any of my posts is aware of the fact that I do not limit myself to a single system or even a single platform. I'd appreciate it if you would actually read my posts (perhaps with the assumption that maybe I'm not out to get you just because you bought S939) before you let my posts "get to you".
Charlie and I were able to get only one 3D bench out of the FX-53, and it was with stock clocks (2400MHz), so one of the 3700+ benches we ran (also 2400MHz) was with identical settings and hardware. The following was the result:
FX-53 S939 w/X800XT, all stock clocks, 2k1: 26573
3700+ S754 w/X800XT, all stock clocks, 2k1: 27425
Compair these scores with Mongoose's stock 3500+ S939 at 2200MHz, 2k1: 25161
hallowen's 9800XT and S939 running 100MHz higher CPU than my gaming rig (S940 FX-51 and 9800XT, aircooled w/no mods or tweaks) is still 1400+ points off my 2k1 score. Is this good?
Hardly impressive numbers for the S939s. Either something is wrong with the A8V or the S939 is no faster than any other A64. NOBODY has even halfway decent numbers with a S939 based system. That's wierd to me.
I will start a new thread after I have tested the S939 against the S754 with identical setups except for MBD and CPU to report the results, and full compares with card clocks will be included. Should be interesting.:D
You guys can deny all you want, but it's not looking good for S939!:rolleyes:
Originally posted by StormPC
I'd appreciate it if you would actually read my posts
Request denied.;)
I don't have time to read nonsense.
I will start a new thread after I have tested the S939 against the S754 with identical setups except for MBD and CPU to report the results, and full compares with card clocks will be included. Should be interesting
Ahhhh...that's right. You are indeed the world's number one "air cooled" expert. After testing " the S939 against the S754 with identical setups except for MBD and CPU to report the results" I am sure you'll do much better than the other dozens of credible sites that have already proven that the 939 is the fastest platform to date.
I feel so much better with your extreme air cooled "expertise" on the case.:toast:
Now, now............
You can't even compare that 1 benchie, StormPc....lol that was like the drag race car that blows it's engine 3 seconds after the green light and "coasts" for a bad time! We NEVER even got the FX/X800XT functioning correctly.
C
I just ran 3DMark01 with stock settings for CPU (12X200) and the X800XT (519.5/560). I got 28,179. So maybe charlie's rig has some issues.
Based on Mongoose's stock score (you beat him by 1400 points) I'd say your system ran about as good as his, which kinda proves my point I believe.Quote:
Originally posted by charlie
Now, now............
You can't even compare that 1 benchie, StormPc....lol that was like the drag race car that blows it's engine 3 seconds after the green light and "coasts" for a bad time! We NEVER even got the FX/X800XT functioning correctly.
C
I never said it was the CPU's fault. The fact is THE MOTHERBOARDS ARE $HIT!!!
Hopefully this will change. AMD better hope this is the case. The current boards are making their S939 look bad.
sierra_bound,
Yes, but you are on water on CPU and GPU. Superior cooling will almost always give better results even with the same clocks. Charlie and I were both on air.
Quote:
Originally posted by StormPC
I never said it was the CPU's fault. The fact is THE MOTHERBOARDS ARE $HIT!!!
Hopefully this will change. AMD better hope this is the case. The current boards are making their S939 look bad.
Holy Crap! I agree!
I would not argue that the 939 is definitely teething right now. Too many folks are having little irritating issues to ignore.
I'll agree with you on this point for sure. But that's a far stretch from the previous "S939 = Crap" you were at a while ago.
Glad to see you've come around a little:D
Ahhhhhhh...tell me you mistyped!Quote:
Originally posted by StormPC
Yes, but you are on water on CPU and GPU. Superior cooling will almost always give better results even with the same clocks.
Just when I went ahead and agreed with you! Your not seriously saying that one rig will actually bench higher with better cooling with the clocks being the same? OMFG:stick:
I have not "come around". I can't sell hardware to customers unless it's 100% reliable. For you guys it's not a problem because messing with hardware is what you do. Most people don't want to have to flash their BIOS every other day in an attempt to make their computer function the way they want it. So you see, my perspective is different then yours, that's all. When I say something is crap it means I can't sell it retail with confidence that it will function correctly, not that it would not be fun to overclock.
Ok, you want to take it to extreme? Try this!
Bench your system with the heatsink on the CPU. Then bench it with no heatsink. Do the same on your GPU. Now, which one scored better?
Heat is the enemy of the overclocker. Is that not why we try so many things to make our systems run cooler? When a device gets hotter they can't do as much work. Why do you think people run 1 test at a time? That's right, HIGHER SCORES!
Originally posted by StormPC
So you see, my perspective is different then yours, that's all.
I would agree. I've built quite a few custom gaming rigs for clients myself over the years, and I be lying if I didn't sat that I'd have to give pause before trusting any of the new S939 mobos.
Bench your system with the heatsink on the CPU. Then bench it with no heatsink. Do the same on your GPU. Now, which one scored better?
niether.
wow....where to start....try this:
If the "clocks are the same", then they obviously scored even.
High temperatures does not effect the work being done directly. If you take a totally stable system and make it cooler (CPU and GPU), it does NOT bench any higher. If you don't turn up the clocks to make use of new found headroom from cooling things off, you gain nothing. A mhz is a mhz.
If anyone is foolish to run their temps so far out of line that thermal throttling kicks in, then there is a slowdown. But that's simply a mhz reduction....not a temperature induced loss of work per mhz.
Cooler = higher clocks = more performance
You forget the entire middle.
BTW, is that how you bench 3d, one test at a time?
I suppose I should try that.
Not entirely true.
You ignored the question of why people run 1 test at a time, which is to get higher marks with the same clocks. Have you never noticed that higher MHz does not always give you higher scores? When running on air you don't need to run your temps out of line. All you need to do is run them high enough to where current leakage is occurring. When running 3D benches this occurs due to load/stress of benching, even at stock clocks. And even a little can impact scores. Throwing water on (especially when running all 7 tests consecutively) will give higher marks, especially in the latter tests because the heat that builds up during the bench will be better removed by the superior cooling so less leakage occurs.
LOL...
Those who run the tests one at a time obviously do it to cool down between runs. This is to prevent crashing....not make anything run faster. Those systems that find it necessary to take breaks between the runs cannot handle the sustained heat load and are not stable. Its that simple.
A mhz is a mhz.
Man....and you say you build computers? ;)
Heat buildup not only causes crashes, but it slows the computer (CPU and GPU) down as well.
Anyway, the fact that you barely beat my stock aircooled scores with your FX-53 S939 and a Prommie is proof that there is either something wrong with you or your hardware. My score is very good for air. Your score given your hardware and cooling is weak.
Mike is exactly right. Unless you get into a thermal throttling situation a computer is completely deterministic, based on it's clocks and software. Given the same clocks and software it doesn't matter if you're running at +50C or -50C, the results are identical. The gain at -50C comes from being able to increase clock speed. I know what I'm talking about (over 30 years in Electrical Engineering, the last 15 designing ASIC's) and it sounds like Mike does also.
You're wrong. Thermal throttling is not the only way heat can cause a problem for a CPU or GPU.Quote:
Originally posted by bmg
Mike is exactly right. Unless you get into a thermal throttling situation a computer is completely deterministic, based on it's clocks and software. Given the same clocks and software it doesn't matter if you're running at +50C or -50C, the results are identical. The gain at -50C comes from being able to increase clock speed. I know what I'm talking about (over 30 years in Electrical Engineering, the last 15 designing ASIC's) and it sounds like Mike does also.
For me this discussion is finished. You guys knock yourselves out.;)
Wouldn't want you to embarrass yourself further. Leakage current obviously increases heat and heat increases leakage, but so what? Come back and post more about this after you've studied digital design. We're talking about a programmable digital system here. If it's not completely deterministic then it's malfunctioning. Most of the best 3DMark scores are with "malfunctioning" video cards, causing artifacts, etc., but that's how that game is played.Quote:
Originally posted by StormPC
You're wrong. Thermal throttling is not the only way heat can cause a problem for a CPU or GPU.
