New version of AMD Overdrive!
2.0.17
http://www.techpowerup.com/downloads/1012/AMD_Overdrive_2.0.17.html
Printable View
New version of AMD Overdrive!
2.0.17
http://www.techpowerup.com/downloads/1012/AMD_Overdrive_2.0.17.html
I've tried this quite a few times and I keep getting the message thatQuote:
Originally Posted by d412k5t412
"AMD OverDrive cannot detect AMD CPU on this computer"...
Am I the only one with this problem? :shrug:
No, same here. DFI 790FX board / Vista x64. :shakes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Daveburt714
Works for me, but I had a fresh install of XP too. Try that if you're that desperate? Couldn't auto-clock passed 2.4ghz :(
I hope the B3 stepping proves to be more overclockable. If all they did was fix the TLB errata, and didn't do anything to resolve the horrible stability issues with 4 memory modules or Vista 64-bit booting...
Thanks d412k5t412 :)
Problems... it's probably just you Vista guys and the poor driver pickup :p:
It needs to pickup the driver within Vista properly or it would read that error, unless you haven't rebooted.
MagnumMan your issues are probably with just Vista 64b and not the CPU itself. A known issue. Heck, Vista has a known issue installing with 4GB RAM, gives a BSoD on a perfectly stable system. As for clocking, don't expect it to improve, I doubt it will and nor was the timescale for it to (the main reason is to fix errata in hardware).
Here's one BSoD Vista is known to give if you have more than 3GB RAM upon installing and the fix: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/929777/en-us
Anyway, me thinks I'm picking up another 5000 BE now for personal use in the 780G, since the cheapest prices compared are as follows:
AMD 5000+ BE 2.6G £50
AMD BE-2350 2.1G +£7
Phenom 9500 2.2G +£48
Intel E8200 2.66G +£63 (not yet available)
Intel E6750 2.67G +£74
This isn't free, yes, UK is always more expensive :(
Quite a cool purchase me thinks, 3.3G should be stock volts and at todays rate being from US, that sets me back $101 compared to $251 for E6750. :D
That's similar to what I had asked but earlier they said yes, then no they can't because it's a limitation and now yes again. Hence why I mentioned it earlier and then withdrew that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mathos
Ah well, you never know. Was using a TT120 before as well as a Zalman 9700 when I had this error with 9500/9600BE, didn't make any difference to it. :shrug:Quote:
And cmon, stay with the dark side....you know you wanna do it ;P. Only thing I can recommend is to not use the stock cooler this time. Nirvana 120 premium, TRUE, or something of that caliber, should easily handle the heat.
I believe anyone can understand this much if sincere, honest and technologically understanding. But I've known from internal sources since June on such facts, so I have no reason to conjecture other scenarios. The IMC-CPU delta, in volts and speeds is a major issue for K10h, as well as the actual bugginess of it. A1 step had a major bug where it did not boot because the IMC failed to initailze and IIRC B0 had the same bug. The IMC is also a power/temp hog and it was a major limit in final clockspeeds (very low yields at higher speeds, higher caused much inconsistent buginess). You can drop CPU speed/volts to 1000/1V low from stock and still won't get as big power saving as you will get by dropping IMC volts alone.Quote:
On the other hand, the multiple cpu death thing that seems to revolve around the NB/IMC kinda gives hard evidence of a hotspot on the die causing probably the TLB and part of the reason the phenom were released with the IMC/L3 being clocked so low.
Some onliners think AMD K10h is really crap. Most that I've seen do not know what they are talking about when they say this. All of them cannot even make a 8086, they have no room to talk yet, until they can understand what they're talking about, I'm talking about practical experience not flanderish dabbling as a toy amateur or sentimental chat. This ignoring the obvious haywire trolls, who I skip over reading. Onliners need to keep a level head, they seem to be too wounded up in speed numbers. In actual fact, AMD K10h design is far ahead of it's time, go ask a processor engineer, don't take my word for it, no really, go and ask one - this is where AMD lost out. It is a tomorrows things, fabrication node and even software is just not optimized and ready for such an architecture yet. For any design, you essentially need good speeds.
AMD K8 always started at low speeds, early Q4 2003 130nm Sledgehammer followed later in Q2 2004 by Clawhammer. Being the top most expensive line, their top speeds were FX51 2.2G, FX53 2.4G and FX55 2.6G at high TDPs. Later, by mid 2005 90nm San Diego top bin was FX57 2.8G. By mid-Q2 2005 you then had release the Manchester and Toledo X2 cores at 90nm, their top bin being FX60 2.6G... by then Intel had Pentium 670 at 3.8G retail already, a lineup that already overclocked over 8GHz if cooled properly [1]. Then in mid-Q2 2006 you saw 90nm Orleans and Windsor for AM2 with DDR2 support and by then, Intel had released their dual-core Pentium D 960 3.6G. By then Intel had many Tejas CPU samples running stable 5.8G air at over 230W TDP using a 40 step pipeline [1]. AMD's top bin was FX-62 2.8G by 2006 with 90nm 6000+ offering 3.0G by Q1 2007 and 6400+ being the highest speed bin at 3.2G by late 2007. Brisbane 65nm K8 topped out retail now in Q2 2008 with 3.0G 5800+.
[1] Meaning, the only thing holding Intel CPU's back was TDP. Lower node, TDP tweaks with much cooler operation, and they could retail 6GHz air CPU's since 2003.
AMD always had started at around 2GHz whilst Intel started at around 2.8GHz.
Why should this change now?
-As you can see, since 5 years now, AMD never ever had high speeds with their CPU design and material choices. Always sub-2.4G with a new arch, after 2 years to get only 3.2G.
-Intel on the other hand always had high speeds, up to 8GHz possible with their design and material choices. Only being limited by current leakage and TDP.
Difference?
Netburst was fast at low performance per clock.
K8 was slow with fast performance per clock [compared to Netburst].
Overall Desktop: K8 won.
Why? Netburst was poor per clock.
Weaklinks?
If AMD improved their arch to achieve high MHz, they succeed Intel by a long margin.
The day Intel improved their arch to achieve better per clock perf. they will annhilate AMD by a long margin.
5 years on, what happened?
Intel patched their weakest link, clock per clock perf. with Core. Core 2 did not overclock like Netburst, it is a hotter core per MHz compared to single core Netburst but per clock it is much faster. My Core 2's needed more than 1.4V for 3.7G stable but my Pentium only needed 1.2V for 3.8G stable. By G0 step, the only thing holding Core 2 retail 4.0GHz C2Q/D back was TDP, not yields, nothing else. 9 months on and 45nm Core 2.5 releases, improves this by the 35% improvement a node shirnk should bring by nature and lets you get higher frequencies with a tad more perf, coming closer to Netburst speeds again, but still far off esp at the higher end. My Netburst 2.8G chip did 1.2V 3.8G air stable, Core 2 could not do that and neither can Penryn yet. They are trying to reach those speeds of 4G retail till this day. Penryn 45nm can still not do that. They are once again stuck at high TDP with their top bins. They can go 3.5G dual core quite easily but not more than this nor more than 3.4G for quad staying under 150W TDP, and that's with their highest bins, Core 2 arch is too hot for that even at 45nm. Unless they can do something magical, Nehalem native will be worse oc, hotter and higher TDP for lower clocks than Penryn simply due to the design. Depends on them and that is why they will try to push till 32nm and not 45nm.
For Intel to get 5GHz retail, is no achievement, it is old Netburst replay. They are still playing catch up on Netburst with speeds yet even at less than half the node of 130nm. Intel Penryn is still Core 2, I would name it Core 2.5 in performance, as it adds but does not much more than a die shrink+cache+instructions+tweaks would add. It was there to make way for Nehalem and to achieve higher clock speeds they struggled at 65nm with. It's the per clock perf. that matters.
For years AMD built up slowly to only reach 3.2G retail... this is where they lost out. Whilst AMD did not improve their per clock perf. Intel did and now it had both strengths combined to leave AMD in the dust, since AMD could never compete with Intel oc/speeds anyway. 2.0-3.2G retail has always been it's forte while 2.8-3.8G retail has been Intel's plus 8G overclockability. AMD can no way win Intel unless: a) they improve oc b) they improve per clock perf. drastically. Both of these will now require a major change in the core design and materials, not tid bits.
AMD's IC material/design choice is not for high speeds/oc's, it never has been, but Intel's always has. K8 could never even come close to P4 speeds. Nothing yet even comes close to P4 speeds and things are far off the 5.8G Tejas chips Intel had for a while at it's labs. Do I care about speeds? No I don't, only those inexperienced with high speeds might or not understanding. Give me a 10GHz 200% clock for clock faster than Penryn Nehalem chip and I still feel the same as I feel on a 1.3GHz K7 whilst doing common desktop usage. Our workplace 16-core 3G X7350 systems would destroy SkullTrail in Cinebench 10 by far even if you oc'd the latter. Exactly, so what. I expect this of a Netburst replacement by nature but clock speed doesn't matter at all to me, per clock performance does. Intel has not advanced since Core 2 since 2 years, the limitations of Core 2 still exist and it's looking like what AMD did since 2003 again - become complacent. AMD on the other hand, took a step back from even K8 oc with K10h. Sure, I think users are forgetting AMD has never been Intel, they could never oc high, nearly all the oc's were only 200-800MHz that were considered very good. Now Phenom does not change this and users start to act weird, well they need to come to reality. The best oc'er I've seen on air is the Opty 165 and 5000+ BE by AMD, and even that, after months to mature and tweak, it only reaches 3.3-3.5G air from 2.6G and 1.8G-2.8G. A clock difference of +700-1000MHz. Heck, at launch many of the K8 until Opty's could not do even 200MHz oc's. At launch, most Phenoms can do +300MHz oc's and many 9500/9600BE's have done +400-700MHz, with a native quad. Again, is this poor oc compared to AMD chips since 2003? No it's not for s 1st step, compared to their chips, it's very good. It is only poor if you compare it to the competition, Core 2 and Penryn, and that because of per clock perf. People want Phenom to be Core 2, but it isn't. It will never be in my opinion, for long. The path AMD chooses is always low power/higher per clock perf. compared to Intel which focuses on highest clock/ok per clock perf. With Phenom, AMD did not get high per clock perf. compared to Core 2. With Phenom, AMD chip lost the little oc ability it had at least under cold.
Merit has to go where it's due. At 65nm, their chip was too high in current leakage to get the required speeds... they are the best chip tweakers at every node, they can surely get much out of these with time too, but for these next 9 months, they won't be able to level even their 90nm and 65nm K8 offering speeds. This is a bad sign, it means the chip actually is limited in architecture and/or materials, so it won't scale in speed with further die shrinkages unless they implement drastic favorable changes. Intel on the other hand will not have to worry about getting higher and higher clock speeds as fabrication level shrinks, it will be second nature.
Native approach was was always risky but allowed AMD time and much experience to resolve all for the future now and be far better experienced and prepeared for 45nm. Intel never did this for the exact same reason, they knew it was the best approach, they doubted it as impossible as their best engineers couldn't do it at 65nm. They were not even able to get B3 2.0GHz native Kentsfield out, the problems in their samples were so much, heat, very low clocks and poor yields with high wafer defect density meant it was no go. AMD pulled it off, props. Intel even skipped 45nm for it, that's how much of a problem they had with it and now they're trying to skip to 32nm for this reason in case you hadn't noticed why. So far, we have Core 2 and Core 2.5 out with K8 and K9 out there competing. Nehalem regardless of perf. has the right to be named Core 4, whilst Shanghai might very well merit the name K10, finally. :)
Do I think you'll get Netburst oc's with it? No
What am I looking for in it? Good clock per clock perf. (more than 10%), major IMC perf. and core to core perf. improvement, no major bugs, retail minimum upto 2.8G launch and 3.2G by post 6 months, oc's to 3.4G tops on air, good yields, availability, timed release, no cold bug uptil at least -100C, good affordable prices, not like FX57 or QX series = win.
Do I think 45nm K10h will level Penryn perf.? No, not by what I've seen,
I also want Nehalem to not have the problems I'm pretty sure it will have if released at 45nm for desktop, mainly due to heat, cost, price and not being suited to the available software code around. I'm hoping they compete well with each other, because I'm sick of stupid 500% markup prices which makes them very wealthy at our loss.
I think your chip did 1.24V 2.7G stable, right? Mine only did 1.26V 2.656G stable and 1.28V 2.7G stable maximum last it started. GBT PSU costs 1/2 more than my 5000+ BE here, yup.Quote:
And as far as all that can be tweaked thats why I enjoy mine so much as well, granted *knock on wood* I haven't had the processor death problem yet. Granted I've also been able to OC at lower voltages than you have as far as I can tell though as well which probably helps. I kinda wish those ODIN Psu's didn't cost so much.
I like a balanced life, the middle path. :D But I've been programming and oc'ing before, been member here 3 times since March 2002 first time, hence I remember this place, online IT, and it's happenings very well over time. Same with many other places, like once-upon-a-time the now ruined THG.Quote:
I think I'm actually about the same way when it comes to showing interest in computing in reality. Now IF I'm talking to another person that's interested, then yeah I'll talk about it. But same here it's by no means my life. Though I've actually recently started to play games on my computer again, which is something I hadn't done much of since I got the phenom build goin. I gotta laugh, I've been the same way about roleplaying gaming for a long time as well. I enjoy RPGing, but I don't talk about it outside of the game, or in the rare occasion it comes up in conversation, even though thats about a 50/50 whether I'll talk about it. Bad part is I've had friends on the other hand, that do nothing but talk about gaming 2/3 of the time, thats what kinda turned me off to being such a dork about it.
Should do 900MHz easily. Even the 2900 does this and it's much hotter. What's the full card name or MFG P/N? I might pick one up, sounds interesting.Quote:
And no I haven't tried to OC the Toxic edition yet, but let me tell ya the VaporX cooler is freakin amazing. Card Idols at around 40-45c, at that temp the fan rarely runs if at all, full load in half life 2 episode 2 with high setting it stays below 60c, and even then the fan isn't going above 50%, and thats without ATiTool, if I use ATiTOol it runs even cooler. Thats at factory default 800mhz core, should easily be able to go much faster, but I'm a noob when it comes to OCing vid cards so not sure how high I could get, should hit 825 easy, since that was what the atomic which is the same card was clocked at, only difference between the two is the name on the card, and package contents. You don't get the $30 etailer thing, or the metal briefcase, you get a 6ft hdmi cable instead of a 9ft, you get valve blackbox free (can't remember if atomic was orange box or blackbox.
KTE
i tryed the P0J bios, and it blue screens.
the BSOD Error is :
Stop 0x0000007B (0xFFFFFA6000SAF9D0, 0xFFFFFFFFC0000034, 0x0000000000000000, 0x0000000000000000)
now i see it ref. to
BSOD with 0x0000007B in crcdisk.sys
and
After you install a device or update a driver for a device, Windows Vista may not start
i am trying a few things (based on various posts on this stop error) but it seems that the bios changes things enough on the disk hardware that vista freaks out.... more updates later.
UPDATE :
so, assuming it's a driver issue, i'm looking up drivers for the promise RAID.
MSI has driver version :
Promise FastTrak TX4650/2650 : Microsoft Windows miniport driver 1.1.1030.7 -- NOT DIGITALLY SIGNED
PROMISE has driver version :
Promise FastTrak TX4650/2650 : Microsoft Windows miniport driver 1.1.0.4 -- MAY BE SIGNED, CAN'T TELL 100% (device manager changes it's mind, depends on when i look at it)
and, then found out Windows Destroy my computer automated service (READ : Windows Update) has/wants to (depends on how you install) :
Windows Promise FastTrak TX4310 (tm) Controller (x64) : DriverVer=02/15/2007, 2.06.1.326 <--which to me doesn't look like it should even work at all..... but it's installed.
I would love to just use the MSI driver, but not signed means no x64 use.... unless they allow that driver signing thing turned back off...
That BSoD is a corrupt HDD, IRQ or I/O port address confict existing between both controllers, or corrupt/unreadable/unrecognized HDD driver.Quote:
Originally Posted by dr_drache
Have you first tried booting off disk and running Checkdisk and checking your HDD's are OK?
Tried checking for conflict in IRQ?
Tried Last Known Good Config?
I don't know what is digitially signed for Vista there as I didn't install the driver for Vista, sorry. You're going to have to troubeshoot it through.
BTW, in case you guys didn't know, there is a new mATX AMD chipset coming dubbed 790GX and it has a faster IGP than what 780G has. Also the 780G and SB700 each have a 1.5W idle TDP. ;)
And some new CPU's coming out (now-ish) are:
Brisbane:
A64 4050e (G2/45W) 2100MHz
A64 4450e (G2/45W) 2300MHz
A64 4850e (G2/45W) 2500MHz
X2 4600+ EE (G2/45W) 2400MHz
X2 5600+ (G2/76W, maybe a 65W varient too) 2900MHz
X2 5800+ (G2/89W) 3000MHz
Sempron (Brisbane):
2100 (G1/65W) 1800MHz
2100 (G2/65W) 1800MHz
2200 (G2/65W) 2200MHz
it's the same HHD/info that i am running now. if it was corrupt, i wouldn't be typing this.. lol
safe mode = same bsod
last known = same bsod
checkdisk = no issues
I HAVE to have said driver installed in some way, because of the RAID-0 i am running.
sure, i could shutoff the raid and go normal, but I like my raptor RAID-0, if i could just throw everything on the SB600, would be nice and easy methinks.
That doesn't matter, HDD corrupt does not mean you can't use it. It fails slowly, run the HDD stability test from the MFG.Quote:
Originally Posted by dr_drache
Driver, HDD or controller is bad.Quote:
safe mode = same bsod
last known = same bsod
checkdisk = no issues
Have you tried it?Quote:
I HAVE to have said driver installed in some way, because of the RAID-0 i am running.
sure, i could shutoff the raid and go normal, but I like my raptor RAID-0, if i could just throw everything on the SB600, would be nice and easy methinks.
true, sorry bout my quick comment, ran tests from WD, 100%Quote:
Originally Posted by KTE
i am thinking driver incompats with new bios version or something, going to try to switch drivers.Quote:
Originally Posted by KTE
ohh yea, no driver in this case = no raid-0, vista x32/x64 won't even install, and none of those 3 drivers show signed in a SP1 intergrated disc.Quote:
Originally Posted by KTE
to be honest, i have no clue how raptors perform in non raid, i've been raid for year. have never looked back till now.
@KTE yeah, I'm around THG under the same username. There are still some good people on the Forums, if you can ignore the Intel Trolls. Like Technology Coordinator just depends on the day you catch him, usually he's pretty level headed though, there are a few others too, but there are plenty of Intel trolls there. Not to mention the quality of their reviews at THG has been sliding quickly down the crapper, seeing that with their cpu cooler roundup, and almost every recent Phenom review.
I say k10 athlon is just fine, I think a lot of the sites are doin something wrong, because I get numbers better than theirs 90% of the time once I get the hardware figured out. But AMD will outright tell you, the base athlon architecture was never meant for high clock speeds, it was meant for high ipc, which I think is why they're moving up to a longer pipeline with the next arch after deneb.
I honestly think Intel is gonna start having higher TDP's on their processors with Nehalem. AMD's been keeping fairly competitive out power usage, with a processor that has an IMC/nb on die, which is actually pretty impressive. I don't think Intel is gonna hit the speeds that people think they will though, I also don't think Intel is gonna release a retail processor clocked at higher than 3.6ghz.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814102732
That is the video card, costs a bit more than the regular 3870s, but the package contents value makes up for it. 6' HDMI cable, full version of 3dmark06, PowerDVD7 and PowerDVD Suite, and Valve Black Box, plus the other regular goodies. Hell a 6ft hdmi cable costs about $35 at the Walmart where I work at the very least.
And with the meltdown problems that some are having with the e8400's I'm thinking OCing going any higher than the TDP of the processor is gonna start going the way of the dodo soon. People are frying their penryns because they can't measure the thermal properly, or don't realize even though the die is smaller, they still generate heat. They're generating more heat per square mm in fact than a conroe. And without cooling that can easily handle quick heat dissipation well.... you get the picture.
Now on another thing, I'm curious whats going to set the FX82 apart from the 9850BE. Just wondering if the FX's aren't going to be cherry picked BE's that had the ability to clock the NB/IMC higher at stock voltages. Thats about the only way I think they could get more performance out of them to justify the FX label. And does anyone know if the fx91-92 that are socket 1207+ are gonna be 4x4 compatible? Would be interesting if they could get the performance up on em, to compete with the super high end Skulltrail.
And yeah, in 1.1b3 I was running 2.7ghz by 2ghz, 1.262v (1.248v actual with C&Q disabled) core VID, 1.1v NB/IMC VID, was the same for 2.6ghz core, and was doing 2.4ghz NB/IMC at 1.250v VID. Currently running 2.6ghz core, at 1.250VID under bios P0J, 1.240v actual, 1.04v under C&Q mode, voltages are set to auto. So yeah, Part of the Phenom stability equation I'm really starting to believe has to do with bios maturity.
Sorry, I can't do anything since I can't test those drivers, OS and setup yet. :(Quote:
Originally Posted by dr_drache
Ask MSI for new drivers here, they should reply quick: http://ocss.msi.com.tw/index.php?mod=questions&dop=list
I don't read the forum at all, not since late 2006 and don't read INQ/FUD either for a while now. Worthless. But along with many others that is. I can't be bothered with trash, there's enough in life to handle without more stupid geeks playing God over the net. :D 1 forum is enough for me to post in since I don't have the time, with too much to do in life. My profession in the major sciences and no scientist I know out of many all over the world has even the amount of time I do to post from work, they have enough to do and learn about away from even family life.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mathos
True that, the design is only supposed to be for high perf. per watt at low clock speeds sub 3G, in opposition to what Intel intended. But they didn't achieve high perf. per watt with K10h while Intel has more of it. With the reviews, same here. The biggest muckup so far I've seen in reviews was with Phenom, they really needed a lot more time to understand and experiment before giving us reviews of a product they didn't understand. Usually I get more perf. at exact settings than all reviews but for those using x86_x64 where I use x86. Then you have SP1 which is even worse if used.Quote:
I say k10 athlon is just fine, I think a lot of the sites are doin something wrong, because I get numbers better than theirs 90% of the time once I get the hardware figured out. But AMD will outright tell you, the base athlon architecture was never meant for high clock speeds, it was meant for high ipc, which I think is why they're moving up to a longer pipeline with the next arch after deneb.
I don't read into what people guess much but 2.8G native at 45nm should be at 150W TDP and no less. They have heat problems with native designs esp. if they put a 35-55W IMC with 3 DRAM controllers in there. 32nm, 35% reduction is standard but won't be achieved since they're moving from MCM to Native, 136-150W 3.2G 45nm MCM, so let's say Native+IMC 3G at 130W TDP. I doubt you'll have more than 3.4G native quad release for a while yet without plus 150W TDP, but speed doesn't matter, Perf. per MHz does. If they can achieve more than 1.1x the Penryn perf. per clock with equal settings, they've improved and more than 1.3x will be very good (not just in one specialized non-realistic bench).Quote:
I honestly think Intel is gonna start having higher TDP's on their processors with Nehalem. AMD's been keeping fairly competitive out power usage, with a processor that has an IMC/nb on die, which is actually pretty impressive. I don't think Intel is gonna hit the speeds that people think they will though, I also don't think Intel is gonna release a retail processor clocked at higher than 3.6ghz.
With K10h, I doubt Shanghai is the one we'll want but that to me will be Budapest.
Ah yeah, hard to find here and same price here as a Q6600+5000+ BE+3800 EE OR a 9500+9600 BE. :(
For me as a non-gamer, it's no point. My 3850 and 2600 give me good enough per if I want to dabble in a quick game at all medium settings with 2x or 4x AA. I will pickup another 3870 soon though, I was thinking about how four of them would be earlier just to test MSI board and Phenom. Depends if I get another Phenom first. Has anyone tried quad CrossFire on the MSI board that you know of? Hows the performance compared to 2x 3870X2?
Not sure. Just a higher bin part it seems, higher official MHz. Most people don't oc so that would appeal to them as well as to those who only oc 100-300MHz. If they hit 3G with sub 1.4V stable, and 9850 I doubt will hit 2.85G unlike how we hit 2.6G stable with BEs fine, then people will flock to upgrade from previous Phenoms, X2s and general AMD platform buyers. Here's what's releasing in a week or two (I would say April 8th for stock) including Phenom 9050, Kuma coming quicker than expected and 5600+ Black Edition: http://www.digitimes.com/mobos/a20080317PD209.htmlQuote:
Now on another thing, I'm curious whats going to set the FX82 apart from the 9850BE. Just wondering if the FX's aren't going to be cherry picked BE's that had the ability to clock the NB/IMC higher at stock voltages. Thats about the only way I think they could get more performance out of them to justify the FX label.
They're not releasing. 2P systems are postponed till Deneb at the earliest. 1P FX are AM2+. Roadmap is getting pushed little by little further back and it seems the FX might not even launch if they push things back by 3 more months.Quote:
And does anyone know if the fx91-92 that are socket 1207+ are gonna be 4x4 compatible?
Similar volts to mine. 2691MHz at 1.225VID/1.248V for perfect stability and 1863 NB at 1.038VID. More than this required voltage increase. That's two days before I cleared CMOS and it died.Quote:
And yeah, in 1.1b3 I was running 2.7ghz by 2ghz, 1.262v (1.248v actual with C&Q disabled) core VID, 1.1v NB/IMC VID, was the same for 2.6ghz core, and was doing 2.4ghz NB/IMC at 1.250v VID. Currently running 2.6ghz core, at 1.250VID under bios P0J, 1.240v actual, 1.04v under C&Q mode, voltages are set to auto. So yeah, Part of the Phenom stability equation I'm really starting to believe has to do with bios maturity.
I asked the distributor and they're saying that this CPU is not known to die or be faulty and it's extremely rare. They are having problem believing it's my 2nd one dying in a row and insisting I check with a new MB. 9850 they say is 5th April earliest possible.
My second K9A2 caught fire and took my 3600X2 with it. All other components are happy in my BadAxe2, so I know nothing was at fault but the board. I sent it back for a refund, seriously considering the M3A-MVP Deluxe Wifi. Still need something with 4 PCI-E...
Interesting read, will be hard to stay away from shopping till shanghai releases. :yawn:Quote:
Originally Posted by KTE
I'm surprised of the triple-cores TDP, 65W is nice. I remember I saw a power consumption comparison in a preview showing only marginal differences between triple and quad cores (idle). Maybe they did not have an triple core and used the bios or the windows bootflag to run a triple system.
I think its 65W ACP
You are right it's ACP nowadays. Do you thinks it's 95W TDP vs. 65W ACP?
Here is the review I talked about:
http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?op...1&limitstart=1
To stay at that level of liable weblinks.
New 8 socket opteron server from HP
http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquir...-amd-quad-core
EDIT: I'm curious how this machine equiped with eight future 45nm quad core opterons will compare against a quad socket hexacore nehalem system.
How did it catch fire? How bad? Where? What was the setup, settings and apps you were running when it did? First person for K9A2 there, I've had two and ran over 200W TDP without a problem on a 330W PSU.Quote:
Originally Posted by [XC] Kayin
It will still be the highest load you as a customer can get from the hottest chip in the bin running TPC.Quote:
Originally Posted by Morais
Usually 68W ACP is 79W TDP with AMD CPU of the same step.Quote:
Originally Posted by justapostYou are right it's ACP nowadays. Do you thinks it's 95W TDP vs. 65W ACP?Quote:
Originally Posted by justapost
B2 there vs. B3 step new. ;)
Yep, saw that. HP Proliant DL875 G5, 24-cores. 2.5G Barcelona would do nicely in that, 2360 SE, if they ever release them. :yawn:Quote:
New 8 socket opteron server from HP
http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquir...-amd-quad-core
EDIT: I'm curious how this machine equiped with eight future 45nm quad core opterons will compare against a quad socket hexacore nehalem system.
Crisped the VRM. It puffed some smoke from under the heatsink, but before, at startup, it was flickering my G15 REALLY bad, and then it smelled horrible. The chip may can be salvaged, as I've done it before,but I've been burned twice by boards that failed in like two days. Mithril has work to be doing, and this isn't helping it get there.
Hmm... never heard of that apart from with faulty boards, especially with the low power CPU you had running and I've never used extra fan cooling either just to test the longevity of the VRMs, with no problem. Bad luck I suppose.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kayin
Some Relevant News Around:-
Here's the new Athlon X2 4850e 45W I plan to get for my 780G build. AMD has dropped the "64" moniker after the Athlon name for the new X2's... initial review shows it oc'd to ~3100MHz stable: http://www.hardspell.com/doc/hard/69064.htm
New AMD FAQ explaining 45W and more: http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/...00.html#117799
Speak of the devil ;)Quote:
Q: What desktop processor lines will transition to the new model numbering conventions? Will AMD Athlon™ FX processors be included?
A: AMD plans to apply the new model numbering conventions only to new AMD Athlon™ X2 dual-core, AMD Athlon™ or AMD Sempron™ processors.
AMD plans to apply slightly different model numbering conventions to AMD Phenom™ FX processors that are similar to the same incremental progression as the previous AMD Athlon FX solutions and not to follow the new model number conventions. Consumers can expect to see AMD Phenom FX processor solutions following this trend as product enhancements continue.
Upcoming AMD Phenom FX quad-core processors may have model numbers for processors for AM2+ socket platforms as well as processors for dual-socket 1207+ platforms.
Check this out, IBM recently made photonic inter-core switches for SOI CPUs, already tested within a fully functional CPU, which have a major energy consumption reduction as well as tiny, nano sizes (capacity of 2000 within 1mm² IIRC), but also, 40GB/s per switch bandwidth between the cores :eek: http://domino.research.ibm.com/comm/...ics.index.html
And carbon nanotubes have beee found as faster interconnects than traditional copper for CPUs: http://www.newelectronics.co.uk/arti...rm-copper.aspx
PC Power Efficiency Testing:-
I found no better resource than my home nation Department of Energy for all information on this, as they have set up the ENERGY STAR rating and 80% PLUS SMPS ratings for this exact reason, as well as nearly all the major semiconductor and electrical firms working in alliance with them to set these accepted criteria, which includes Intel and Via providing mutual guidelines. So since I'm about to test system power now (got a new Phenom and GBT Odin) I read up on everything needed and thought I should share these bits from all the most official bodies.
Here's some info on how the ENERGY STAR rating is worked out and applied to our PC's, what it's looking for (very briefly) and it's conditions. It tells us how the major national energy laboratories, electrical firms, Government advisories and sub-segments measure and categorize these things and what they see as accurate ways with energy measurements.
Aim: Their ultimate aim is to reach Standby power of 1W for all electrical devices (P.Bush ordered this initiative for all Government sector computing equipment in 2001).
