Printable View
that's quite possible too, though i was under the impression that SS was supposed to reduce leakage some, thus lowering power consumption and heat. i might be getting my facts mixed up though
however, you better not be basing that hotter statement off of the one review that compared power consumption and temps :toast:
edit: this is getting waaayy o/t sorry :slap:
What else are we going to talk about until Turion is available. :p
I guess I should probably wait until more reviews are out. I've only found one that compares Winchester to Venice at the same clock speed and voltage with the same cooling. Something still could've been messing up the results. The difference was pretty significant, though. About 2*C I think. It was the 3200+ Venice review at Xbit-labs.
2ºC (alt-167 for º ;)) isn't really much of a difference.. i've seen two different mounts with the same heatsink on the same cpu change more than 2º
though, assuming that it was the same both times, it appears that the venice that they had for testing is warmer than the winchester. i'd like to see comparisions between other venice and winchesters though, because if my thought on how no 2 cpu is the same in terms of heat output, it would kinda make any comparision between two chips void. i want an average of like.. 50 different chips :banana:
(ps, sorry for being so difficult. it's in my nature to disagree :toast: )
Hey no problem man I may be jumping to conclusions.
same with me. or i could be way off base with my assumptions on how amd is making their chips.. though i've thought about it for a long time, and what i stated before is about the conclusion i've come to, and i'm not about to change my mind until i see some solid evidence ;)
though, i guess time will tell on how turion really does oc
i want turion but im worried that my evap will crack the core :(
cores are more durable than most people make them out to be. just don't do anything stupid with it. i've been running my cpu with the core looking like this since late december. it's been through quite a few remounts and i move the case around a bit and nothing bad has happened yet ;)
http://www.freewebs.com/ozzimark/core.JPG
(note that it's not really clean there, thus not as shiny as it would be)
:ROTF: hehe that makes me feel a bit more comfortable!
Holy crap. Did your Zalman cause that?
I accidentally took a tiny chunk off the core of my old desktop 2800+. The chip still worked, but it did hurt overclockability.
nope. sandpaper did. if you ever lap your core, don't do it too much :slap:
woooaaaa that cpu still works? :0
soi = less leakage
ss = faster transistors = higher clockspeed :)
im wanting a turion, if the die doesnt crack it will be easier to aim small evaps onto cause u dont need to get it perfect alignment
when they come out if ive gpot cash i can do the first -40 tests
yup, it's my 24/7 rigQuote:
Originally Posted by saaya
and thanks for the correction. i did a bit of research, and it seems that DSL increased and decreases leakage, depending on whether the transisor is being stretched or compressed.
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20041213-4459.html
Good Work keeping this thread active guys, especially ozzimark, cos they actually had to get it off sticky as it getting so unpopular.
Perkam
thanks perkam
one thing i would like to bring up though.. note in the roadmap, under the turion, replacing the mobile clawhammers is Newark. for a long time, i was thinking that Newark would be included with Turion, the Lancaster being the extra low voltage, 512kb parts, while Newark would be the slightly higher wattage, 1mb parts.
now that everything has fallen into place, and Newark still isn't claimed for anything, i'm trying to figure out what will happen to it.
perhaps we will see a 50-55w 90nm DTR part that will have better compatibility that is based on thermally binned san diegos, just like the DTR's and mobiles of before that were thermally binned clawhammers?
if anyone has any ideas, feel free to chip in :toast:
That would be awesome. Some of the current 3400+ DTR Clawhammers clock like a dream!Quote:
Originally Posted by ozzimark
that's my thought.
and my problem is... my birthday is in the end of may. i want to upgrade my clawhammer that has a terrible memory controller and can only clock to 2.3ghz before needing a terrible amount of voltage.
so, i either get a 3400+ mobile, or see what newark will really be and try to be one of the first and evangelize it's awesomeness :D
ozzi? do you have magical powers? amd announced the 3700 mobile today. http://www.amd.com/us-en/Corporate/V...~96667,00.html
wouldn't seem like too big of a deal but the feature model number comparison now shows the 3000,3200,3400, and 3700 on 90nm process and "3DNow!™ Professional technology, SSE2, SSE3".
http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/...^10222,00.html
so it seems as if an E stepping regular s754 mobile 90nm (12x multiplier :) 1mb cache) has just happened. *
* this was just announced so avaiability won't be for a long time. (turion was announced on march 10th and we still can't find them)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ozzimark
my cpu died today so im now defianalty in the running for some kind of s754 1mb chip!
the cpu is :toast: i hope they are out soon as i have learned its best to wait, but i cant wait long!
90nm DTRs? Sweet. You called it ozzimark. :)
i'm just damn lucky when it comes to guessing :toast:
now it looks like my option from upgrading to a 3400+ mobile claw has changed to a 3700+ mobile newark! yay, i'm so happy.
now to find a way to pay the ~350 for the cpu
double post, i know.. BUT
the 3700+ that came out isn't DTR. that's been around for a while.
it's a real mobile A64
check the pricing
http://www.amd.com/us-en/Corporate/V...04_609,00.html
before, the mobile line only went to 3400+ :toast:
So it's a 62w mobile?
I wonder if it operates at a lower voltage than desktop San Diegos. AMD could probably pull off the 62w power rating at 1.4v (or 1.35v, whatever the rev. E desktop chips are).
i'm not sure. seeing as the mobile clawhammers were 27w lower (about 30%) than the normal destops.. that's where i get my 50-55w guess from before
(70% of 67 is actually 47, but i doubt it would go that low.. mostly because i think the voltage will only drop .05v instead of the .1v before)