Quote:
Originally Posted by j3pflynn
The tweaking part would make it more fun for my money. The only reason I worry is that the chip seems to be sent out for review, although, I could be mistaken. Anyway, I'm sure that they will debuy higher.
Printable View
Quote:
Originally Posted by j3pflynn
The tweaking part would make it more fun for my money. The only reason I worry is that the chip seems to be sent out for review, although, I could be mistaken. Anyway, I'm sure that they will debuy higher.
That's a B2 step and very low voltage for a quad at 65nm. That's not ES either. Looks like it'll be multi's of 11.5x 12x 12.5x 13x and maybe 13.5x and 14x too. IF the CPU can get to 300HT, what a blower that'd be with these multi's. :D
Top part is higher than 2.5GHz. IIRC it's supposed to be a 2.8GHz for December but in October that depended on future production so they will probably have highest working part for release but very limited quantities (like QX9650).
with all that power coming from the B2s, what can we expect from the opterons and the fasn8 plataform?
Btw, does anybody has any info if fasn8 will use HT1.0 or HT3.0?
so many contradicting infos lately eh... Phenom slower than K8 in Crysis,
1.5V for 2.5ghz, 1.2V for GP9600 and now 1.0V for teh same GP9600... arghhh :S
though this '1V for 2.3Quads' reminds me of that saying: 'At 3ghz, the Phenoms
are stone cold killers, much faster than anything AMD and Intel has to offer today'
of Rahul Stood :D
A real pleasure to read your thread kyosen, as usual you have some rather interesting info we can trust 100%. Also thanks to stephen for sending these chips on vacation :up:
I had been a bit busy, sorry.
Max FSB is around 245 for 2350(B1) on my KFSN4-DRE so far,
still Vcore&Vnb is 1.20~1.25V area, though...
...I intend to do voltage mods on this server board:)
BTW, Franck/cpuz is working hard for K10 support:up:
Now CPU-Z can show NB clock, each core clock/multiplier, memory acccess ganged/unganged...
http://222.151.153.254/c-board/file/...1_unganged.png
...and memory clock calc method is changed for K10...ratio against FSB, same as Everest.
It means that I had compared K10(BA) at 333MHz memory clock and K8 at 300MHz memory clock...
...comparison for K10(B1) and K8 was no problem, both were 333MHz memory in stock setting.
Then I tried again SuperPI4M for K10(B1) and K10(BA) at same core/NB multiplier.
I had expected ~1% = 1~2sec difference, but there isn't such a difference.
So, I was misunderstanding...now I should say B1 and BA is almost same performance,
at least for SuperPI.
Yeah s7e9h3n was/is right:)
So, the conclusion is we can fit barcelona's performance less than Quad Intels and greater than dual opterons/Xeons ??
OR
Yet to see the B2 stepping ?
some thing else ?
PS: No offense ...trying for a honest opinion.
seems that B1 and BA are "almost" the same so.
My questioning would be: in which cases does it perform better, and which does it performs worst?
And: how much better or worst? ;)
is B2 coming out?
Great work, my friend! Ok these questions are for either you or Franck ;) ...Quote:
Originally Posted by kyosen
One thing I'm a bit confused about - I see the CpuZ shots in this picture identify logical cores as an individual processors i.e., Processor #1 and Processor #2. Now what happens when you insert a second PHYSICAL cpu? Will CpuZ assign each core #5-8? Or will there be some way which it differentiates between physical cpu #1 and physical cpu #2?
Will CpuZ be capable of reading the Vcore on Barcelona? To this point, the only tool that I believe accurately depicts Vcore is AMD's power monitor. It'd be great if CpuZ could do the same.
Hi S7e9h3n,
I'm confused as well. This should not report this way, but one processor with 4 cores / 4 threads, as on previous screenshots.
Kyosen is modifying MSRs, so this can make cpuz wrongly detect some things, this may explain. He will help me figuring out anyway.
AMD's power monitor reports the Core VID, I'm currently adding that in cpuz as well. But the real VCORE is always better, and in this case cpuz did not detect the sensor chip.
I'm also preparing a small tool to change multiplier on the fly for each core. Kyosen already does it, but this is not very convenient. A slider will make things much easier for him.
OK...thanks for clearing that up. :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by cpuz
BTW, if you need some data/dumps from a system running 2 x Barcelonas, feel free to send me a PM (of course that's dependent on when my system comes back from repair :rolleyes: )
I presume multiplier is upwards locked in new Barcelona's?
Also is it possible to set vcore higher than 1.2V using C'n'Q or this is maximum allowed?
What is maximum vcore for northbridge?
Can you use half multipliers on Barcelona? Phenom 9600 is running 11.5x so it looks like Barcelona should be capable of doing same. If yes will we see any performance drop from using .5x as on K8?? (mainly lower memory bandwidth).
Lots of questions for our Guru's! :)
Yes :(Quote:
Originally Posted by Lightman
Max VID is 1.55V.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lightman
This depends on dual-plane or single-plane configuration, and I still miss the register values to tell. On Kyosen system, the NB VID is 1.2V on the B1 and 1.15V on the BA.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lightman
Yes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lightman
I don't know. On K10, memory clock is computed from bus speed, and it therefore not dependant from CPU speed anymore, so this is tempting to say "no", but only a real test can tell.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lightman
Is it possible to figure out the value by looking at which register Amd's Power Now tool is accessing? Also, I think the B1 vs. B2 NB VID's are different because Kyosen's cpu's are HE's :)Quote:
Originally Posted by cpuz
Thank you for your answers Franck! :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by cpuz
With 0.5x multipliers I'm also tempted to say it will not make any difference, but ....
Regarding vcore is it then possible to set 1.55V from Windows?? You know that X2 are hard locked between 1.30 and 1.45V depending on model and version....
BTW have you all guys noted AMD's official pricing for Phenoms??
It is what I was waiting for :) .
Pricing is very competitive ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Lightman
source?Quote:
Originally Posted by Lightman
:banana::banana::banana::banana: dood, you know we're lazy! where's the linkage?Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
Here's your "linkage":Quote:
Originally Posted by zornundo
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...93&postcount=1
I just got Tyan S2915-E. Seem oc a little bit higher. Now i can run 225 mhz htt.:D. But can not reach higher than 230mhz. Seem mainboard need a lot of tweak. Barcelona 2.3ghz is coming, i saw preorder on web now.:D
Very good news.
And my client confirm One barce 1.9ghz faster than Two opteron 280 in web & streaming servive in their datacenter.
And desktop software do not gain much and using full barcelona power. Becos i saw no gain when using 3dmax9 render(single chanel vs numa enable).
I miss the value of the register, not the register.Quote:
Originally Posted by s7e9h3n
This register is not "standard" and the generic dumps do not show it. It needs a special access. The next test will answer to that question (max NB VID)
as far as i can understand according to kyosen's SS:
[IMC clock]:[phys. memory clock] == 27:5 when IMC clock == 1800 and ddr2 667 installed
and
[IMC clock]:[phys. memory clock] == 24:5 when IMC clock == 1600 and ddr2 667 installed, etc.
and respectively
[L3 cache clock]:[phys. memory clock] == 27:5 when IMC clock == 1800 and ddr2 667 installed
and
[L3 cache clock]:[phys. memory clock] == 24:5 when IMC clock == 1600 and ddr2 667 installed, etc.
right?
SuperPI4M time with different NB clock
2350(B1) @1.8G=200x9, NB@1.8G=200x9: 3m47.453s
http://www.oohashi.jp/c-board/file/S..._NB1.8_UnG.png
2350(B1) @1.8G=200x9, NB@1.6G=200x8: 3m47.359s
http://www.oohashi.jp/c-board/file/S..._NB1.6_UnG.png
Almost same time...difference is within fluctuation, I think.
