What date code is your CPU? 1t changed to 2t would indicate that your memory was the problem. 2t on the failing Winchesters does not help.Quote:
Originally Posted by MouseSeries
Printable View
What date code is your CPU? 1t changed to 2t would indicate that your memory was the problem. 2t on the failing Winchesters does not help.Quote:
Originally Posted by MouseSeries
I just Primed 14 straight hours with mine... 3200+@2500Quote:
Originally Posted by kryptobs2000
Nothing wrong with A64 and Prime95... You need to configure the RAM better... Its that simple..
Have you even read all of this thread? Congrats on your chip working, but I don't think yours working means there is no problem with prime and A64. If you read the thead you will find that there are a few ppl with working chips, but also a lot that aren't.Quote:
Originally Posted by Badge56
Quote:
Originally Posted by Badge56
lol, that made me laugh, do you work for amd?
Welcome to the discussion - don't be so lame next time you post. You have luck with yours, good for you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Badge56
WRONG.Quote:
Originally Posted by Badge56
What is your CPU date code? Some work fine. I don't know how else to put that. I work for a memory company. I help people properly configure memory for a living, Thank you.
Read all the test data and look at all screenies in this thread.
:)
From what I have seen.
pre week 41 don't like prime:(
After week 41 they love it :)
And it doesn't matter if you overclock or not, they fail at 200fsb stock voltage etc just as much as they do at 250fsb etc etc.
does that look right?
Hey Bigtoe - I've yet to see an AMD64 LOVE Prime ;) ..but I know what u mean!Quote:
Originally Posted by bigtoe
LOL. I know where your coming from Dean ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by dnottis
I have a memory problem so I can't be to sure but at stock speed anyways my week 39 seems to be ok with prime blend. (I ran it overnight). Once I get some different ram that can run at low voltage I can comment more on my specific CPU.Quote:
Originally Posted by bigtoe
I don't want to be offtopic but anyone of you red this article from Inquirer?
AMD says there's no problem with Winchester chips!
They added a link to this thread! Have you noticed the barbaraty that the guys on AMD said, like this: :stick: "An AMD representative said that the firm's techies say that because the Athlon 64 chips are locked and cannot be overclocked, an attempt to increase the mobo's system clock is causing all the components to respond, rather than just the microprocessor." :stick:
I really don't know if you guys noticed this, just wanted to keep you informed. If you don't want this kind of post to repeat, please let me know, I wont be offended! :toast:
Best wishes
Jorge Lopes
Yep, it has been posted many times.
I think that AMD is avoiding a straight answer because it doesn't have one. The reason could be that if something went wrong during the manufacturing processes of week 41, they missed it, and now it's difficult to find out what happened back then.
I had the toughest time with a 3000+ 939 (unknown date code). It could only pass prime in single channel. I tested this cpu in 4 different motherboards (ECS K2, MSI-NEO2, Abit-AV8, and Gigabye Ultra) I returned the cpu for a 3200+ 939 with a 32nd week code (0432 TPMW) and now can pass prime95 in dual channel at stock speeds.
andyOCZ
You tried running 2T on the Winchester that failed on ya? And also, if you still have the chip that fails, can you try running memory at a ratio? Seems like MANY people running memory with a ratio don't have prime failing.
Thats not fixing the problem, that merely points out that the memory controller is bunk :stick:Quote:
Originally Posted by IvanAndreevich
Perhaps you mean 0.09 AMD64s. Both of the 754 Clawhammers I owned loved Prime. The Newcastle 939 I'm using now loves Prime. The Winchester 939 I owned along with another Winchester 939 I borrowed did not love Prime. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by dnottis
There are other problems with A64, not just Prime95. Try for example Linux installation or boot floppies. To have that done you will need to use to lowest possible memory settings.
This has never ever happened to me with any of the Intel chips, or with Athlon XP. AMD keeps on denying the problems but memory controller on A64 Winchester is the main suspect. That memory controller is something AMD cannot get done right despite all the denials.
It's all in the CPU guys -
http://www.3dxtreme.net/other/3000%20wk41/293x9-2T.jpg
The whole thread is here -
http://xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=48127
hey, I'm just wondering. What is the benefit of even having the memory controller on die? I can see the obvious benefits of less latency or something (I don't know how it all works, but just guessing). But other than that.. I just don't see any benefits. I mean, on crappy low end boards, sure they would have equaly crappy memory controllers, but who cares? On high end boards, say if the 754 dfi had it's own memory controller. I'm sure it'd have a really good memory controller easily capable of 300mhz+ 2-2-2-5 (dosn't mean the ram can do it I'm just saying). And you could have dual channel on the 754 cpu's. So whats the point? Is it just to cut costs or a promotional gimmick, or is there actually a real benefit?
Less latency, why do you think the AMD64 are killing the P4's in memory bandwidth even though both are dual channel?
Well I thought there was more to it than just that. I'm not by any means pretending to know what I'm talking about, but the A64's (and Athlon XP's) architecture are very different than the p4's (memory controller aside) and I thought there was something else as to why they were better. The Athlons have more pipelines or something and so they can process more at the same time than the P4's. Correct me if I'm wrong, but.. I just thought that was why they have better memory performance.
Theres a rather easy way to find out if the prime95 problem is a hardware issue but it requires you to have access to a c++ compiler. Try compiling a copy of the latest linux kernel. Software compilation is way more sensitive to hardware errors than most other software and should definitly throw a fit if the cpu or memory error at all. I get compile errors on my system at speeds lower than what prime95 or memtest say are 100% stable even after 48 hours when overclocking. An if my memory serves me correctly this was the same way the pentium 3 1.13 debacle was brought to light forcing intel to recall those chips.
Yup. Linux kernel compiling is a good thing to try as well.
I noticed the problem loading Raid drivers from floppies, it was impossible to do until I figured out - set memory 2T, on the lowest possible speed and down to 200 bus. Then it worked. Therefore it is the memory controller. The same memory I used in Pentium 4C Linux installation, there it wasn't any problem all the way.
OK... you are probably correct. I only have ONE winnie to play with. However many people :banana::banana::banana::banana::banana: and complain and don't configure there RAM correctly. The winnies, mine in any case does NOT like it much when two sticks are used so using AUTO or SPD in BIOS is a guarantie that it will not post or be verry unstable. I have played with both Corsair and Mushkin and results are similar... :stick:Quote:
Originally Posted by andyOCZ
as i posted before, my week 33 3200+ primes fine so im not sure if it's as simple as pre wk 41 vs post wk 41 (and it's not just wk 41 afaik).Quote:
Originally Posted by bigtoe