For me this discussion is finished. You guys knock yourselves out.;)
Jeez...some of the ignorance displayed in this thread is amazing. ;)
Ever heard the phrase "put up or shut up"?
So beat my non-vmodded 100% aircooled non-OS tweaked S754 score in 2k1 (see sig) with a non-modded 100% aircooled non-OS tweaked S939 2k1 score. Anybody?
Bones:
You are an ignorance expert of some kind I take it?:bs:
bmg:
But so what? You are saying the leakage and heat are the same on water cooling as on air? You are the one who should be embarrassed.:slap:
StormPC, here is a little lesson for you in physics (partly).
1 mhz is 1mhz. 1mhz does not become 2mhz until you cool it to the point of superconducting.. and when you reach that point you no longer have a working computer.
Is that simple ehough?
EDIT
2 for 1 day!
Current leakage will be the same on any cooling given then same temperature, clock speed, and voltage. All the extra cooling is allowing is for the voltage to pass through with less resistance (heat is a product of resistance, but more resistance occurs due to heat..).
So.
Given:
CPU @ 1ghz
Cooling @ water/air/phase
voltage @ 1.8v
Temperature @ 50c
Current leakage = The same.
Temperature influences current leakage, not whether its air, water, or phase change.
Also on a related note: The thicker your wire the more current it can handle..
This is all pretty basic stuff StormPC.. really... saying anything you have said would have gotten you laughed out of a physics class.
wow, given the way these a64 x800 combo's dont scale its surprizing a 2.4ghz x800xt 3700 beat my 2.2ghz x800xt stock 3500+. a 200mhz and cache advantage compared to the advantage of dual channel. omg! going to 233x10 gets me 26.9k no tweaks, no realtime and in the stock order a pure strait run. And i love how charlies set up at a bit over 26k is normal because sierra's set up at the same clocks is run cooler. That explains the 1700 point diffrence, yup.Quote:
Originally posted by StormPC
No apology necessary for me, as I never take anything personally, not even from people (like Eric) that I know, but especially NOT from someone I don't (you).
Which one of my systems is obsolete? I don't know where you get the idea that I have only one system, but it was not from me. I guess it's normal for certain persons (usually small ones) to assume that what they believe and truth are one and the same. Anybody who has read any of my posts is aware of the fact that I do not limit myself to a single system or even a single platform. I'd appreciate it if you would actually read my posts (perhaps with the assumption that maybe I'm not out to get you just because you bought S939) before you let my posts "get to you".
Charlie and I were able to get only one 3D bench out of the FX-53, and it was with stock clocks (2400MHz), so one of the 3700+ benches we ran (also 2400MHz) was with identical settings and hardware. The following was the result:
FX-53 S939 w/X800XT, all stock clocks, 2k1: 26573
3700+ S754 w/X800XT, all stock clocks, 2k1: 27425
Compair these scores with Mongoose's stock 3500+ S939 at 2200MHz, 2k1: 25161
hallowen's 9800XT and S939 running 100MHz higher CPU than my gaming rig (S940 FX-51 and 9800XT, aircooled w/no mods or tweaks) is still 1400+ points off my 2k1 score. Is this good?
Hardly impressive numbers for the S939s. Either something is wrong with the A8V or the S939 is no faster than any other A64. NOBODY has even halfway decent numbers with a S939 based system. That's wierd to me.
I will start a new thread after I have tested the S939 against the S754 with identical setups except for MBD and CPU to report the results, and full compares with card clocks will be included. Should be interesting.:D
You guys can deny all you want, but it's not looking good for S939!:rolleyes:
And there was something up with charlies score, fx53 s939 x800xt at stock without tweaks should get damn close to 28k if not over like has been shown allready.
here's a stock fx53 s939 and x800pro at [urlhttp://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=7924580]26317[/url] and then there's sierra's score below. guess how many points i gained from a x800pro to x800xt at stock with my 3500+, yup about 1700. thats got to be some mystical :banana: :banana: :banana: :banana: to come up with a coincidence like that.
Hei Mongoose, not trying to offense anyone here, ok? Is it just me being too thick or english is not my first language? I hardly can understand what you were trying to say man. It was just too deep -maybe you can be a bit more direct?? :rolleyes:
Wow, so much fun while I was sleeping.
It seems to be hit or miss with the vdimm issue and the A8V. First board had no issue what so ever, but the one I just got back from rma, freezes at windows if I have it set to 2.8 vdimm unless its at higher than 200fsb. I also had to set the memory timmings agressively at that voltage. It runs fine at any other vdimm setting.
The gigabyte reacts the same way with higher vdimm and running bh-5. I can't say if they have similar issues with other types of memory, but I'll be trying some eb later this week
heavy sarcasm in that post.Quote:
Originally posted by H2OGun
Hei Mongoose, not trying to offense anyone here, ok? Is it just me being too thick or english is not my first language? I hardly can understand what you were trying to say man. It was just too deep -maybe you can be a bit more direct?? :rolleyes:
I have the same problems with freezing in windows. I was able to get 2.9v to the mem by raising the HTT to 230 in the bios. It seems that the HTT needs to scale with the mem voltage or windows locks up and it needs to be done from bios and not using clock-gen.Quote:
Originally posted by pkrew
Wow, so much fun while I was sleeping.
It seems to be hit or miss with the vdimm issue and the A8V. First board had no issue what so ever, but the one I just got back from rma, freezes at windows if I have it set to 2.8 vdimm unless its at higher than 200fsb. I also had to set the memory timmings agressively at that voltage. It runs fine at any other vdimm setting.
All I know is that with auto and bios 1005.020 I am real stable at 252 htt ddr400 sync, at 5X HT. Any setting other than auto was freezing the screen in windows, or getting into windows. I'm running the 3700eb's now, but the Corsair Xl's had the exact same behavior. Some wierd voltage issue. I'm very curious how the "booster" will effect this. Otherwise I'm pretty happy right about now and I have a bit more room to go.
It's too bad FM doesn't distinguish who runs the tests one at a time versus those who run all the tests straight through.Quote:
Originally posted by mdzcpa
Those who run the tests one at a time obviously do it to cool down between runs. This is to prevent crashing....not make anything run faster. Those systems that find it necessary to take breaks between the runs cannot handle the sustained heat load and are not stable. Its that simple.
As for the VDimm issue, when my board is set at default speed (200), I occasionally get a temporary black-out at the Windows splash screen, but never any freeze-up. And since I rarely have it set at default, it hasn't been a real issue with me. This is with 1005.021.
Glad to see you got that to work, what type of memory are you using?Quote:
Originally posted by cowpuppy
I have the same problems with freezing in windows. I was able to get 2.9v to the mem by raising the HTT to 230 in the bios. It seems that the HTT needs to scale with the mem voltage or windows locks up and it needs to be done from bios and not using clock-gen.
Also, charlie, when you were getting the problem with your HD not being recognized, were you using the on-board promise raid controller?
I said nothing of the sort, leakage is a function of temperature (usually exponential) and leakage increases temperature, but so what?? Obviously cooling a cmos based system will let you push the frequency higher, but it does nothing to improve performance at a constant frequency, which is what you claim.Quote:
Originally posted by StormPC
But so what? You are saying the leakage and heat are the same on water cooling as on air? You are the one who should be embarrassed.:slap:
right now I have the 3700EB in. 2x512Quote:
Originally posted by pkrew
Glad to see you got that to work, what type of memory are you using?
Also, charlie, when you were getting the problem with your HD not being recognized, were you using the on-board promise raid controller?
xgman, is everything running smoothly? No new problems to report?
Do any of the current A8V bioses allow 5X HT in ddr400 sync mode according to sabdra? Sandra reports 800x2=1600 when set to 1000 in bios.
perfect since the "auto" thing except for 5X reported as 4x in sandra. Is yours that way?Quote:
Originally posted by sierra_bound
xgman, is everything running smoothly? No new problems to report?
Yes, mine's the same way. I think that was done in the beta BIOS to improve system stability. But right now, I'm running at 3x. I can bench better at that speed.Quote:
Originally posted by xgman
perfect since the "auto" thing except for 5X reported as 4x in sandra. Is yours that way?
until mdzcpa can match his score, stormPC prevails in my bookQuote:
Originally posted by StormPC
Ever heard the phrase "put up or shut up"?
So beat my non-vmodded 100% aircooled non-OS tweaked S754 score in 2k1 (see sig) with a non-modded 100% aircooled non-OS tweaked S939 2k1 score. Anybody?
Bones:
You are an ignorance expert of some kind I take it?:bs:
bmg:
But so what? You are saying the leakage and heat are the same on water cooling as on air? You are the one who should be embarrassed.:slap:
Doesn't really matter. I for one am not going to re-configure my rig just to prove a point. As I said before, tweaking is part of the overclocking experience. Most of us here do it. As long as it's legitimate tweaking and not cheating, who cares?Quote:
Originally posted by Iridium192_217
until mdzcpa can match his score, stormPC prevails in my book
This has absolutely nothing to do with score. It was about storm's claim that computers magically run faster at lower temperature, when holding the clock frequencies constant. No one's arguing with the fact that cooler temps generally let you increase clock frequencies, and thus performance.Quote:
Originally posted by Iridium192_217
until mdzcpa can match his score, stormPC prevails in my book
Man, a lot of activity the past couple days. I've stopped receiving email notifications for some reason, otherwise I'd have chipped in earlier.
I was able to wrap up some preliminary results Sat morning before my folks arrived in town and I called it quits for the weekend.
I've got the board on my workbench right now, with nothing installed but WinXP, VIA drivers from the CD that came with the mobo, Cat 4.6, P95, and 3DMark01. It's all installed on a single 7200rpm IDE drive right now, not the Raptors in my sig.
Found that my memory can handle up to 247 at x-2-3-3 at 2.8v. The CPU tops out right around 2.6 GHz at 1.8v, maybe 2.61 or 2.62.
This part may interest Charlie...I was able to get P95 stable at 247x10.5, but couldn't get it to run 3DMark01. Kept freezing or crashing to desktop after a few minutes. I resolved it by bumping V-Link to 2.6v and AGP to 1.6v. I have no idea why this would help, considering I've got it locked at 33/66 and haven't overclocked the x800xt (yet).
After looping each benchmark 10 times, I got right at 30K. Overclocking the x800xt will obviously raise it, but I don't know whether switching to the Raptors will make a difference.
Right on! Talk is cheap, and all I see from S939 owners is talk!:DQuote:
Originally posted by Iridium192_217
until mdzcpa can match his score, stormPC prevails in my book
Unless you've got an invisible 3DMark2001 score I don't see, both mdzcpa and sierra_bound have 3DMark2001 scores well above your's. Also, that has nothing to do with the issue we were disagreeing with you about.Quote:
Originally posted by StormPC
Right on! Talk is cheap, and all I see from S939 owners is talk!:D
This is with some 3700EB. Nice stuff at a low voltage. I'm testing with my BH-5 right now and it seems that I'm limited to about 235HTT wich isn't bad but the EB still out performs the BH-5 even with the crap timmings. I need more voltage!!!!!!!Quote:
Originally posted by pkrew
Glad to see you got that to work, what type of memory are you using?
Also, charlie, when you were getting the problem with your HD not being recognized, were you using the on-board promise raid controller?
cowpuppy, how much VDimm are you using to get 265 with the EB?
I totally agree!!Quote:
Originally posted by StormPC
Right on! Talk is cheap
So real question is when are you going to do something extreme yourself? Or are you just gonna continue to armchair quarterback all the guys that really get it done?
When are you going to step up and run some real competitive scores? Real ones...pure default. Not the class handicapped or qualified nonsense. I don't care if you piss on it to keep it cool, the best default score takes it.
Yeah....that's what I thought.
Furthermore, because I'm much more logical than emotional (unlike some others) I'm not gonna pull my daily gaming rig apart just to prove what dozens of reputable websites have already proven....the 939 is the fastest platform....period. In fact I challenge you to find a credible review source that says the 939 is not faster.
As far as I'm concerned, the only perspective you have from your vantage point is my backend in front of you on the ORB.
LOL...considering my gaming rig is played daily, has solid but not extreme cooling (just a plain jane MachII) and a X800 Pro instead of an XT, #11 on the ORB isn't bad at all.
I have nothing to prove, and my time is worth more than meeting some qualified challenge from the lower classes. If you don't volt mod, tweak, or serious cool anything, then your success is more luck of the hardware than anything else. There are limited choices to make in the BIOS, so there's nothing else to know or do.
Boring.
I say YOU step it up instead. That's where the fun is. I haven't benched seriously in 18 months, but I'll make an exception if you can step up to the challenge.
*caveat - If someone sends me an X800 XT to use, I'll run it on air:D
Nice!!. I'll be trying some eb this week. Here's what it takes to get 28s using bh-5 and the giga boardQuote:
Originally posted by cowpuppy
This is with some 3700EB. Nice stuff at a low voltage. I'm testing with my BH-5 right now and it seems that I'm limited to about 235HTT wich isn't bad but the EB still out performs the BH-5 even with the crap timmings. I need more voltage!!!!!!!
I can oly get 2.9v and then the board locks in windows.Quote:
Originally posted by sierra_bound
cowpuppy, how much VDimm are you using to get 265 with the EB?
Quite frankly I am amazed that I can get at least 252htt sync stable at only 2.62 volts reading at oin 1 with 2x512 3700eb. I can't run 2 trcd at that voltage, but still not bad.Quote:
Originally posted by cowpuppy
This is with some 3700EB. Nice stuff at a low voltage. I'm testing with my BH-5 right now and it seems that I'm limited to about 235HTT wich isn't bad but the EB still out performs the BH-5 even with the crap timmings. I need more voltage!!!!!!!
Is Tras 10 better on the EB's than 8?
Bigtoe just looked in the bios mod program at 1006.004 and he said it shows a pci lock. Has anyone seen a lock with this bios? Maybe someone can figure out how to enable it.
I gave cowpuppy's timings a try. Was able to get 264.6X10 at 2.8v (bios setting). I'd post a Sandra screenshot, but the photo hosting site I use is down. I only had time to run 3DMark01 once. Got about 31,350 @ 260X10. Maybe more results later today.Quote:
Originally posted by xgman
Quite frankly I am amazed that I can get at least 252htt sync stable at only 2.62 volts reading at oin 1 with 2x512 3700eb. I can't run 2 trcd at that voltage, but still not bad.
Is Tras 10 better on the EB's than 8?
I am running air cooling only. Both of the people you refer to are either running water (on CPU and GPU) or Prommie on CPU and 80watt pelt AND water on the GPU.Quote:
Originally posted by bmg
Unless you've got an invisible 3DMark2001 score I don't see, both mdzcpa and sierra_bound have 3DMark2001 scores well above your's. Also, that has nothing to do with the issue we were disagreeing with you about.
Now what? You gonna give me another physics lesson and explain how 100% air runs just as cool as a Prommie plus pelted and watered GPU? What's wrong with you?
All I am saying is the truth. mdzcpa acts as if beating an air cooled computer by 1500 points with a much higher CPU and VC clock is somehow noteworthy. I believe this too, as it's noteably weak in my opinion. His (supposedly superior) hardware should easily be 3k higher than he is if the FX-53 939 was worth a $hit.
CPUs without motherboards are strikingly similar to mdzcpa's posts in terms of their usefulness.
Oh, and STEvil???
You're little physics lesson is comical. Yes it's true that if all those variables were the same the leakage would be the same. You forgot one little detail though.
THE SITUATION IN YOUR EXAMPLE IS NOT POSSIBLE IN THE REAL WORLD!!!
That's because air/water/phasechange DO NOT RUN THE SAME TEMPS where everything else is equal. Again, WTF is wrong with you guys?:confused:
mdzcpa
NO THANKS! I prefer a kicka$$ aircooled system to a slightly faster extremecooled pain in the a$$. I am a system builder who just happens to like testing systems on air to see what limits exist with stock hardware so that I know what I can safely offer my customers.
I build systems for people who like to use their computers, for those who take them places, you know, in a box? Neither myself nor my customers have any interest in pissing on our motherboards so we can raise our 2k1 score by 30 points, though it doesn't surprise me that you do things like this. But hey, more power to you. :rocker:
so which are the best timings and still stable?Quote:
Originally posted by sierra_bound
I gave cowpuppy's timings a try. Was able to get 264.6X10 at 2.8v (bios setting). I'd post a Sandra screenshot, but the photo hosting site I use is down. I only had time to run 3DMark01 once. Got about 31,350 @ 260X10. Maybe more results later today.
I just tried 2 more modded 1006 and 1006.004 bioses. Apparently Asus has lcoked the agp/pci oiptions out even though it shows in the bios simulation and has an on/off switch. So I hope 1007 works right.Quote:
Originally posted by xgman
Bigtoe just looked in the bios mod program at 1006.004 and he said it shows a pci lock. Has anyone seen a lock with this bios? Maybe someone can figure out how to enable it.
Not sure yet. Unfortunately, I have to work today, so I won't be doing any testing until I get home tonight. 260X10 is definitely stable. If I have time this evening, I'll try to bench at 265X10.Quote:
Originally posted by xgman
so which are the best timings and still stable?
Originally posted by StormPC
That's because air/water/phasechange DO NOT RUN THE SAME TEMPS where everything else is equal. Again, WTF is wrong with you guys?:confused:
Maybe the question is WTF is wrong with YOU. There are a number of experienced members here telling you your full of $hit. Yet you live in denial. Seems to be a bad habit of yours.
Saying that a system runs faster just by being cooler without changing clocks speeds is the stupidest thing I've read here on XS in a long time. I know that I am dumber for just having read it.
But, just for :banana: :banana: :banana: :banana:s and giggles over the last hour, I pulled the waterblock on my multimedia rig and slapped on the OEM HSF. Something like that was easy enough to do in 5 minutes. I ran SuperPi and Sandra CPU repeatedly. With zero changes in my system except for the waterblock/HSF swap the results were indeed amazing! Yes....not a f*cking thing different in the scores!
Would anyone else care to try this too? I could be wrong you know;)
NO THANKS! I prefer a kicka$$ aircooled system to a slightly faster extremecooled pain in the a$$. I am a system builder who just happens to like testing systems on air to see what limits exist with stock hardware so that I know what I can safely offer my customers.
Hey, that's okay. Life in the slow lane is cool too :cool:
Go Get 'em Tiger!
Word from Asus:Quote:
Originally posted by xgman
I just tried 2 more modded 1006 and 1006.004 bioses. Apparently Asus has lcoked the agp/pci oiptions out even though it shows in the bios simulation and has an on/off switch. So I hope 1007 works right.
"No officially released BIOS will support this feature because VIA has a problem..."
I wouldn't count on this changing anytime soon.:(
I'm hoping the Gigabyte board I'm getting Friday will be better. Their S754 Pro 250 based boards are very nice!:toast:
**********************mdzcpa*******************
Gee, I guess I stand corrected.:with:
Where are your S754 smashing aircooled 3D benches? An awesome FX-53 rig like yours should be able to put up some big numbers.
Yeah, I thought so!:down:
I have it on good authority that the A8V has already been revised and in 2-3 weeks they will all be shipping with working locks and bioses. I think the fact that some seem to be working more or less fine is just a fluke but there still is some background problems, and we should keep our eye out for the new revs and hope rma is still viable at that time. Not sure how we will be able to tell the new rev's when ordering or rma'ing. This is also most likely why the 1006 bios which has lock options in it but don't show up on the 1.02 rev. boards. I would be willing to bet they show up fine on the new rev #.
This is the same situation with the abit via boards and this leads me to believe it amounts to a via chipset revision. Again I know some of the boards are working and may have locks or partial locks, but there is a problem that is currently being addressed.
I trying to decide whether or not to RMA this A8V rev. 1.02 MoBo I JUST BOUGHT last week or Not?:confused:
It DOES have Locks and Multi's with the 1005.020 or 1005.021 Bioses, and seems to work half-way decently, But Should I Wait For Something Better(If there Is another s939 Board that works!)
Anyone have an Opinion on this? :)
BTW: Don't mean to Go over this Again, but thought I would ask. :cool: