new AMD Overdrive video's on youtube

Printable View

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

11-16-2007, 10:03 PM
rogueagent6

Look closer, both are 2005. Besides, do you really think Macci would be so stupid as to put his reputation on the line doing something like that?

You all need to put the pipe down and step back. :rolleyes:
11-16-2007, 10:29 PM
dinos22

man my eyes suck i can't tell which versions they are
gotta give the man benefit of the doubt heh

actually when it races through the bench it looks like '05 for both ;) :)
11-16-2007, 10:30 PM
Zytek_Fan

Quote:

Originally Posted by dinos22

man my eyes suck i can't tell which versions they are
gotta give the man benefit of the doubt heh

actually when it races through the bench it looks like '05 for both ;) :)

Yeah I noticed that the second time I watched it.
11-16-2007, 11:12 PM
macci

Yea its 05 for both runs (of course!) =)

Quote:

theres no way thats 05. 20k 05 with a 3ghz phenom and 3870 crossfire?

I dont think the CPU clock was visible in the 20k run... But feel free to check the ORB for 20k scores, the lowest CPU MHz to break 20k is 3150MHz right now (not saying it could not be done with lower clocks but that should give an idea about the requirements for 20k).
11-16-2007, 11:14 PM
VulgarHandle

that is a serious stretch to think they run 2 different 3dmark's...

also, that's almost a 50% score jump an unknown overclock that was done using the auto-overclock feature of Overdrive

makes you wonder what the overclock was ;)
11-16-2007, 11:51 PM
Gautam

Very exciting application!

I'm surprised you ever tested for stability, who does that? :cool:
11-17-2007, 12:02 AM
saaya

good to see macci again, but damn, who made that videoclip? it really sucks, :P
the only good parts are when macci is talking and using the tool, all the "somewhere in a secret lab" and the car tuning stuff was painfull :lol:

about the tool, great looks, couldnt be better, great featureset, could hardly be better, the benchmark and stability test is great too... but the tool is slow and buggy... it should reset all msr values when you reboot which it doesnt, this is not only annoying but could be dangerous too.
if it would work faster and only load the different parts of code once you click on the tab of the bench or stability test for example, i think it would be faster and better to work with.
11-17-2007, 12:06 AM
Zytek_Fan

Quote:

Originally Posted by macci

Yea its 05 for both runs (of course!) =)

I dont think the CPU clock was visible in the 20k run... But feel free to check the ORB for 20k scores, the lowest CPU MHz to break 20k is 3150MHz right now (not saying it could not be done with lower clocks but that should give an idea about the requirements for 20k).

The CPU clock showed 3010mhz I think....
11-17-2007, 06:09 AM
n!Cola

http://thumbnails2.imagebam.com/91/b51e44905615.gif

Heh some old style bench from it :)
Yep can't do nothing in it , all i can is use system stability, general info on hardware and this benchmark.
Nice tool.
11-17-2007, 08:16 AM
Start

This app should be nice. It allows independent core clocking, so if you have one dud core, you can probably scale the other chips higher. So this should take out the equation of having to overclock 4 really good cores at one. But I do wonder if this will cause issues in programs where you have 4 cores running a different clock frequency on a a heavy multithreaded application.
11-17-2007, 09:32 AM
kiwi

Can I run that stability tester on my Intel system :p:
11-17-2007, 10:10 AM
Start

Quote:

Originally Posted by kiwi

Can I run that stability tester on my Intel system :p:

if(CPU == Intel)
format drive:c

:D
11-17-2007, 10:27 AM
Solarfall

damn that application looks dead handy..
11-17-2007, 10:47 AM
Shintai

Quote:

Originally Posted by SP33DFR34K

This app should be nice. It allows independent core clocking, so if you have one dud core, you can probably scale the other chips higher. So this should take out the equation of having to overclock 4 really good cores at one. But I do wonder if this will cause issues in programs where you have 4 cores running a different clock frequency on a a heavy multithreaded application.

You would get a performance rollercoaster in games when Windows changes the core a thread runs on now and then.

But ye, stability is a whole other issue aswell for any software timings.
11-17-2007, 10:53 AM
RPGWiZaRD

Quote:

Originally Posted by SP33DFR34K

if(CPU == Intel)
format drive:c

:D

if (CPU == Intel)
return theBombHasBeenPlanted;

:D
11-17-2007, 11:01 AM
DoubleZero

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shintai

You would get a performance rollercoaster in games when Windows changes the core a thread runs on now and then.

But ye, stability is a whole other issue aswell for any software timings.

There's a thing called CPU affinity... not that you didn't know, you just played dumb because of your agenda... the same agenda that lets you see the future and conclude that it will be a "performance rollercoaster".
11-17-2007, 11:16 AM
Shintai

Quote:

Originally Posted by DoubleZero

There's a thing called CPU affinity... not that you didn't know, you just played dumb because of your agenda... the same agenda that lets you see the future and conclude that it will be a "performance rollercoaster".

And with CPU affinity...how do you run your multithreaded games again? By deselcting cores for...less overall performance? Also you cant control any spawned childprocesses in a game.

Perhaps you should do soem REALLY BASIC RESEARCH before spreeing out BS.

And currently I have been right, and you have been blatently wrong. So history aint exactly helping you there either.
11-17-2007, 11:18 AM
mascaras

Quote:

Originally Posted by Warboy

i want.....that....tool.....

Quote:

AMD Overdrive 2.10

The AMD OverDrive™ utility provides high-end users the ability to maximize the capability, flexibility, and adjustability of the platforms utilizing AMD processors, sockets, and chipsets. Hardware parameters may be controlled manually, or allow AMD OverDrive to automatically tune the system. Stability tests can be performed, once a system is modified, to verify the system and conduct a performance test to measure the impact of the modification.

supports the following chipsets only:

RS740(770)

RS780(780)

RD790(790X & 790FX)

Download>> http://www.techpowerup.com/downloads...rive_2.10.html

:up:
11-17-2007, 11:59 AM
Start

I don't have enough background in multithreading yet, but it should be an issue of concern. Something tells me that in heavy multithreading application, the slower core will bottleneck the other cores.
11-17-2007, 04:26 PM
justapost

Thanks for the clip, did you realize they used and Phenom FX (1:17min).
Seems they release an FX for AM2 and Socket F.

Other "source"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1p-Vi...eature=related

But what fun is overclocking with a tool like this. :shrug:

EDIT: Also not so cool if everyone runs his machine on an unacceptable speed vs. energy consumption level.

As i just crippled my AM2 mobo Asus (M2A-VM HDMI) with my first oc approches i preordered the low budget Asus M3A
for 66€. Hope a 9500 will ab available for ~200€ in Q1 08.
11-17-2007, 04:59 PM
tictac

waiting for macci LN2 run... :D
11-17-2007, 05:10 PM
informal

Quote:

Originally Posted by SP33DFR34K

I don't have enough background in multithreading yet, but it should be an issue of concern. Something tells me that in heavy multithreading application, the slower core will bottleneck the other cores.

The best and most simple way to "calculate" the speedup from variable core OCs is to take the arithmetic mean of all frequencies of the cores.Yeah,it sounds simple and "dumb",but that's closest you will get when calculating the OC result in some multicore aware app.In monothread app. it depends on which core you run it,so you can bind it to the fastest core/OC and that way you will insure the best performance.
From available data,K10's perf. seems to be somewhat limited by ram bandwidth and Northbridge(L3) clock as well.The L3 runs at measly 1600Mhz/1800Mhz and we should see some decent OCs on L3 with retail Phenoms.I think tictac posted the way how ram speed is calculated and how Northbridge speed is calculated.
11-17-2007, 05:20 PM
Shintai

Quote:

Originally Posted by informal

The best and most simple way to "calculate" the speedup from variable core OCs is to take the arithmetic mean of all frequencies of the cores.Yeah,it sounds simple and "dumb",but that's closest you will get when calculating the OC result in some multicore aware app.In monothread app. it depends on which core you run it,so you can bind it to the fastest core/OC and that way you will insure the best performance.
From available data,K10's perf. seems to be somewhat limited by ram bandwidth and Northbridge(L3) clock as well.The L3 runs at measly 1600Mhz/1800Mhz and we should see some decent OCs on L3 with retail Phenoms.I think tictac posted the way how ram speed is calculated and how Northbridge speed is calculated.

You cant actually calculate it so easily. It also depends how much serialized code is being run. And how the multithreading is done.

If we very roughly say Core0 and 1 is 2Ghz, Core2 and 3 is 3GHz. Then 3 bad rough examples could be:

1. When you game and Windows flips the main thread from core to core now and then. Then you could have 20FPS one minute and 30FPS the other.
2. Say you render, and the render hard assign (in code) affinity in 4 spawned subthreads. Then you would have 2 fast renderings and 2 slow. Still waiting for the slow.
3. Running programs that still do software timings like mentalray etc. Then it would basicly just mess up to say it mildly. But it already does with CnQ or speedstep anyway.

However for something like WCG/Folding etc it would give a permant speedboost.
11-18-2007, 02:22 AM
saaya

shintai, thats why every core has its own counter ;)
none of the things your worried about can happen afaik, except for some threads on some cores running faster than others, but if a game or app is programmed well itll know this from the counters and clockspeed.
11-18-2007, 04:41 AM
DoubleZero

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shintai

And with CPU affinity...how do you run your multithreaded games again? By deselcting cores for...less overall performance? Also you cant control any spawned childprocesses in a game.

Perhaps you should do soem REALLY BASIC RESEARCH before spreeing out BS.

And currently I have been right, and you have been blatently wrong. So history aint exactly helping you there either.

It's this a joke or are you being serious? lol

The point of overclocking just one core or two, is to get max performance for games\apps that don't use more then, guess what, one or two... lol
No one is going to have a core at 3.2ghz and the others at 2.0ghz to play games that use 4 cores, or would use that stupid scenario to
criticize this independent core overclocking feature...

And i don't even remember that i ever been wrong and you right, let alone lately... you're a joke.

Quote:

we very roughly say Core0 and 1 is 2Ghz, Core2 and 3 is 3GHz. Then 3 bad rough examples could be:

1. When you game and Windows flips the main thread from core to core now and then. Then you could have 20FPS one minute and 30FPS the other.

So playing a game and never going over the 20fps the 2.0ghz would give you it's better how?

Quote:

2. Say you render, and the render hard assign (in code) affinity in 4 spawned subthreads. Then you would have 2 fast renderings and 2 slow. Still waiting for the slow.

And this is bad how? With all the cores at the same speed wouldn't you still have to wait for the "slowest"? lol

Quote:

3. Running programs that still do software timings like mentalray etc. Then it would basicly just mess up to say it mildly. But it already does with CnQ or speedstep anyway.

Meh

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page