NB@1.6G may be enough for single thread program with dual DDR2-667 access!?
or I suspect my NB multiplier changing method is incomplete:(
I have no detail info about L3 clock and its behaviour...
3DMark06 score with different HT Link clock
2350(B1)@2.0G, GeForce8800GT@default clock, HT Link@1000MHz=200x5: 9418
http://www.oohashi.jp/c-board/file/3..._HTx5_88GT.png
2350(B1)@2.4G, GeFoce8800GT@default clock, HT Link@962.8MHz=240.7x4: 10926
http://www.oohashi.jp/c-board/file/3..._HTx4_88GT.png
We can observe slight improvement compared to previous results, 9353 and 10796:
http://www.oohashi.jp/c-board/file/3....0G-200x10.png
http://www.oohashi.jp/c-board/file/3....4G-240x10.png
K10 support in MchbarEdit and MemSet
FELIX provided me beta programs, both are working fine:up:
Now we can change NorthBridge & HT Link multiplier with MchbarEdit,
and memory timing with MemSet, on Windows...both 32bit and 64bit:clap:
(Good old WPCREDIT has no support for Win x64)
Screenshots are located on my BBS:
http://www.oohashi.jp/c-board/c-boar...ne;no=5239;id=
CineBench10 32bit/64bit
32bit, 2346(BA)@1.8G, NB@1.6G, DDR2-667: 1483, 5731, 3.86 x
http://www.oohashi.jp/c-board/file/C..._NB1.6_333.png
32bit, 2346(BA)@1.8G, NB@1.6G, DDR2-800: 1487, 5730, 3.85 x
http://www.oohashi.jp/c-board/file/C..._NB1.6_400.png
32bit, 2350(B1)@1.8G, NB@1.6G, DDR2-667: 1484, 5743, 3.87 x
http://www.oohashi.jp/c-board/file/C..._NB1.6_333.png
32bit, 2350(B1)@1.8G, NB@1.6G, DDR2-800: 1493, 5736, 3.84 x
http://www.oohashi.jp/c-board/file/C..._NB1.6_400.png
32bit, 2350(B1)@2.4G, DDR2-640: 1973, 7654, 3.88 x
http://www.oohashi.jp/c-board/file/C..._NB1.8_320.png
32bit, 2350(B1)@2.4G, DDR2-800: 1977, 7672, 3.88 x
http://www.oohashi.jp/c-board/file/C..._NB1.8_400.png
64bit, 2346(BA)@1.8G, NB@1.6G, DDR2-667: 1793, 7315, 4.08 x
http://www.oohashi.jp/c-board/file/C..._NB1.6_333.png
64bit, 2350(B1)@1.8G, NB@1.6G, DDR2-667: 1789, 7327, 4.09 x
http://www.oohashi.jp/c-board/file/C..._NB1.6_333.png
64bit, 2350(B1)@2.4G, DDR2-800: 2402, 9642, 4.01 x
http://www.oohashi.jp/c-board/file/C....4_x10_400.png
64bit, 2350(B1)@2.3G=230x10, DDR2-768: 2279, 9191, 4.03 x
http://www.oohashi.jp/c-board/file/C....3_x10_384.png
64bit, 2350(B1)@2.3G=242x9.5,DDR2-808: 2306, 9239, 4.01 x
http://www.oohashi.jp/c-board/file/C...3_x9.5_404.png
Summary from above:
* B1 and BA show almost same performance.
* DDR2-667 or 800 makes almost no difference.
* 32bit -> 64bit score gain is about 20%.
* K10 has no performance degradetion at half(*.5) multiplier.
BTW, Franck provides me CPU-Z latest beta:up:
Now we can see K10 VID on CPU-Z(for example, in the 64bit, 2346(BA)@1.8G case above),
and also can choose a clock showing core#:clap:
I intend to test a rendering software, Shade...familiar in Japan,
and then, I'll try voltage modification:)
thanks for all the work kyosen, franck, felix, and others ;)