Intel's comment on PC power efficiency metrics => Energy Star Computer Program Discussion Guide: Version 4.0, Tier 2.0 dated November 9, 2007, United States Environmental Protection Agency, United States Department of Energy:
Quote:
Originally Posted by How we should test PC efficiency
UUT = Unit Under testingQuote:
Originally Posted by Applications we should use to test power efficiency
Also, a friend sent me a link today, 10 months too late, confirming exactly what I had told you long back, almost in August '07 - funnily by Fuad with Intel engineers. Intel saying K10h native design+IMC was the way to go all along which they could not physically make and get working at 65nm or they would've: http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?op...=6353&Itemid=1Quote:
Originally Posted by System Power Consumption Efficiency Testing Directives
Once again, it is very clear and obvious a long while back esp. if you have trustworthy knowledge by informed contacts. 2G native K10 at 65nm was doubted immensley as literally impossible at the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Annual Conferences since 2006, that's why there was huge interest and hype in K10h developments and ongoings by most in this field. It was mission impossible for even the worlds best engineers. If you know any manufacturing level employees at Intel personally, ask them and they'll tell you how difficult it is to manufacture and why. And... Nehalem isn't the name of what's coming up as an upgraded mutation of Core 2 either AFAIK. ;)
Tried that linpack+specview thing:
linpack+specview 242W DC
prime95+3dmark06 241W DC
linpack 235W DC
prime95 200-210W DC
And finaly the winner
linpack+3dmark06 260W DC
Everything measured with Odin, P5K-E + qx6850, so it's a little OT.
hmmmm 3 new bios's have been posted to the MSI FTP site, all within the last couple days.
A7376AMS.P0G
A7376AMS.141
A7376ACI.103
Has anyone tried any of them yet?
no, but get them to me, and with KTE's help i'll test them out....
EDIT : i have the 141
A7376AMS.P0G
A7376ACI.103
A7376AMS.141
Those are the ones most recently posted on the ftp site, some were put up today, and one was done on the 16th.
thanks for the link :up:
have anyone tried the 141?
AMD7376ACI.103 includes a PCIe frequency setting aned TLB disable. It does not include northbridge multiplier settings. That's the only thing missing now... I have a rig on stock coolers running FSB 230 CPU 2530 Mem 920 4-5-5-15-2T Vcpu 1.376 Vnb 1.275 (seems to go to 1.25) Vht 1.225 (seems to go to 1.25) Vmem 2.2 4x 1gb OCZ Pc6400 FlexXLC CL3 PCIe 115 HTMult 9x = 2070MHz just passed 20 hours Prime95 w/ affinity & 900MB ea. BIOS CAI.103seems pretty good, just missing the northbridge multiplier...
agreed, P0G and 141 neather boot for me (BSOD still, new install)
running stock on ACI.103 right now..
Accoring to TLB-disable program (v.1.04) the TLB fix is set to disable in the bios, and the MSR's are still set, this is most likly SP1 in vista. though,
lost 200 k/sec on winrar from 133, WTF? why does it keep getting slower? LOL
edit : after a reboot, it's only lost 100 k/sec went from ~1200, to ~1100
just an update, and a happy one... this is autotune, fresh install, working on getting back up and running-and a warning to others, as well...
My issue was with the heatpipe-it hit PCI-E0, which made the sinks lift and resulted in crashing. Fixed, as you can see...
official 1.4v is out
click me here
so far so good... :D
I just tested the official 1.4v on a 9500, but there are no nb / pcie multipliers, no disable tlb fix option, no autoxpress. when i ran winrar benchmark, it's showing the tlb fix is enabled, so i guess we'd have to disable it manually with this bios.
anyone else tried this bios on a phenom?
one other thing, on some chipsets, increasing the pci-e frequency helps in the cpu oc, what's the recommended pci-e freq for the 9500+k9a2?
Well finally got me a Phenom 9600 BE ordered:D $189.00 "FREE" Shipping at New Egg with Promo code was too hard to pass up!:up:
Does MSI change an already uploaded BIOS? i requested for a BIOS that has the PCI-E multiplier and NB multiplier unlocked, and the CS advised me to get the 103 BIOS. When I checked the FTP site, I saw 2 BIOSES uploaded just today. the 140 BIOS i believe is the official one which madfaze posted last 22nd, but it was uploaded only on the 24th? anybody tried 13T?
A7376AMS.13T 1024 KB 3/24/2008 1:55:00 PM
A7376AMS.140 1024 KB 3/24/2008 3:28:00 PM
Nothing too great to report here. But I finally started messing with my Phenom setup. 3DMark06 shows 2.3GHz, but its really at 2.5GHz on all four cores. I'm not sure why 3DMark reports the wrong clock, anyone know? 2.5GHz seems to be my max stable. 2.6GHz is impossible, for me at least. Anyway, here are my results:
Screenshot of everything:
http://jmbat.com/media/phenomoc/2poi...rk06_10981.jpg
3DMark 06 result:
http://jmbat.com/media/phenomoc/3DMark06_2point5GHz.jpg
-OS is Vista 64-Bit
-Video drivers are Catalyst 8.3
-AMD OverDrive is version 2.0.14 (2.0.17 reports it cant find my an AMD CPU.)
-BTW, I'm using AMD OverDrive to overclock
I'll up the video card some more and I'm sure I'll hit 11k. Woot.
Another screenshot for you guys. Nothing crazy. Upped the 3870 speeds, broke 11K in 3DMark06. Still stable at 2.5GHz.
http://www.jmbat.com/media/phenomoc/...4_3DMark06.jpg
Vista 64 bit is the culprit for your bad Overclock, I couldn't get 2.5 stable on my phenom BE in vista, I went to xp pro 32 bit and now I've hit 2.9 stable
Quote:
Originally Posted by batmang
Man it's been quiet around here, did KTE give up on phenom completely or just take a break?
Wow... Vista is that much of a overclock killer? LAMMMMME.Quote:
Originally Posted by Grian
It's not Vista, it's the 64-bit. Phenoms do not overclock at all in a 64-bit OS; they're really unstable.Quote:
Originally Posted by batmang
Speaking of 64 bit, what BIOS do I need to run with a 3600X2 and 4 gigs of Geil Esoteria on x64? Just put my order in for half my new RAM (yeah, 8 GB, but I render on this machine) and I NEED 64 bit, but I also want to run this board. If I need to run stock, I can do it, but at the same time, I'd like to get my overclock out of it...
This machine works just as hard as it plays, so I need to stuff it full. Kerkythea renders and giant Sketchup files, as well as Terragen worlds-it needs to just run, and not bog down and take 8 hours for a single render, or skip skip skip when moving a model-all functions of enough RAM, which for me necessitates Vista 64...
19th time on XS losing a lengthy post in 4 days!! :mad: :mad: :mad::shoot: :brick:
I HATE when that happens!!Quote:
Originally Posted by KTE
Using the GBT 780G board? Try lowering the HT Link speed to 1400Mhz... :D
I'm in the same predicament - are ALL 780 boards unstable OC'd with Phenom on 64-bit? I, again, need 64-bit for rendering (Kerkythea, Blender, Yafray, Indigo), but I use Linux (BlueWhite64) as opposed to Windows.Quote:
Originally Posted by [XC] Kayin
P.S., nice to see another Kerkythea user here :up:
I don't have a Phenom yet, but I want to be able to drop one in. So far, in 32 bit Windows, it's stable, but RAM starved for my apps.
hopefully there'll be an update on bios that we could monitor NB, SB, PWM temps...
been talking with the msi support about the including a nb multiplier option in the bios, after going back and forth for almost a week, a "bios engineer" supposedly told the customer service rep that the HT multiplier is the same as the NB multiplier?!? dont know if they will ever include it in a future bios revision...
what's the best bios for k9a2 in terms of a stable oc for the phenom?
Quote:
Originally Posted by bgbdbstrd
read few pages back KTE mentioned POJ and 113...btw what batch you got on your phenom?what is your highest stable OC?
:welcome:
Sorry fella's, been extremely busy with many things too lengthy to mention here and whenever I did have some time to post or get on, either I logged in and was called away never to return, I lost my post with system/Fx crash, or the time was fully spent fighting 891 Virus/Worms/Trojans/Spyware/Adware/Rootkits! Since I move around daily and I'm given a different system to use, the system I was given around 4 days ago was buttload infected and it's took me till yesterday late to clean it out. :mad:
Only thing I've done since my last post here with PCs is test a new pair of Crucial Ballistix Tracer 2x1GB 1066. Managed 1.968v / 2.00v 1080 5-5-5-10 maximum stable [Test 1/3 - Test 2/3] and so far just finished testing 1080 5-5-5-5 2.065v / 2.096v perfectly stable, Memtest and in-Windows [Test 1/2] including 100% load 22min Kerkythea rendering.
So, hows MSI been treatin' you fellas? :D
Any feedback on these:
Any better BIOS for oc? [best before was 113]
Any better BIOS for stability? [best before was P0J]
Any better BIOS for hardware support? [best before was P0J]
MSI told me the new features are coming but today they told me there is stlll no BIOS for those options we asked for. :(
On a side note, this is just some extremely ignorant drivel. Really, this is poor even for a super moron. :shakes:
Get ready for some length now... :p:
Hmm.. you know, max I get with a 450FSB 3.6G 1.36v Q6600 G0 is 224W DC momentary and 208W DC constant using P95 SFTT. So that wattage is looking quite a lot.Quote:
Originally Posted by justapost
Max possible I get by running Intel TAT + ATi Tool.
But I'm mainly interested in Phenom for now, so did you test it?
Have you worked out if you have a bad rail reading, which rail is to which connector and how much difference there is with volts in P-Tuner from DMM volts?
I spent quite long on these, had to take my system to 4W TDP to check out that the 8-pin CPU +12V was 12V1 and 12V2 but even at 8W DC and 15W DC, they read 0A each, which meant my system was pulling wattage from even the 12V3 (the ATX 24-pin). :yepp:
I've tried P0G, it was released a while back to me but 103/141 I've not seen before. Anyone test 141?Quote:
Originally Posted by Mathos
Thanks for informing and linkin' them BTW :up:
Thanks for the feedback. Have you check if TLB Patch is disabled on all cores now?Quote:
Originally Posted by MagnumMan
64-bit, right?Quote:
Originally Posted by dr_drache
Yeah, SP1 overrides BIOS set TLB Patch status when windows loads.. something definitely in one of the driver files...Quote:
Accoring to TLB-disable program (v.1.04) the TLB fix is set to disable in the bios, and the MSR's are still set, this is most likly SP1 in vista. though,
So... P0E is 100KB/s slower than 113, 133 is 100KB/s slower than P0E and now 103 is 100KB/s slower than 133? Not good :down:Quote:
lost 200 k/sec on winrar from 133, WTF? why does it keep getting slower? LOL
edit : after a reboot, it's only lost 100 k/sec went from ~1200, to ~1100
Thanks for the feedback details, glad you have it working. :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by [XC] Kayin
Thanks for the info and link, how is it, anything new or different? Tested its perf?Quote:
Originally Posted by madfaze
Thanks for the feedback... looks like another one to avoid then.Quote:
Originally Posted by bgbdbstrd
Not sure here, it only helped me when I set high (past 237) on HT with 9500/9600, not on 96BE and I recall Sami used it when setting high HT. For me it was 108-110MHz maximum which stabilized with IDE drives. I'm not sure why it would help unless like earlier CPUs, K10h worked its base clock frequency (HT Ref) from the PCI frequency using divisors. :shrug:Quote:
one other thing, on some chipsets, increasing the pci-e frequency helps in the cpu oc, what's the recommended pci-e freq for the 9500+k9a2?
Eh, camon Bro, wheres 3G and 2.8G benches we're waiting for :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by Brother Esau
Any testing yet=> max NB, max HT, max MHz, max MEM, max bench, max stable, max blow up... max fire :p:
Not usually, nope.Quote:
Originally Posted by bgbdbstrd
13T is new, looks like a tester release. Can you upload and link that here?Quote:
i requested for a BIOS that has the PCI-E multiplier and NB multiplier unlocked, and the CS advised me to get the 103 BIOS. When I checked the FTP site, I saw 2 BIOSES uploaded just today. the 140 BIOS i believe is the official one which madfaze posted last 22nd, but it was uploaded only on the 24th? anybody tried 13T?
A7376AMS.13T 1024 KB 3/24/2008 1:55:00 PM
A7376AMS.140 1024 KB 3/24/2008 3:28:00 PM
Also, can anyone pass me the FTP for MSI please, I don't have my own system with me till at least a week and so don't have any site links saved here to check. :)
Did you test 13T BTW?
Good going, you can ignore FM detection, we don't look to it for any authentication since it's very unpredictable and buggy. AMD OverDrive/AMD Power Mon and CPU-Z are authoritative enough (incl. Memset). ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by batmang
Still around, just very busy honestly. Not even had time to pick up another Phenom or ask uncle if 4850e/B3 are in. Will try this weekend.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mathos
According to my experience and that of Lightman (IIRC), it's just Vista 64b and not XP 64b that is extremely problematic. I mean, Achim had less oc/stability on Linux 64b than XP 32b but still a higher oc than others and I had 2.622G max stable on Ubuntu 64b while my max stable on XP 32b was 2.68G, so not much difference (and that was reached entirely by in-windows tweaks available on the XP platform).Quote:
Originally Posted by ExtelleronIt's not Vista, it's the 64-bit. Phenoms do not overclock at all in a 64-bit OS; they're really unstable.Quote:
Originally Posted by batmangWow... Vista is that much of a overclock killer? LAMMMMME.Quote:
Originally Posted by Grian
Have you tried P0J and P0G? How were they? P0J should work with them AFAIK.Quote:
Originally Posted by [XC] Kayin
Not all, my 790FX, 770 and 780G ran Phenom B2 200x12 2.4G and 225x11 2.475G on XP 32b, Ubuntu 64b, Fedora Core 64b and Vista Ultimate 64b perfectly fine. I didn't push it more because of the poor BIOS I was on and because I had to sell 'n' deliver it off that day without killing it... you know. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by karbonkid
I think its pot luck whether you have one that works upto around 2.8G on 64b or not, but there is a trend of having major problems on Vista 64b. There are guys who have 2.8G on Vista 64b running perfectly fine yet others who can't even get 2.4G running on it. I would love to have their CPUs shipped to test what and why.. but you know they will never do that :D
I use Kerkythea, Blender, 3DS Max 9, Apophysis, SPECViewperf 10.0, Maya 6.5, POVRay 3.7, Cinebench 10, Cinebench 9, Mandelbrot and Fract to test my system rendering performances, comparing between many speeds, settings and AMD vs,. Intel systems. One problem I had with Kerkythea is I couldn't make (didn't spend time learning it) a decent model to render so I was using the example image file WinOSi and rendering that with 4 threads at 1280x1024 with stock settings, which took around 2m30s on the Q6600 450x8 3600MHz / 1080 5-5-5-5 RAM. Didn't look much of a test though. Between Kayin and karbonkid (and anyone else capable) are you guys able to provide me a settings file to render which is reflective of your usage better for performance comparisons (heavier is better - 2GB limit though)? :)
Would be great if you could, even in Sketchup and Blender if you want, its appreciated.
===========EXTRA 45nm DISCUSSION=============
AMD had plenty of time with Intels 45nm process variation ramp problems, (causing long delays/poor availability) but AFAIK, Intel has sorted the problems out and is now going to release Xeon L5420 2.5G and Xeon L5410 2.33G low-voltage quad-cores, at only 50W TDP with a 7-year life cycle. You know whats best.. they have a 40W TDP 3G low-voltage dual-core coming out too. :eek:
Yup, depending on price, AMD will now lose out quite a lot in that market... massivley from their only "energy efficient" products. Their process leakage problems caused them to fall very behind.
TBH, naturally, without anything but HK/MG integration, over SiON/Poly-Si, you are bound to make collosal energy/leakage gains, so this is no biggy, but Intel also has high frequency and strong perf. at those wattages, that is a MPU biggy. IIRC (memory is weak here) Intel is using TiN gate with HfO2+MgO high-k dielectric for NMOS and HfO2+Al2O3 high-k dielectric for PMOS in their released 45nm chips. What that does is enhances electron mobilities and reduces charge-trapping (PBTI) also lowering threshold voltage. Using older Jan '08 DATA since I'm not exact of the updates:
Intel 65nm 2005:
NMOS Idsat 1210 μA/nm @ Ioff 100 nA/μm
PMOS Idsat 710 μA/nm @ Ioff 100 nA/μm
Intel 45nm 2007:
NMOS Idsat 1360 μA/nm @ Ioff 100 nA/μm
PMOS Idsat 1070 μA/nm @ Ioff 100 nA/μm
45nm+HK/MG Idsat Gain:
NMOS +12.4%
PMOS +50.7%
Intel very strangely skipped presenting any details or turning up at IEEE IEDM 2006, so they only allow us to compare 2005 vs 2007 data, we'll do now for IBM/AMD (ITSA). Not sure but those values look AC as typically given, but, either way, this data is even less critical than ever before for 45nm HK/MG - Actual CPU transistor Idsat depends entirely on your fabrication processing stage, many problems there, especially with plasma deposition techniques, chemical vapor desposition and the stages where substrate is subjected to high temperatures, which can ruin a transistors performance immensely resulting in lower actual perf. and sometimes, far lower (this is why the words "best on paper" were used at IEDM '07). Intel sticking with dry lithography meant they were bound to face much more problems in this department than those using immersion.
ITSA 65nm 2005:
NMOS Idsat 1259 μA/nm @ Ioff 200 nA/μm
PMOS Idsat 735 μA/nm @ Ioff 200 nA/μm
ITSA 45nm 2007:
NMOS Idsat 1364 μA/nm @ Ioff 200 nA/μm
PMOS Idsat N/A μA/nm @ Ioff N/A nA/μm
45nm Idsat Gain:
NMOS +8.34%
PMOS +??%
Now that shows nothing really. What can you expect from ITSA 45nm?
First of all, far lower wiring delay and power leakage due to Ultralow-k use, more than that of Intel 45nm, and secondly, IBM/AMD already presented their experimental findings of the highest PMOS (110) transistor performance with only using conventional SiON + compressive liner and eSiGe stressors with optimized Rext. at Lgate=35nm, Vdd=1.0V, 250 nm poly-pitch: Ion over 1 mA/μm at Ioff 100 nA/μm. AFAIK the concentration of pFET Germanium was <30% and SiC was used for nFET performance advancements. This was back in September 2007, so quite obviously with HK/MG, even with metal gate-first approach, they are not going to be much behind Intel 45nm on pure transistor perf., if not quite ahead judging by their research experimental data we have from them.
SOI was best for soft error immunity, low voltage characteristics and low junction capacitance but suffered parisitic effects, poly-gate scaling, and especially, FBE. Well, on top of the above developments by IBM/AMD, IBM in the paper “Record RF performance of 45-nm SOI CMOS Technology" showed 'peak transition frequencies (ƒT) of 485 GHz and 345 GHz for floating-body p-FET and n-FET devices, by employing a notched-body contact layout which significantly reduced parasitic capacitance and gate leakage current, ergo improving RF performance'.Quote:
Originally Posted by AMD
Put the basics together and ITSA could have something very special, it certainly looks so for current data. I know IBM is going to produce a 45nm CPU too, can't wait to see what the heck that would be looking at Power6 65nm. However, while this does more or less guarantee boosted clock speeds for IBM as it did with Intel, not so for AMD; that's design and microarchitecture dependent. If you read 2001-2003 research papers, all the high clock speeds were even then possible just by shrinking process node, but the most significant paramount problem was power density of the MPU rising with FO4 delays coming to their lowest for stability, i.e it would go above 200W/cm², which is a total design failure. Since then they planned, the only way forward to continue scaling is by "decreasing delectric" and "focusing on multi-processor parallelism", and here we are today. Have a nice read :D
Unfortunately the intel linpack binaries do not work on the phenom system, so i could not yet try it, must build my own binaries first and i'm very short in spare time atm.Quote:
Originally Posted by KTE
I used an qx6850 GO ES did not play with the FSB, due to lack of time. With an 11x multi and 333MHz FSB wattage is ~230W DC during prime95 test.
Still on the todo list. If i plug in the USB Stick 12V2 raises about 3-4W.Quote:
Originally Posted by KTE
:yepp: Saw that news. Those xeon's are for dual socket systems, and they still use fbdimm's, that might level things out abit. Does 7-year life cycle mean 7-years warranty?Quote:
Originally Posted by KTE
@KTE yea 64bit, talked to MSI about drivers/bios and they told me to talk to promise, that's their problem. (didn't matter than i told them that some bios work, and others don't)
here is the 13T Bios : A7376AMS.13T.zip
havn't had a chance to test it myself yet.
Yeah if you get a b3 phenom you won't even need to worry about the TLB fixes in the BIOS's. You might actually be able to test out the performance on the actual release bios's properly. I think as far as the release bios's go maybe 1.2 would be best, since that one still has the custom p-states. I'm just concerned that the SP1 vista thing may be a processor driver issue that may effect all phenoms regardless of stepping.
If I can get the money saved up I'd be half tempted to just save up again and buy a new 9850, just to get around the b2 stepping stuff.
and yeah, that MSI forum thing about the IHS I actually replied to and told em the other way around.
Thanks! finally got in here:up:Quote:
Originally Posted by madfaze
I'm using P0J, I'm only getting around 2.5Ghz stable (230 Mhz HTT/FSB) with a minor vcore bump. I can get it stable at around 2.7Ghz (can do benches, like 3dmark06 and over an hour with prime95 running on all 4 cores, didnt error out, i just stopped it after an hour, not really that patient)but im not comfortable nor do i feel it necessary with the vcore increase ( a little less than 1.4v, dont have the guts to go higher) for a 24x7 rig :eek:
is there a way for me to find the batch without taking off the hsf? taking off the geminii and moving my case to mess with the innards (the old steel version) would be a full time job :rofl:
Guys, the AMD Overdrive 2.0.17, Vista SP1 Patch and TLB Patch issues have all been fixed in the latest release, follow these instructions by Sami: http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...d.php?t=181197
Post#40 onwards :yepp:
Now if you click the Turbo mode (yellow), it should disable the TLB Fix on all cores. :up:
Also, I'm seeing many of you guys actually go after 2/4x2GB setups, current favorites being G.Skill F2-8500CL5D-4GBPK, G.Skill F2-8000CL5D-4GBPQ and OCZ OCZ2RPR10664GK. I can test these on this board with a Phenom/X2 if you guys want, see what works, how and try working around them if problematic?
Let me know. ;)
I'll get back to you guys individually later, uber busy once again.
KTE i would LOVE if you could test G.Skill F2-8500CL5D-4GBPK VS.OCZ OCZ2RPR10664GK
i am still debating on which of these 2 kits is best for me...
i like the idea of the OCZ head pipes, but at the same time i can buy thermalrights kits if they make a differnce...
so, if you could, it'll be awsome....
As above, and if you can GEiL Esoteria 6400 4-4-4-12 as well.
Guys I sold the K9A2 with Team Group 4Gb memory modules @1000 5-5-5-15 2.0v and Phenom 9600 @2500 HTT/NB x9, 8h Prime stable. They are very good for 70 euros.:up:
I'm going to try XP64 and see how much farther I can get.
If you had difficulty downloading collection of the MSI K9A2 Platinum beta bios. :(
I got the beta bios collection on one page over here: MSI K9A2 Platinum Beta Bios Collection :up:
Happy Tweaking and Overclocking :woot:
dr_drache Yeah I should be able to check 'em out, let me first get hold of a Phenom first. No B3 here yet.
Kayin: Geil, what part number is that? I can't get hold of that here that I know, no where.
aGeoM: Thanks for the heads up :up:
batmang: Should be better IME than Vista 64b anyway. ;)
Cutie: Great collection you have there, thank you mate :D
2 more:Quote:
Originally Posted by tictac
A7376ACI V1.0B3/A7376AMS VP.0BG - http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...postcount=1524
Welcome, BTW the system was with XP x64, and bios A7376ACI.103, I could not set Promise RAID, neither CD integrated or by F6 FDD, had to be in SB600. :(Quote:
Originally Posted by KTE
Hope to see some B3 results, B3 in Germany by April 2.:up:
Yeah some parts of EU and US get them far before us each time. MFGs usually play games by doing paper launches in most of the world but satisfying just one market; mostly the US market. :(
Well... XP is definitely alot more stable than Vista when overclocking... thats for SURE. I'm at the same overclock I was in Vista64, but I'm at a lower voltage. 2.6GHz is still unstable, but I was able to get 13.5 (2.7GHz) multiplier for a few seconds then it froze... :P 2.5GHz is fine to me, heres the latest. I'll rerun 3dmark06 later today.
http://www.jmbat.com/media/phenomoc/...64_2point5.JPG
I'm running XP 64 btw.
EDIT: Bumped the vcore to 1.26, got a random lock up. :\
http://www.jmbat.com/media/phenomoc/...int5_11197.JPG
just noticed when you adjust the NB volt it bumps its PCIe volt... :confused2:
e.g.
NB volt = 1.2v
PCIe = 1.325
but when NB volt is in stock reading of PCIe is only 1.250v...is this safe?anyone can confirm why it does?
used dual core center to read it..
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...d.php?t=179058Quote:
Originally Posted by batmang
Makes sense NOW. My system became unstable at 2.5Ghz randomly. I could play games for a while, randomly would reboot doing not so taxing things. It's back to Vista 64 and no overclocking for now. :down: I'm not going back to XP 32bit, no way.Quote:
Originally Posted by SocketMan
I've seriously had information overload for the past 5 weeks. So much info, no time to menton or explain. :(
Wanted to post some BIG pics of nearly all new AM2+ MBs, check 'em out, 3-way SLI boards here too! ;) To list just a few:
AMD 790FX
Albatron KX 790FX
AMD 790GX
DFI LanParty DK 790X-M2R
AMD 780G
Abit AN78
ASUSTeK M3A-H HDMI
ASUSTeK M3A78-EMH HDMI
Biostar TA780G M2+
ECS A780GM-M
ECS A780GM-A
Foxconn A7GM-S
GIGABYTE GA-MA78GM-S2H
Innovision A78GM-HDMI
Jetway BA-200-KU
Jetway HA06
J&W Technology JW-RS780GA-UVD
MSI K9A2GM V2
AMD 780V
MSI K9A2GM-F V2
AMD 770
ECS 770M-A
Foxconn A78AX-S
Jetway HA03-GT
Jetway PA77GTA-VT
Jetway BA-10
AMD 740G
Biostar A740G M2+ SE
ECS A740GM-M
Foxconn A74MX-S
J&W Technology JW-RS740G-DVI
Nvidia nForce 780a
ASRock K10N780SLIX3-WiFi
ASUSTeK CrossHair II Formula
ASUSTeK M3N-HT Deluxe/Mempipe
FOXCONN DESTROYER
GIGABYTE GA-M780SLI-DS5
MSI K9N2 Diamond
Nvidia nForce 750a
ASRock K10N750SLI-WiFi
ASRock K10N750SLI-110dB
BIOSTAR TPower N750
J&W Technology JW-NF750A-HYBRID
Nvidia nForce 730a
ASUSTeK M3N78-EMH
ASUSTeK M3N78-EH Deluxe 730a
J&W Technology JW-NF730A-HYBRID - nForce 730a
Nvidia GeForce 8300
ASUSTeK M3N-H/HDMI
Galaxy Technology GeForce 8300/nForce 730a
J&W Technology JW-G83UM-PVHD+
Nvidia GeForce 8200
Abit AN78G
Abit A-N78HD
Abit A-N78H
ASRock K10N78hSLI-WiFi
ASRock K10N78hSLI-1394
ASRock K10N78FullHD-hSLI
BIOSTAR TF8200 A2+
BIOSTAR GF8200 M2+
ECS GF8200A
ECS GF8200M-M3
FOXCONN M78A-S
Galaxy Technology GeForce 8200/nForce 730a
J&W Technology JW-G82UM-PVHD+
Jetway HA05
Jetway PN78GTA-GHG
Jetway PN78GT3-GHG
MSI K9N2GM
MSI K9N2GM V2
Alot of them are here: http://digitallife.jp.msn.com/articl...icleid=273449/
You can find many of them here that aren't above, close up, far better than the above: http://bbs.danawa.com/view.php?nSeq=...logCateSeq1=32
I've uploaded some bigger, closer-up pics on imageshack, check 'em out according to the tags: http://profile.imageshack.us/user/kte/
Review of ECS 780G vs MSI 690G vs Palit 8200:http://www.digit-life.com/articles3/...gm-a-780g.html
Palit 8200 vs Biostar 8050: http://www.digit-life.com/articles3/...force8200.html
Interview with AMD: http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/AMD-Ph...iew-30449.html
For reference, the AMD RD790 chipset bundle is a 11.4W TDP max and 8W max. average with 1.xW TDP idling chipset (incl. Southbridge). The GeForce 8200 chip has a 14.3W TDP alone.Quote:
Originally Posted by some highlights
Anyway, check what AMD officially said of CnQ 2.0 power consumption for Phenom. :shrug:
I tried that and it didn't work. Got a developer to build it for me too and it still failed to run (wrong platform). :(Quote:
Originally Posted by justapost
Whats the stock VID and Vcore on it?Quote:
I used an qx6850 GO ES did not play with the FSB, due to lack of time. With an 11x multi and 333MHz FSB wattage is ~230W DC during prime95 test.
Yeah, that's one major problem, their chipset and their platform doesn't match in terms of cost/energy efficiency. Their 7300 chipset for Tigerton I played with at work today for a bit, it has 4 separate FSBs (DHSI) for each socket and 8 DIMMs for each socket too.Quote:
:yepp: Saw that news. Those xeon's are for dual socket systems, and they still use fbdimm's, that might level things out abit. Does 7-year life cycle mean 7-years warranty?
Have you checked this out? http://aceshardware.freeforums.org/c...iler-t428.html
You can skip most of it as fanboy drivel but some parts are very relevant to coding; Intel (in its best compiler) is using a separate path for AMD CPUs than it does for its own CPUs while that separateness is not needed if both were optimized the same. So the optimizations for Intel CPUs actually run code much faster than those for AMD CPUs. :yawn:
madfaze: Which BIOS did you change volts in? What does AOD read?
Kayin: Esoteria CAS3 800 didn't fit side by side in dual channel, they were too thick. There was also no supply of them here, I tested on someone else's system. The EVO's are available here though...
BTW how many of you realize that we've already covered individual core clocking without AOD about 5 weks ago? :D
batmang: 64b is a known problem for many.. I haven't worked out why and don't have any answers to it either. :(
You can find many AM2+ board pics/specs here too: http://products.amd.com/en-us/MotherboardResult.aspx
Here's two AMD 780G videos I forgot to post:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kd0Of4PnpQk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V741r...eature=related
Leslie speaks about the new AMD lineups (not that you can see her :D):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZQ_MV81yoMc
I didn't know that, if true, then you might have a big OEM/vendor hit :yepp:Quote:
"AMD is planning to launch B3 stepping quad-core Phenom 9050 series CPUs including 9850, 9750, 9650, 9550 and 9150 within the next 1-2 weeks, however the top-end 9850 will only reach a core frequency of 2.5GHz, instead of the original goal of 2.6Ghz [....] AMD will later launch triple-core Phenom 8750, 8650 and 8450 CPUs with power consumption of 65W in late April. Prior to that, the company will launch the Athlon 64 X2 5800+ to fill the gap in the mainstream market, noted the sources".
KTE,Quote:
Originally Posted by KTE
The ULK will have a positive power impact, but dynamic not leakage. Leakage in the backend is not the dominating power loss mechansims, gate leakage has surpassed subthreshold leakage at 65 nm.
On the Idsat, it will be interesting if AMD can implement the (110) technology since that will be a big boost in Pmos, they have not reported Pmos data that I am aware, though I have only 'lazily' looke dor it.
Their NMOS Idsat is not that impressive, they are reporting 1364 at 200 is about 8% above where they reported the initial 65 nm at the same subthreshold and this does not account for gate leakage which is only present during the on state. So, unless PMOS comes in very strong, then 8-10% more clock at the same thermals, or some power savings at the same clock.
It is hard to tell, or even speculate at this point since the initial 65 nm data is sorta stale, in that what AMD reported in 2005 was probably operative at 65 nm launch (which top binned at 2.6 GHz for a dual core at the time), but today that is pretty much different for what is going into Barcelona since they had a year to exercise CTI.
In short, I don't really see AMD's 45 nm really coming very close to Intels unless two things happen... they bring in HK/MG and come out with a very strong PMOS (which could happen if they do 110)
EDIT: I went and looked up the IEDM paper referenced in your link http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/freea...t=281&index=75 (oooops, not that one, this one http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/freea...t=281&index=78) and yep, their Ion/Ioff curve is very impressive.
Jack
Yeah Jack, the (110) PMOS is to be implmented at a later node because of its complexity but the ability has already been proven without even the need of HK/MG, some very good SOI performance has already been obtained as noted above. HK/MG will only add more benefits such as PMOS Idsat increase, after the 45nm fabrication process is matured, the integration will begin. I don't think we can judge PMOS performance based on NMOS performance data since Intels 45nm NMOS Idsat boost was only ~12% but PMOS was a huge ~50%. However the CMOS performance IIRC is not like Intels HKMG 45nm and without HKMG. The last research studies and papers on IBM/AMD SOI 45nm CMOS without HKMG is what I believe Shanghai will be based on, maybe a little tuned but not much more: PMOS 840μA/μm DC and NMOS 1240μA/μm DC at Vdd=1.0, Ioff=NA: http://hasan.nayfeh.googlepages.com/...ology_2006.pdf :)Quote:
Originally Posted by JumpingJack
Quote:
Originally Posted by KTE
Yeah, see my edit above. Si(110) is still in the research phase from my impression , simply built upon thumbing through articles -- I have not spent inordinate amounts of time reading every paper.
But looking at the experimental data ... it is quite impressive. The 1 uA/um Ion is taken at 100 nA/um Ioff is right there with Intel's current 45 nm.... the question is how close to moving from lab to fab is it? Not sure.
ITSA has not really published PMOS data, only one of two reasons a) they don't have anything to publish or b) it is so phenomenal they don't release the information for competitive reasons.
EDIT: Yeah the 45 nm data you linked here is kinda old data, in fact, it is showing about equivalent to current 65 nm process... this has been improved by now as seen by the NMOS data, so I take that 2006 info with a grain of salt (not the quality of the data, just the applicability).
EDIT2: Another thing caught my eye, you are right, PMOS and NMOS come down differently. The 50% gain you quote here is a massive jump related more to solving poly depletion problems by going metal. This is the largest node over node gain I have seen through IEDM. I think 50% is asking a lot from conventional poly (assuming no 110 -- that, again was impressive).
Edit 3: I went back to find the VLSI symposium data that yielded the NMOS numbers, it was leaked in Jan of 07, presented in june of 07. The Reg leaked it:
http://regmedia.co.uk/2007/01/28/ibmhighk.pdf
So even that NMOS data is old.
Jack
1.4v KTE...
Like many k9a2 + Phenom b2 owners, I have been requesting MSI to include the NB multiplier to a new BIOS release...here's the reply got today...:down:
Dear Sir/Madam,
Thanks for contacting MSI Technical Support.
I am so sorry to tell you that BIOS engineer didn't succeed in adding this item.By testing,the PC always hangs if adding this item.So we can not release this BIOS.
So Sorry for any inconvenience to you.
Thanks and Best Regards
MSI Technical Support Team
Posted: Apr 01, 2008 by MSI
I asked them how come it was available in earlier bios versions and is/was instability the reason they took it out in succeeding ones....now i feel like i've got a hampered processor...and a motherboard...
Which BIOS was this?Quote:
Originally Posted by madfaze
Yeah I figured this was the problem from earlier. I know this is why they took it down and this is why they made V2 but even that didn't correct it, it was a hardware fault. So if you tried 113 BIOS, although it did allow NB FID changing, it was very buggy and restricted clocking. I have not seen any board BIOS which works flawlessly with just these basics yet, they're having too many problems. here's hoping the nForce boards can get things much better, but true, I feel ya pain. :(Quote:
Originally Posted by bgbdbstrd
From looking at Dr. Hasans research and papers (one of the chief scientists heading IBM/AMD 45nm technology) it looks to be a 32nm implementation and not until then, they don't have the mass tooling required either. They've gone past the first phase of research, process, initial product test but not far past that that I know of. It's certainly a future target.Quote:
Originally Posted by JumpingJack
c) could also be the exact opposite of b) as we saw with AMD K10h "hushness". ;)Quote:
ITSA has not really published PMOS data, only one of two reasons a) they don't have anything to publish or b) it is so phenomenal they don't release the information for competitive reasons.
I've just checked again, it seems I've got two or more papers mixed up from 2006 and 2007 on 45nm. The ones I initially read were of late 2007 detailing 45nm SOI CMOS results. Just checked and those values are the same as what ITSA claimed in 2006, but the 2007 DC NMOS Idsat is 1240 uA/nm.Quote:
EDIT: Yeah the 45 nm data you linked here is kinda old data, in fact, it is showing about equivalent to current 65 nm process... this has been improved by now as seen by the NMOS data, so I take that 2006 info with a grain of salt (not the quality of the data, just the applicability).
Agreed, no way SOI CMOS without HKMG would boost p-FET Idsat by 50% over, you'd need a "special" change for that such as HKMG. Usually we are talking +100-150 uA/nm at the same Ioff and Vdd maximum being a healthy increase down a full node.Quote:
EDIT2: Another thing caught my eye, you are right, PMOS and NMOS come down differently. The 50% gain you quote here is a massive jump related more to solving poly depletion problems by going metal. This is the largest node over node gain I have seen through IEDM. I think 50% is asking a lot from conventional poly (assuming no 110 -- that, again was impressive).
I'll link you any updated 45nm SOI PMOS data once I become aware of them. :)
BTW check my 2x1GB 5-4-4-5 540 2.096v on P35 fully stable guys:
http://img232.imageshack.us/img232/7...4521iz5.th.png
Awaiting to now compare how it goes on a Phenom/X2.
I've just talked with MSI Taiwan now about when I can have their latest NB FID/VID BIOS (etc) =>Quote:
Originally Posted by bgbdbstrd
:D :confused: :shrug:Quote:
Please wait for one that we're developing. Sorry for any inconvenience caused to you.
That's most likely *not* an official release.
it is the latest official release bios from MSI version 1.4
KTE yea if you could test some 2x2gb g-skill sets that would be great... also are you going to be testing some 9750 and 9850's?
madfaze: If I understand correctly, there's 4 major voltage domains on a Core 2 chip and for K10h, +4x PLL+1x IMC+1x HT but the HT voltage is the same as the FSB voltage in the C2 chips. The PCIe links are controlled by the I/O hubs in the RD790 chipset, so if you were to increase their voltage, it may very well increase PCIe volts too. :yepp:
jonspd: hows your Phenom running, any updates? ;)
G.Skill, I'll try but not until after I can get a Phenom. It'll be 9850, most likely, I'm not bothering with more I have duties to attend to now.
BTW, somethings going on - it looks like stores were price gouging initially but something else also.
9850 BE yesterday dropped price across all stores here even before release.
It was 176-201 before yesterday everywhere but by yesterday all of them dropped the price to 142-149, which is around $20-30 lower than Q6600 G0 here and $40-50 lower than the cheapest Q9300 is "on order" for.
That's also $40 lower than 9600/9600 BE were retailed here for until mid-Feb '08. The new price is pretty good for a 2,5G IMO since I do reckon there's higher chance of 2.8-3G stable on these than the B2.
Yeah, when you posted that information it got me thinking... when D. Wang published his summary information from the 2007 IEDM (http://www.realworldtech.com/page.cf...1608222300&p=6) I missed the info about him taking the ITSA NMOS numbers from the VLSI Symposium in June. The 2007 IEDM proceedings have been published, but I could not find anything on current state of ITSA 45 nm, thinking I just simply passed over it I took the RTW data at face value.Quote:
Originally Posted by KTE
So, prodding a little, I noted the footnote, looked up the VLSI paper and wolla .. D. Wang is quoting intial HK/MG data from the IBM paper I linked above -- to date we only know that AMD will not initially use HK/MG so that data is irrelevant in that regard. Weird also in that data was generated before last Jan. so using his information is terribly in error ... we don't know diddly squat, that data is simply too old, too much can change and is different.
Nonetheless, the (110) technology is extraordinarily interesting, especially in the SOI implementation -- as I understand from reading up on this, one must 'dig' a hole and selective grow (110) oriented Si to form the device. From the experimental data, they can push to near 1 mA/um which is just a hair shy of a MG NMOS device... this is impressive. If they do cut it in at 32 nm, together the HK/MG this will be something very special indeed.
Jack
BTW, there's more Athlon line CPUs set to release ;)
65nm Brisbane (512KiBx2)
Athlon X2 5600+ G2, 76W 2900MHz
Athlon X2 4600+ (ee) G2, 45W 2600MHz
Athlon X2 4850e+ G2, 45W 2500MHz
Athlon X2 4450e+ G2, 45W 2300MHz
Athlon X2 4050e+ G2, 45W 2100MHz
[Sempron I think]
2100 G1, 65W 1800MHz
2100 G2, 65W 1800MHz
2200 G2, 65W 2000MHz
Has anyone tried visiting MSI Taiwan (Q&A) and been given a Virus attack caution by your AV? I can't get in to check their responses because of my AV stopping the link connection saying it's linked to downloading a Virus. I'm not going to risk it frankly.
This is the link to MSI Online Customer Service [CAUTION!! have your AV at full blast so any virus is caught by it]: http://ocss.msi.com.tw/index.php?mod=questions&dop=list
Let me know if any of you also get a virus alert on trying to access it or if its just my AV playing up (I doubt...) :)
I had read the papers from the authors when they were presented so RW article was just a second source for me. I'll clarify this out more:-Quote:
Originally Posted by JumpingJack
Intel released their 45nm HK/MG (internal process codename is P1266 BTW) at IEDM 2007, in the paper entitled A 45nm Logic Technology with High-k+Metal Gate Transistors, Strained Silicon, 9 Cu Interconnect Layers, 193nm Dry Patterning, and 100% Pb-free Packaging - K. Mistry is the Manager of this technology node and the main presenter.
In it they mentioned:
Quote:
Many challenges with high-k integration have included VT pinning, mobility degradation due to soft optical phonons, and poor reliability [1-3]. Metal gate electrodes not only eliminate the poly depletion effect, but enable high-k dielectrics by screening the SO phonons that cause mobility degradation
Quote:
A key challenge was to simultaneously integrate high-k gate dielectrics, optimal workfunction metal gate electrodes and highly strained silicon channels. Transistors feature 160nm gate pitch, 35nm physical gate length, hafnium-based 1.0nm EOT high-k gate dielectric, dual workfunction metal gate electrodes, enhanced channel strain, ultra shallow junctions & nickel silicide.
Thats where we have the whooper figures from. If you compare Intels PMOS/NMOS IDSAT vs. IOFF curve, it's a huge increase from 65nm to 45nm. Gate leakage is reduced >25x for NMOS and 1000x for PMOS, and the IDSAT improvement figures reflect this positively.Quote:
Originally Posted by Transistor Performance
IBM/AMD's 45m SOI CMOS figures were first released at IEDM 2006, in the paper entitled High Performance 45-nm SOI Technology with Enhanced Strain, Porous Low-k BEOL, and Immersion Lithography
In it they mentioned:-
Later Fig. 14, shows the PMOS/NMOS IDSAT vs. IOFF curve showing IDSAT DC:Quote:
Originally Posted by Transistor Performance
PFET = 800uA/um @ IOFF 200nA/um
NFET = 1140uA/um @ IOFF 200nA/um
Then at the VLSI Symposium 2007, Rhiga Royal Hotel – Kyoto, Japan – June 14-16; IBM/AMD's latest figures were revealed but for 45nm HK/MG, in the paper entitled High-Performance High-k/Metal Gates for 45nm CMOS and Beyond with Gate-First Processing. Lead members from the 3 MFGS I know that attended and presented on topics were Jim Farrell (AMD), Stephen Kosonocky (IBM) and Vivek De (Intel).
In there was mentioned:-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Transistor Performance
If you check the figures, much data of NMOS and PMOS is given but the ION vs IOFF curve of PMOS is skipped altogether. ;)Quote:
By using an integration method that is consistent with traditional high thermal budget gate-first CMOS processing we have demonstrated improved short channel control with high-k/metal gate devices compared to SiON. The aggressive Tinv scaling enables Lgate scaling and results in the highest performing HK/MG nFET devices to-date for the 45nm technology and beyond. BE pFET HK/MG devices are shown with the lowest Tinv to-date providing a gate-first integration path for dual BE HK/MG CMOS technology implementation.
So yeah, these last figures shown by RW in Jan '08 are not 45nm data we're seeing for AMD's Shanghai, but they will be improvments on the first figures I quoted from IBM/AMD's 2006 45nm CMOS as shown above instead. But I'd expect you to know that :slapass:
The latest figures we know given by IBM/AMD were at IEDM 2007 in the paper (110) Channel, SiON Gate-Dielectric PMOS with Record High Ion=1 mA/um Through Channel Stress and Source Drain External Resistance (Rext) Engineering and I believe some newer figures are hinted in the paper SiGe Selective Epitaxy: Process Development for High Performance 45nm CMOS Technology but I can't get access to that paper yet, it was submitted at the ECS 2007 Conference though. :)
Been great... No updates or anything just holding still for alittle while. Enjoying cod 4 for a while :D is that price USD? So you can get ahold of the 9850s already?
I was gonna update the chipset drivers but changed my mine as my b-day is less then 1 month away and looking forward to some kinda upgrade.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KTE
is that good?i mean if i increase volt on pcie will it do any damamge on it? :confused:
UK: etailer claims Phenom 9850, 9750, 9550 all in stock!
http://www.awd-it.co.uk/scripts/prod...dCategory=1867
:D
No, not yet. Prices USD, I'm not sure, ones I mentioned were EU prices.Quote:
Originally Posted by jonspd
Prices in US are higher - around $260 ATM but I've just checked up, your stocks are delayed. Expect ETA for your stocks to be April 14th or thereby. :(
Is there a need to increase NB/PCIe volts?Quote:
Originally Posted by madfaze
You have no need to increase them. I did 1600 HT on my 5000+ BE and 14xx HT fully stable without even touching NB/HT volts. ;)
Yes, PCIe volts tend to degrade up your SATA HD and/or OS if you start increasing them like that.
Just to add. If you're after these CPUs (clock similar to 5000+ BE), then go into Google Shopping and copy/paste the embolded codes, then search:
Athlon X2 4850e+ G2, 45W 2500MHz ADH4850DOBOX
Athlon X2 4450e+ G2, 45W 2300MHz ADH4450DOBOX
Athlon X2 4050e+ G2, 45W 2100MHz ADH4050DOBOX
ETA is any time in the next 7 days in most places. I would wait till 8th and then start checking just like for B3 Phenoms. They are very cheap, cheaper than any 65nm X2 CPU out yet. 4850e 2.5G 45W is 33% price of E6750 2.67G 65W here.
yeah, ive been getting that since yesterday, im using avast btw. i risked it on another pc ansd currently running a virus scan...Quote:
Has anyone tried visiting MSI Taiwan (Q&A) and been given a Virus attack caution by your AV? I can't get in to check their responses because of my AV stopping the link connection saying it's linked to downloading a Virus. I'm not going to risk it frankly.
---update---
< finished the virus scan, and it found a virus in my c drive matching the description from the alert that we are getting from the msi site,..anyone knows an email address where we can report this to?>
------------------
Anyway, another chapter in the k9a2 NB multiplier saga...just when i'm about to give up on this mobo...
Dear Sir/Madam,
Yes,because it is very inconvenient for user overclocking.If you adjust Northbridge multiplier improperly,the system will hang.But I have a good news for you,BIOS engineer tell me that they will consider re-adding the item in the BIOS code today.They will try to solve the instability issue while adding the item,please wait patiently.If this BIOS is released,I will contact you ASAP.
Sorry for any inconvenience to you.
Have a good day.
Thanks and Best wishes
MSI Technical Support Team
Posted: Apr 03, 2008 by MSI
Thanks for testing it. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by bgbdbstrd
Yep, I had Avast too and the virus they knew about and have cleaned up now [check again] ;)
Avast! should easily pick up and clear that virus.
As I mentioned, MSI are adding NB Multi option back in there.. they just need to work around the bugs that come along with it [many].
So for you guys who've been asking for it: you'll have to play, test and debug it and then give them appropriate feedback because otherwise they will just remove it again if you don't and if it just creates them more hassle. Remember what I just said, it's important. :yepp:
Phenom 9850, 9750, 9550 are in stock here too confirmed: http://www.tekheads.co.uk/s/search?a...ment=&sortBy=1
;)
Morning Tye;) Let me ask you is there any advantage of running a 4GB Ram Kit in Vista with this Phenom? Anything thats noticeable with the OS running smoother or anything else for that matter?
Depends what you're doing Cam... normal usage (not graphics/media/game/memory heavy) you'll just be wasting the extra RAM as more RAM is slower and harder to oc than less RAM. It's also harder on the IMC ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Brother Esau
Can someone advise me if thee's any better OC BIOS than 113 yet please?
I'm in need of one right now...
Thanks Tye and wheres that Blue Bow tie I sent for your User Title @:doh: :sofa:
P0J is good for everything except NB/IMC, the TLB disable fix works properly as well. Very stable auto voltage settings with the bios too. Still doing 2.6ghz with C&Q enable on my 9600be. But, if you're getting a b3 phenom 9850 or something, I'd go with official bios 1.2, same settings and everything as 1.1b3 but only issue I had was the TLB fix, otherwise I went to 2.7ghz stable with that, not to mention that one still has nb/imc states settings. Granted as far as a b3 phenom goes you'd almost have to retest any of the beta bios's that still had all the settings you wanted.Quote:
Originally Posted by KTE
Thanks Mathos, that's what I have. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Mathos
Np... blue bow tie?Quote:
Originally Posted by Brother Esau
Oh that one! Well... you know.... threw it in the bin where it belonged :p: :D
Don't you know I dress shirtless? :cool:
geil Esoteria 4GB kit is perfectly fine with this setup, and 1.2 and Vista 64bit play very well with my 3600X2. Still no OC yet, as I'm reinstalling all programs, but at least this combo is stable.
I can't get those kits here (i.e. not in this country) or I'd test 'em out for ya Kayin. :(
Guys, I have no idea why but Phenom 9850/9750/9550 are dropping in price very quickly already. There's been further price drops and you can pick it up cheaper today around Europe. :shrug:
Prices are pretty good now actually.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KTE
Just a guess:
Maybe cause Intels:Q9300@9450 (oem) are in stock now,at my local shop anyway:rolleyes:
http://www.ncix.com/products/index.p...l&promoid=1060
I left a 50 cdn deposit for the MSI K9A2:) and the B3's Phenoms should be here on the 7th, until then Tony's record
will hold:D
KTE You should try the A7376ACI.103 if you got the time, PCIe frequency adjustable in bios, correct TBL fix on the 4 cores, OCed fine the 9600, no NB multi :( , but was stable to the point that I sold the system to a old time friend. I didn't tested with my 9500, overall was a good bios.
My preferred bios was P0D, good loving I got from that one, with the help of RW-Everything.
The technology game is funny in how it works:-Quote:
Originally Posted by SocketMan
Sometimes US gets it all while no one else does (Wolfdale/Yorkfield/Skulltrail)
At other times EU gets it all while no one else does
Yet other times, Asia gets it all while no one else does
And yet other times where two of them may get them all whilst no one else does.
All being cheaper price and early ample availability. :D
For Phenom B2, US/CAN had it all, EU was late and higher priced.
But for Phenom B3, the exact reverse has happened. Our supply is ample with good price already but I personally know US supply will not be much until 14-18 April, like this.
Some NA area's will start rolling with supply on 8th April though.
Good luck with your setup. You would already know that I'm not bothered about speed contests ;)
Thanks, I'll give it a try ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by aGeoM
Before you ask, this is mine=>
http://picsorban.com/upload/dsc02148.png
AMD Beef Cake:rofl: now you need to wear the Bow Tie for sure:DQuote:
Originally Posted by KTE
Nice one KTE! :)
I wants it.....my prrrreciouss tricksy hobits'sQuote:
Originally Posted by KTE
Unfortunately I gotta wait for my tax return for that, either that or that supposed $600 rebate check. May end up selling the 9600BE on Ebay to see if I can recover some of that money, at least I can guarantee that I could get it to run 2.6ghz by 2.4ghz so that might make someone happy that didn't care about the TLB stuff.
Nice... real nice... hey... man... comeback..., don't be afraid, we will not hurt you... I know... I know poor Tony... :rofl:
:up:
sweet... :up: