Printable View
Probably the amount of L3 cache it has. My 9850, 9500, and Opty 1356 all have AA as the two letters, meaning first revision. But if AC is the second revision, why didn't they use AB? And my sempron doesn't have it so it has to be L3.
9500 - CAAZB AA 0743EPMW
9850 - JAAFB AA 0811CPFW
1356 - JAAMB AA 0816BPMW
oh, if agena also has those then being related to l3 also makes sense to me
edit:
if all agenas are AA the second letter could mean the amount:
A: 2MB
B: 4MB (Phenom 8xx)
C: 6MB
Amount of cache is already included in the 1st row...
Back then L3 cache was non existent, So the first row was for non L3 cache. To avoid confusion they likely just added more letters for L3 cache.Quote:
Originally Posted by largon
Amount of L2 is already among the 1st row so it only makes sense there's a letter for L3 in there too. And, CPUs with L3 have 1 letter more in 1st row than those without any L3.
I have two Opteron quad ES's (B0 Barcelonas). The are both FAAHB GA 0720SPBW's. I haven't tried these yet, but should I expect some kind of weird cache amount?;)
so in the first 5 digit code on the 4th and 5th numbers which are CV on the chip what exactly does it mean? i know you say it is memory controller related but what if it is different? what would the differences be?
I think only AMD would truly know that and it's up to us to figure it out.Quote:
Originally Posted by roofsniper
Fx chips for instance tended to clock ram really well 1/1 and had a very strong MMC except when put under phase.
It's likely a way they bin or ID chips
Via process of elimination we determined BH chips scaled very well with cold. I doubt they did it on purpose, whatever they did was likely a side effect.
The current CV chips appear to have decent HT capabilities, curiosity makes me wonder how well it clocks ram above 1066 and how tight you can maintain timings.....
As more batches come out you will likely see that CODE change and then differences will be more apparrent.
It rarely effects actual clock speed however, week and batch are better indicators of that.
Without the chips cold bugging it may become much harder to factor in a difference as well.
It also might be a moot point because back then all we were really doing was searching for a way around the coldbug....
I do see chips pulling extreme cold, I'd like to see some of these cold chips + xtreme bandwidth and ram clocks to see if its completely gone.
so if your 4th number is different is there any specific that would be different? like different speeds or something?
ON a side note isn't it kind of funny that with the addition of an MMC on intel chips they all of a sudden ran into a coldbug as well ;)
possibly might be both numbers different, I would suspect that there would be subtle differences but like I said it will be much harder to tell and the database will have to be immense to draw any conclusions if the coldbug is completely gone.Quote:
Originally Posted by roofsniper
Put simply lest say we had about 1000 CV chips. Not all chips are equal and they all clock differently....
Say we have another 1000 chips and say we call them CW, These are also not all equal and clock differntly...
Now under cold the CV chips consistently cant get over 1100 memory frequency although there is an aoccasional 1 or 2 that can
Now under cold the CW chips are pulling 1200 memory frequency consistently although there is an occasional 1 or 2 that can't
It would be safe to assume that CW has a better memory controller while cold...
On a side note the cpu's would be indentically specced if thats what your asking.
In order to do a proper database there has to be a set of strict guidlines as well, also there are alot of other contingencies , motherboard, people who have no clue what they are doing, usually though once you get a large number of submissions the averages tend to show regardless. Also multiple databases help, like 32mb stable submissions, then a cpu z , then a prime stable 24 hours. PI 1 MB fastest times database with ram clocks showing.....all these will eventually show a steppings true colors.
just wondering cause i got my cpu today directly from amd and it was just off the production line about 3 days ago. so a few things are different.
Post up a pic. I'm curious. thats if you wont get in trouble.Quote:
Originally Posted by roofsniper
yea im not sure its an ES so..... ill pop it in this weekend. right now im running all the benchies i can for my 9600. thinking about doing a little mini review between both of them at stock.Quote:
Originally Posted by chew*
IF it says ES somewhere on the chip its an ES or it could be a chip not destined for retail channels like thisQuote:
Originally Posted by roofsniper
AACVC AC 0902 BPMW
The first letter would ID that.
A being not likely retail
C being retail.
yea the first one is an A and i know for a fact its an ES.
Yep I wouldn't post it then someone might get in trouble.Quote:
Originally Posted by roofsniper
If you grey out the "picture ID"-thing, and the last 4 digits of the S/N no-one will get in trouble;)Quote:
Originally Posted by chew*
PS: testing a Phenom 9900 ES now:p:
Deneb with CS instead of CV:
I'm not sure, but I think a friend has another chip from the same week but with CV.
Come on.
"ES" doesn't mean the chip is some secret. Unless the source said you can't post it on the internet then you can do whatever you want with it.
Fire that ES up:)
Imo all 940s with 0847 to 0841 are early sample pre-retail cpu.
My 0849 seems to max @ 4.1ish Ghz with air. I guess its time to freeze it.
Mine does 3825 on air with 1.55V real (I was afraid to give it more on air)
4825 on cascade with 1.63V real (no scaling with more voltage)
5725 on LN2 with 1.89V real (no scaling with more voltage)
Sick Dumo...I missed ya! :p:Quote:
Originally Posted by Dumo
o rly? LOL, and now AMD seems to have fixed theirs :rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by chew*
Another small victory for AMD I guess you could say :p:
I thought Intel CPUs were coldbugged since Conroe :shrug: