Yes, 1.7v max: http://www.amdzone.com/pics/motherbo...39/cpuvolt.JPG
Printable View
Yes, 1.7v max: http://www.amdzone.com/pics/motherbo...39/cpuvolt.JPG
yes but in full you'll have 1,8v about.
I think with a good FX53 and your LS , it will be enough to have more than 2900mhz stable.
Not using an LS but I get similar performance (-40 to -50C).
well now,
i think i should go with an ams 939 3500+ and modding a board is not problem so maybe i will buy the giga or waite for the dfi.
i think the last way best one. so how long must i wait for the dfi relese.
is the performance realy good or not?
and how i have to overlock the 939 i have no experience with clocking a 64 bit system.
i have a psu 3.3v mod is it killing board? i can go there upto 3,9v -4,0.
so the rammvoltage is enough there.
and whats are the maximum temps and voltage (vdimm,vcore, and so on)
for this cpu
please help !!
thx a lot
It's a waste of money to get S939 with a Newcastle core CPU like the 3500+ and 3800+. If you are buying a 3500+ that means money is an issue. S939 is not cost effective unless you get the good CPU, and there's only one. You plan to vmod which means performance is important to you. So with those two things (limited funds + need for speed) the S754 is the better choice.
well theres a lot of speculation on dying cpu's, from what i've really seen its 98% down to shuttles, and the rest i'd hazzard a guess being bad boards rather than anything else.
THere are multiple stories of people running high 3.3v lines 24/7(not 2.9/4v high though, seen a few peeps at 3.6/3.7v), and not having issues. I've run ram in a few rigs at 3.4v/3,5 for quite a while and had no issues. AS for vcore, i dunno tbh, running 1.85v for months saw no issue for me and a few chips, other people have done quite a bit more i think.
My bet would be teh dfi board would be best, andlike me the gigabyte probo the best board for now till then, probo late august by teh sounds of things.
My ath's have done a lot of clocking up to 1.75/1.8v, both the k8n pro's i had with decent psu's over-volted to about 1.78v max, but at odd settings, like 1.55v or something gave me that, higher gave me 1.5v.
AS for my asus, i can check, somewhere i'm sure, shipping bios. Like i said, maybe its not locked, but thats never ever stopped me before, adn with locked boards i rarely go with 66Mhz anyway.
personally, with the way things are right now with ath 64's, i'd stick to a much lower 3.3v line, 3.5/6 max, probably try stock first and see how ya go.
Drunkenmaster,
With all due respect, you're full of crap!:slapass:
and your backing that up with the constant threads of ath 64's dying since people stopped messing with shuttles (assuming thats what you're saying i'm full of crap about).
storm pc, the 939 is a £230 chip it (if you actually know what you're talking about) is faster than a 3400+ newcastle. ITs VASTLY cheaper than a s754 3700+ and performs similarly. What exactly is your point, if you care about money you'll by a s754 as its your only choice?
3400+ in uk is £200, 3500+ £230 and quite a bit faster in dual channel.
3700+ is, lets see £430-480 here depending on shop, so its not cost effective to get s £30 more expensive chip for a faster chip.
well i don´t know what to do one say 754 othe r 939 hmm but in thought the 754 is kliied by amd and the 3700+ will be the last one.
so i wait for the dfi boards and then i ask you again
thx
to me when you are talking (checking exclaibur pc)
$839 for a fx 53 and $680 for a 3800+, which judging by uk would make a 3700+ about $680, with a 3500+ at $350 maybe? they don't have it in that store.
The diff between teh 3700+ and fx53 is just $150, to me, at that price point, that makes the 3700+ completely pointless. So to me the chioce becomes, can i afford $800, then the fx 53, if i can't the $350 3500+ or $303 for the slower 3400+.
TO me again that makes the choice 3500+ or fx53. The 3800/3700+ are just at a stupid price point that makes them too close to the fx 53.
You had me going there for a second. I almost believed that you had an A8V...lol.
You're lucky I'm not a mod here. I'd ban you a$$ in a heartbeat.
Why do you want to mislead this poor guy? He comes here looking for help and you feed him BS. Congrats!
storm please get over yourself, i do have an a8v, what exactly makes you think i don't, the fact that you couldn't get it working as well? boo hoo. check the "lock working or not" thread, think i put my serial number down in there, and other threads where i've helped people.
or have you just realised the small difference between your 3700+ and a fx53 i price?
ps, if you banned me as a mod, a quick few photo's of my board to any other mod would see you removed as a mod.
Ps lilgator, your 2nd last post gave me a headache :p
cough
http://abydos.wazco.org/biteme.JPG
ps, before you go on about wanting to see 3d marks, it was just to prove you're wrong. I haven't been bothered benching till i get a board that can do more v-mem as with my bh-5 i can't get any decent mem clocks to bother benching hard.
Yes the 3500+ is faster than the 3400+ newcastle BUT its not similar in performance to the 3700+. Also the 3700 is not $680...its $535.00 for a retail chip (at Newegg).Quote:
Originally posted by drunkenmaster
storm pc, the 939 is a £230 chip it (if you actually know what you're talking about) is faster than a 3400+ newcastle. ITs VASTLY cheaper than a s754 3700+ and performs similarly.
I do not agree with you that the 3400 is slower especially if you get the better performing clawhammer. Mainly because in alot of apps the DC does not outperform the extra cache on the 3400 CH. Also you would be saving 50 pounds (from the 3 stores I have looked at, maybe different from where you live) which could go towards the mobo or other part of the system. Also socket 754 is proven to get very good fsb and have very fast boards. Whereas 939pin do not seem to have that (I am not saying in any way an fx is slower on the same boards of course because that has both DC and the cahce too). It seems quite plain to me that the 3500 is a slower version of the 3400 (also 3800 is slower version of the 3700) because of the Dc vs what has proven to be the faster option of more cahce, which AMD did not really account for as you can see in there rating system. Its like a celeron with DC vs a p4 using single channel.....the p4 would win (even same clock speeds).Quote:
Originally posted by drunkenmaster
if i can't the $350 3500+ or $303 for the slower 3400+.
Yes agree....but who want a newcastle anyway when they can have a clawhammer?....no one.Quote:
Originally posted by Frank E. BoNeS
Yes the 3500+ is faster than the 3400+ newcastle BUT its not similar in performance to the 3700+. Also the 3700 is not $680...its $535.00 for a retail chip (at Newegg).
yes, at stock a 3700+ is "marginally" faster, as every review showed a 3500+ is faster than 3400+ in most situations, at the same clock, the 3700+ is a faster clock, but only at default. AS with most higher end chips they are very similar and i'd say if you took 10 of each chip you'd get the same average overclock. If i get teh 3500+ to same overclocked speed as teh 3700+ the 3500+ wins. From what i've seen i see no proof the 3700+ clocks further.
I'm not from us, i happened to be on exclaibur webby, if its cheaper its cheaper, when storm brought his it wasn't that cheap though :p
there are pretty damned few clawhammer 3400+'s about(checking uk) and afaik officially they aren't being made anymore at all.
The few 3200+ claw's i've seen left in uk carry a bigger price tag than the newcastle version.
(ps i'm assuming storm brought the 3700+ before recent price cuts, which apparently according to news sites increase price to fx53? i haven't seen its price rise though).
In most reviews i've seen only in a coupel of apps did the 3400+ beat the 3500+ and it was extremely marginal.
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets...px?i=2065&p=15
clock for clock i can't find anything in my own testing, or anywhere else that disproves that general performance trend, clock for clock 939 is better, that against a 1mb 3400+, MOST none 3700+ are now 512kb cache. i can't find many 3400+ 1meg i stock in uk, and agian, as far as i've heard there won't be many. even if they kept making them, they aren't as fast. This is on brand new out boards not boards that have been out for 8 months or so as with teh 754 boards. Tbh i think you rarely get much diff between a new board and new revisions when it comes to stock performance, but other people say different.
If you wanted to buy a clawhammer 3400 you would have to buy it from a small retailer. For example aria.co.uk has alot in stock.
http://www.aria.co.uk/ProductInfoComm.asp?ID=10039
Not bad for 200 pounds eh
Drunkenmaster:
Just keep digging that hole deeper, eh?:ROTF:
"Drunkenmaster"...how appropriate.:rolleyes:
Sorry i do not know what you mean Storm :confused:Quote:
Originally posted by StormPC
Just keep digging that hole deeper, eh?:ROTF:
"Drunkenmaster"...how appropriate.:rolleyes:
I own a ASUS that OCs well but not earth shattering.
wait and see what DFI has to offer.
if speculation is correct then production mobos should have more features than the ASUS. 1. higher than 300 HTT , 2. more than stock 2.8v , 3. possibly tighter dividers 4. more CPU voltage.
all worth waiting another 3 weeks until a DFI 939 mobo will be out.
on the 754 thing Storm is right the clawhammer is a strong chip but the 3500+ is damn fast and being a 939 pin gives you future upgrades to even faster chips. Not too many FX CPUs are going to fit into a 754 socket ;)
Well I must have the only other A8V that rocks. If you want 3d benchies they are in my sig. If you can get a A8V with working locks and paired with the right memory the boards are as stable as they come. My 24/7 clocks are 257x11.5+=2.952 and that is rock stable in every game I throw at it.Quote:
Originally posted by StormPC
Well I guess Drunkenmaster is the one chosen by God to get the only "working" A8V on the planet. The rest of us were not so lucky. And what BIOS are you using???
Let's see some 3D benches buddy, but lay off the sauce while your doing it!
stormpc, do you want to link to any reviews that show the 3400+ 1mb is faster than the 3500+? feel free to share.
Was that not enough proof that i have a a8v, or am i still a liar. AS for 3400+, yes, i said there are some in stock, but so what a 3500+ is faster and £30 more. Also, due to the dual channel nature, as you ram up clock speed the bandwidth gap increases so i'd expect it to get further ahead. I'm not saying it kills on performance, but its a better longer laster, faster platform.
Also digging whole deeper? you're great idea is to speed another $200 on a 3700+ that clock for clock, every review says is slower. woohoo for you.
if you read the reviews, cache makes slightly less diff on a ath 64 than a p4, due to the much shorter pipeline, cache is crucially important on a P4, and reviews clearly show not so much on ath 64.
This is the same as when teh 3200 and 3000+ came out same clock and people were quite surprised that the difference was so small. There, but much less than people thought.
Another thing, dab's often stock 50 odd cpu's in teh high end, and 1000's in the lower end and have 9 ath 3400+ 1meg's left, aria rarely stock more than 5 of anything at that price, plenty means more than 5 less than 10 ;)
THere are very few left, again the 3500+ IS faster than the 3400+ 1mb, there is proof on any site you look at. The 3400+ 1mb is rare and dwindling, the 3400+ 512kb will be further behind.