yup, because boxed cooler couldn't handle heat at 2.7ghz also i have ace in my hands... using normal thermal paste between cpu and block... i have some liquid metal pads here should be few degrees lower temps then :PQuote:
Originally Posted by KTE
Printable View
yup, because boxed cooler couldn't handle heat at 2.7ghz also i have ace in my hands... using normal thermal paste between cpu and block... i have some liquid metal pads here should be few degrees lower temps then :PQuote:
Originally Posted by KTE
That means there's a bad current leakage problem at ~1.4V.
For a 2.2GHz 1.23V 95W TDP chip, the power needed to be dissipated at 2.7GHz 1.44V is 160W providing core current supply is kept constant. So no wonder you need liquid. ;)
K10 MCT seems quite limited which outlines another problem with having an IMC that's 1066 constrained. If you didn't already know, my RAM does 675 5-5-5-15 PL5 with 2.3V (benched) and 600 4-4-4-4 PL5 at 2.2V (32M) on P35 easy, but on Phenom/790FX, they fail and reboot at 562 5-5-5-15 all timings high and relaxed at 2.2V or 2.3V. Heck even my bad ProMOS IC's (Corsair PC6400) did 645 5-5-5-18 at 2.35V! So this is quite damn low for oc'ing. And nevermind "extreme", 2.2/2.3V is more like stock.
I'm linking two very good files for Phenom overclocking to the first post in this thread here
/One is the new improved Prime95 25.6 for torture testing, power measurements and for testing which core is stronger (it is still beta, but so are most good things :D)
/The other is K10Calc by lukija (A64Info developer). It is very simple yet allows you to input simple BIOS OC values to show you the CPU/HT/NB speed in different combinations.
Prime95 25.6 looks like this (my recent 2.3GHz CPU, 2GHz NB, 2GHz HT, 1066 RAM 35 minute stress test) ->
http://img217.imageshack.us/img217/7...loadth9.th.png
And K10Calc looks like this (values placed in there correspond to Phenom 9500 stock settings) ->
http://img217.imageshack.us/img217/5042/k10cjv6.png
The first (worst case) value is calculated. But after Dram training it get's optimized by a training method similar to memtest.Quote:
Originally Posted by KTE
The value diminishes as long as the patterns are read correct.
This training leads to different results (+-1ns) after each boot. The value also is smaller if i apply more volts to the ram.
That's why i mentioned it in the first place. ;)
I wonder what other (L3 related) latencies are configured in a similar way.
Well choosen labels.Quote:
Originally Posted by KTE
How do you calculate this?Quote:
Originally Posted by KTE
Another question: What is the max ref HT you can boot with with an 9xnb multi?
KTE - thanks for the K10Calc link. Looks like a nifty
little utility :)
EBL
Test with DQS Drive Strength enabled settings, it helps in the same way here. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by justapost
By using the common formula which cooling product makers use to calculate chip power dissipation and cooling ratings. Same with whats used to build phase change units and so on although most common people don't know of it. Take my example.Quote:
How do you calculate this?
Phenom 9500 95W TDP chip has 18.9A per core @ 1.232V = 93W
Using 95W as reference stock chip power, say I oc'd to 2.5GHz at 1.4V:
95 x (2500/2200) x (1.4²/1.232²)
139.4W power
Code:Pn = Pt x (vn/vt) x (Un²/Ut²)
TDP - thermal design point (Pt = Power [W])
Default Voltage (Ut = Voltage [V])
Default Frequency (νt = Frequency [MHz])
Overclocked Voltage (Un = [V])
Overclocked Frequency (vn = [V])
212MHz :(Quote:
Another question: What is the max ref HT you can boot with with an 9xnb multi?
I'll test more later with a better BIOS (flashing back to older ones without errata patch).
No such bios option here :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by KTE
Thx.Quote:
Originally Posted by KTE
Is that the maximum with the Be9600 or also with an 9500?Quote:
Originally Posted by KTE
CAAWB AA 0748dpgw
thats what week chip I got all my parts are here waiting on a smp unit to finish so I can switch my mobo and stuff out of my main into my secondary.
edit do you care if I post my results KTE?
Check in AOD. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by justapost
9500 was 268 HT ref. max bootup, 270 HT ref. max with AOD and 265 HT ref maximum at 10x multi stable.Quote:
Is that the maximum with the Be9600 or also with an 9500?
The BIOS I'm testing is "not so good" so things are a little iffy. For instance I cannot know if its my RAM making it reboot, my NB or just the CPU (RAM/NB cannot go lower than stock 1066 and 9x with this BIOS)
9600BE;
Max so far booted at low HT/CPU multi is 220HT ref. (9x NB multi though)
Max so far booted at stock CPU/NB/HT multi is 206HT ref. (more does not boot fully) :(
Any more than 220 HT ref. through AOD will freeze/reboot the system (regardless of volts/vid/multi). There definitely seems a limit, I'm not kidding when I say these look like the reject 9900. This one does not go above 2530MHz, from fully stable at >1.25VID 1.32V to instantly totally unstable at <1.5VID 1.48V. This one also hates above 12.5x multi, no boot and instant reboot with AOD.
Max fully stable so far is this: http://valid.x86-secret.com/show_oc.php?id=296574
CPU: 2530MHz
NB: 2200MHz
HT: 2200MHz
RAM: 587MHz 5-5-5-15 2T
HT ref: 220MHz
I'm going to run the stability test of that for longer overnight before screening. 1hr passed quite easily at CPU 1.25VID 1.34V.
This is the second one I had fully stable: CPU 2415MHz, NB/HT 2100MHz, RAM 560MHz 5-5-5-15:
http://img85.imageshack.us/img85/753...r30mqe1.th.png
Do I care? Yes, I do. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by jonspd
Now... quickly post them. :D
(although try keeping them small in size)
You have the same step BE as mine.
Found it. :cool:Quote:
Originally Posted by KTE
Running a stability test with 220MHz * 10,5 over night, so i'll try tomorrow.
Puh, now 212MHz with the 9500 whould have shocked me.Quote:
Originally Posted by KTE
BE9600 is at least good for NB tweaking, will be interesting to see how far you can push it.Quote:
Originally Posted by KTE
I'm still undecided which board i should choose.
Id prefere the DFI as it is finaly available here and i'd like to have a board with
thousands of bios settings. :D
Had ordered it already but cancled it due to the problems with phenoms atm.
Now i wonder if the boot limit at ~205MHz was caused by the cpu and not the mobo.
Well get CB 8500 Tracers in a few days however. ;)
:ROTF:Quote:
Do I care? Yes, I do. ;)
Now... quickly post them. :D
KTE : you're right ^^ remember first opteron 144 s939 models? and especially CABGE patch cpu's... had one... needed freaking 1.9vcore to hit 3ghz with icy water... phenom just need's time to get fixes ... btw only cold can help with ocing current phenoms.. but we dont have unlocked multis.. and BE models sucks at ocing & high ht ref...
in my opinion all models should have unlocked multis and be's should have something else like tighter latencys on l2 and l3 :P but impossible thought.
So far, at any mutli, at any voltage, at any VID, at any NB/HT/RAM/HT ref. frequency, there has always been one peak stable: 2530MHz.Quote:
Originally Posted by justapost
That is fully stable at any config (even tried 2.58GHz NB/HT) but 2MHz above it is not stable with anything!
Plus, the voltage needed for high NB is not much and the voltage needed for 2530MHz on all cores is 1.32V idle/1.3V load (fully stable). But my core 4 and core 1 are weak, much weaker than the rest and core 2 is very strong. It may even do 2.7GHz, I'll test it. I've had a 2.63GHz run on it quickly without any freeze/reboot but I'd like 2cores to work in unison at set speed. Dual-core >2.6GHz and quad-core 2.5GHz won't be too bad because I'll adjust it at my need.
Some quick valids with higher than stock NB/HT (stable):
http://valid.x86-secret.com/show_oc.php?id=296693
http://valid.x86-secret.com/show_oc.php?id=296694
http://valid.x86-secret.com/show_oc.php?id=296695
http://valid.x86-secret.com/show_oc.php?id=296696
Also, I've only yet tested at high ambient temps and pretty high core temps (plus 47C load). Will try colder soon, its 2C out here as well.
Here's 2.438GHz CPU and 2.542GHz NB/HT:
http://img212.imageshack.us/img212/9...5442xn8.th.jpg
Here was a quick plus 2.65GHz on NB (never restarted CPUZ, which you have to do for it to pick up correct values at times):
http://img211.imageshack.us/img211/9...2544nj1.th.jpg
This is what I'm stress testing now (dropped NB/HT/RAM because it was pointless running those speeds with the errata patch):
http://img87.imageshack.us/img87/574...1818wf4.th.jpg
It's past an hour stable so far. BTW, AMD Power Monitor only picks up dynamic CPU FID change and everything else remains from the bootup values. ;)
Yeah I wanted the DFI originally but their BIOS is no good for Phenom although excellent for X2. Probably the worst out of all offerings I've seen for Phenom and missing way too many options available on other boards. ASUS 790FX has one good option all other boards are missing so far but otherwise, this board has all options I'd want and better than most I'm seeing, better than the ASUS/Sapphire in BIOS OC options. I've heard they're taking heed to add more of what we requested, in which case it'd be a top notch board for users. Myself, I won't be keeping it, so not really bothered. :DQuote:
I'm still undecided which board i should choose.
Id prefere the DFI as it is finaly available here and i'd like to have a board with
thousands of bios settings. :D
Had ordered it already but cancled it due to the problems with phenoms atm.
Your board or mine? Mine doesn't have a low HT bootup. Plus 350HT ref. boots easy on X2 and plus 260 has booted easy on Phenoms.Quote:
Now i wonder if the boot limit at ~205MHz was caused by the cpu and not the mobo.
Cold would definitely help since current leakage starts to increase very quickly with the chip. You'll see it as soon as you move voltage/vid up from stock. Without even maxing out volts/vids/frequency, I've topped 450W (VAC) power draw (CPU load) while the same scenario at stock produced 162W (VAC) power draw. This happens with many chips above stock though, but it is very high current leakage.Quote:
Originally Posted by KeZzZu
I think you have stumbled upon AMD's primary problem with getting clock speeds up.Quote:
Plus, the voltage needed for high NB is not much and the voltage needed for 2530MHz on all cores is 1.32V idle/1.3V load (fully stable). But my core 4 and core 1 are weak, much weaker than the rest and core 2 is very strong. It may even do 2.7GHz, I'll test it. I've had a 2.63GHz run on it quickly without any freeze/reboot but I'd like 2cores to work in unison at set speed. Dual-core >2.6GHz and quad-core 2.5GHz won't be too bad because I'll adjust it at my need.
Yep, looking at all this one can very easily see that there will be far too many chips which don't make the 2.5/2.6GHz bins and 2.4GHz bin for quad/tri core on two->one core so would be selling as disabled. That looks to become pretty common, especially considering that most Phenom chips out there today are only getting ~2.45-2.55GHz stable on 4-cores and usually have two cores which can do 100MHz more stable.
Anyway, a quick update:
The same setup as before but this time I threw the ambient lower (19C) and HSF speed is max. Just an average cooler, nothing extreme, rare or expensive. Still going but +2hr P95 stable by now.
http://img141.imageshack.us/img141/1...92hrqg5.th.png
http://valid.x86-secret.com/show_oc.php?id=296735
Next shot will be at the 8 hour mark with high ambient and lowest fan speed to replicate a high case temp typical setup or a low noise setup (as I usually prefer).
Also a thing to note to you guys:
Windows XP/Vista schedules CPU time priority to the application in the foreground, i.e. in focus. Hence whatever is at the front is what will be running to the most potential and this applies to any stress test too. Leave the window maximised and it'll run quicker, more power draw and stress harder. ;)
Well, I will probably start working with the Phenom tomorrow. Right now messing around on the 5000+ BE....
Is that more or less than the 9500 required for 2530MHz? I browsed over the first pages of the thread and found only 2,4 or 2,6GHz results.Quote:
Originally Posted by KTE
Must say i did not expect 3GHz with the BE. If that would be possible in numbers there would be no delay for 9700 and 9900. But i expected an better result that with an 9500.
Same here booted with 235Mhz and tried to lower multis till it was prime stable. Core 2 is my best one, unfortunately i can not define which cores to disable. I can only define the number of cores i want. Does the MSI board allow this?Quote:
Originally Posted by KTE
I'm involved in an project using medical image processing alot. CPU and memory heavy stuff, so I aim for an good oc profile i can use just in case i need it. But most of the time 2x1,8GHz or so are sufficient here.
Had an 9750 here for a day. Did a few benchmarks at 2GHz to comapre it clock for clock with a 2xk10 and 2xk8. As expcted the 9750 won most of em. But the phenom system seems to respond faster, but that's an completely subjective impression i can not proove with numbers.
I get these core temps on 220x10,5 with the reserator 1p. Guess it's time for an 9700 HSF.Quote:
Originally Posted by KTE
In terms of stability or speed?Quote:
Originally Posted by KTE
AMD NB Power Monitor u mean. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by KTE
Latest success report on bro's DFI review doesn't look so bad. But I already got the confirmation that they canceled the board on my order.Quote:
Originally Posted by KTE
The Asus board? What i don't like about Asus is their technical support, I never got any respond from em and they do not even appear in their own web forum.Quote:
Originally Posted by KTE
Lol, the DFI board. M3A seems to do ~360 ref HT with the 406 bios.Quote:
Originally Posted by KTE
235MHz was the max i could boot with the 9500 in the M2A-VM and the M3A so it might be the cpu's limit.
have you done any Super PI 1M testing? and have you been able to achieve stable 1200mhz on the memory?
I don't know which batch you have and the stock voltage, but IIRC 3.2/3GHz was my first boot at stock volts and mine was limited around 3.55GHz on air. It needed higher volts and was running very hot stock so I backed out, reminds you of the P4 days. HT limit was 396MHz and 370MHz was fully stable. Have you tested your boards HT ref. limit?Quote:
Originally Posted by JumpingJack
2.55GHz was stock volts/vid stable with 9500. This BE requires more and it also has a higher power consumption/temps because of it.Quote:
Originally Posted by justapost
I did based on my earlier testing, had they given higher binned cores to us like with the previous FX/BE's instead of reject cores unlocked. These cores are worse than the 9500/9600 on retail around which is not the usual way to sell an enthusiast product.Quote:
Must say i did not expect 3GHz with the BE.
Do you mean through the BIOS?Quote:
Same here booted with 235Mhz and tried to lower multis till it was prime stable. Core 2 is my best one, unfortunately i can not define which cores to disable. I can only define the number of cores i want. Does the MSI board allow this?
No board I've seen yet allows selective core disabling through a released BIOS, have you?
It's one of the options I asked for actually, to allow changing multi of each core within the BIOS.
Yeah for desktop/office functioning, I don't know why this is but because of the memory perf/latency. I've not touched AMD CPU's after K8 since 2006 and switching from a 2 year Intel run on the same day, cloned OS, same GPU/RAM, you can definitely tell the general responsiveness speed difference. Launch some work and you can also tell the performance difference in the same way too though. :DQuote:
Had an 9750 here for a day. Did a few benchmarks at 2GHz to comapre it clock for clock with a 2xk10 and 2xk8. As expcted the 9750 won most of em. But the phenom system seems to respond faster, but that's an completely subjective impression i can not proove with numbers.
What volts/vids are you using?Quote:
I get these core temps on 220x10,5 with the reserator 1p. Guess it's time for an 9700 HSF.
Your chip runs hotter than my 9500 but roughly similar to this BE. You're better off getting a Tunic Tower 120 or Thermalright Ultra-120 if you're paying, the price is v.similar and they cool better especially with +1 fan configurations.
Performance is real junk with the patch. :(Quote:
In terms of stability or speed?
It's called AMD Power Monitor officially :p:Quote:
AMD NB Power Monitor u mean. :)
Although the best thing about it and the only thing I use it for is to see NB VID.
Same here. Way too much experience in that to bother again even though they have decent products but their prices are also ridiculous for not much or any gain. They also play too many caught-red-handed games with consumers for money. Moto: Release 20 products in each chipset, only actively support the ones that make the news with overclockers first, and enthusiasts second. Everything else is really messed about with. If they had some commanding position of quality which was unmatched, we may have been forced to buy their MBs but not when you have better MBs for cheaper with far better BIOS/support around. That said, some of their P35 boards are excellent value for money.Quote:
The Asus board? What i don't like about Asus is their technical support, I never got any respond from em and they do not even appear in their own web forum.
I actually really wanted to try their 790FX board but there is no point with this chip.
With BE, no I haven't. Mainly because I'm testing many BIOSes and they all have the errata patch so any performance benchmark result would be bleak at best.Quote:
Originally Posted by =[PULSAR]=
With the Phenoms before, yes I did.
Well, I can't boot/AOD above 220HT without a lockup/reboot, and that's around 586MHz on the RAM, so I don't know if 1200 would be stable or not. I'd give it a shot with the better older BIOSes but they don't run 1066 on RAM, so max I'd get with 220HT is 440MHz using them.Quote:
and have you been able to achieve stable 1200mhz on the memory?
If the NB multi lowering from 9x worked I could've tested 1200 RAM pretty easily. I'll see what I can do, right now it's running a stress test for another 4 hours.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KTE
Well this is G2 silicon and from my experience so far (just a few hours of playing) it is much improved over G1.
I wonder if it's due to the board or the the cpu. Is it the same for other users with the 9500?Quote:
Originally Posted by KTE
2,35GHz is max. stable jpierce55 and I can get at stock.
It's a nice playground in terms of settings and it does not cost more than the 9500.Quote:
Originally Posted by KTE
Yes through the bios i meant. I have not seen a board allowing this also, but it whould be a nice feature. Asus boards allows downcoring thru the bios at least.Quote:
Originally Posted by KTE
That whould be nice.Quote:
Originally Posted by KTE
Not sure about performance in medical image manipulations as those are very memory and floating point heavy. Do you know how the platforms do in ct/mrt segmentation?Quote:
Originally Posted by KTE
I plan to write a benchmark for those special tasks. I'll build another intel rig for an employee soon, hope I can keep it for a week or so this time.
At stock (1,25V), max possible on the M3A atm.Quote:
Originally Posted by KTE
I'm concerned about the board cooling with those horizontal mounted fan's. CNP9700 seems to do a better job here.Quote:
Originally Posted by KTE
Do you think the extra cooling power provided by those 120's is needed for AMD cpu's.
The Thermaltake Big Typhoon VX funkflix used does not look so bad eighter.
Ahh okQuote:
Originally Posted by KTE
I choose a Gigabyte P35-DS3 board for my first intel rig, did not look bad but i missed basic memory timing settings. After I had it benched it suddenly did no longer boot with 1066 settings. Time was to short to make myself a good picture of it.Quote:
Originally Posted by KTE
what's the difference between core voltage and core VID?
We're past the 12hr mark in stability perfectly now and I don't see a reason to continue at this setting. Here's some good knowledge for you though:
higher CPU temps>higher current leakage>higher CPU power draw. ;)
You saw 217W AC max draw before at the same MHz but low ambient/CPU temps. Now I've left everything running and as soon as I increased the ambient temperature and dropped the HSF speed to lowest, the same load is now pulling 13W AC higher at the same PFC consistent. Move the temps down and you get 215-7W AC back again, even though it should increase since the fan pulls 3W AC going from lowest to highest speed.
http://img219.imageshack.us/img219/5...12hryq8.th.png
2525MHz / 4cores 1.320V idle/1.30V load
1818MHz IMC/HT
539MHz 5-5-5-15-29-2T RAM
12hr stable, 50C max CPU temp reached.
Idle 110W AC
Full load:
230W AC high ambient-bad cooling.
217W AC low ambient-good cooling.
NB VID can go lower to 1.2VID stable at those NB MHz (2.2GHz/2.5GHz will need the above VID though) and thus total power consumption will also decrease a little.
I've found what causes my system lockups! The cores jump in MHz wildly at some second now and then. I had a lockup just now and I managed to catch it while it happened at 2.3GHz. Core 2 and the NB jumped to 2.68GHz randomly and that caused the system to lockup. Don't really know how to work around this or where the source of the problem is here. :(
For reference to MSI K9A2 Platinum users, CPU and NB VID 25=1.237V, 24=1.250V .... 15=1.337V and so on. Just FYI. ;)
Can't really comment based on memory since my own experience with G1 was long ago. Through observations, I would say something similar.Quote:
Originally Posted by JumpingJack
Quite frankly, it looks like the CPU to me. The only thing it can still be is the RD790 clock generator which is what causes most of the oc errors around with people. It is hard to debug though, I'm trying to find out it's MSR to read the registers but haven't got anywhere since there is minimal official documentation on the RD790.Quote:
Originally Posted by justapost
Well the firm I picked up the 9600 BE from purchased both this and the 9500 at the same price but that's not true for retail buyers who feel it in their pocket first and foremost. US has it far cheaper compared to Phenom 9500/9600 and Intel C2Q than UK and much of EU does. Many [r]etailers are price gouging.Quote:
It's a nice playground in terms of settings and it does not cost more than the 9500.
I haven't, sorry. A benchmark for that field would be pretty good to use, I hope it's Windows based though and not Unix. :DQuote:
Not sure about performance in medical image manipulations as those are very memory and floating point heavy. Do you know how the platforms do in ct/mrt segmentation?
I plan to write a benchmark for those special tasks.
Some of the AM2+ boards, in fact many of them, require a lot of MOSFET/inductor cooling and for those the 9700 works pretty good (since it can cool the RAM and CPU supply circuitry at the same time). The only reason for wanting better cooling would be a) try low temp oc b) lower noise c) better cooling price/performance really. K10 oc doesn't seem temperature limited at all, so whether you try the stock fan or a 250W TDP CoolIT freezone Elite, it doesn't seem to enhance the oc in any way from my experience and observations.Quote:
I'm concerned about the board cooling with those horizontal mounted fan's. CNP9700 seems to do a better job here.
Do you think the extra cooling power provided by those 120's is needed for AMD cpu's.
I actually like the Gigabyte P35 series a lot. Had a lot of good experience with them. :yepp:Quote:
I choose a Gigabyte P35-DS3 board for my first intel rig, did not look bad but i missed basic memory timing settings. After I had it benched it suddenly did no longer boot with 1066 settings. Time was to short to make myself a good picture of it.
First is VCore and the latter is Voltage ID needed for the processor to set Performance profile states. It's a little too lengthy to explain accurately but in short, you have higher amps fed to the core with higher VID and higher VCore options available as you increase the VID (I've tried up to 1.74V).Quote:
Originally Posted by mrcmtl
For reference, if you use the TLB patched BIOS there is no real way to disable it and gain the previous performance you have without it. AOD "boost" button will make things considerably better depending on the application (helps where memory performance is paramount) but still not anywhere near without the patch in the first place.
For instance,
a) Super Pi 1M without the patch at 2300MHz 420MHz 5-5-5-15-24 2T is 33.1xx seconds.
b) With the patch at 2300MHz 533MHz 5-5-5-15-24 2T it's at 37.1xx seconds.
c) With the magic *TLB cache button enabled+patch it'll perform the calculation in 35.1xx seconds.
SuperPi uses a set of recursive functions but it is a CPU clock-speed dependent benchmark first and foremost.
So the loss is approximately (CPU MHz x Benchmark Time [s]);
a) From a "PP" of 76,130
b) To 85,330
c) Remedied a little to 80,730
The formula is actually scientifically used in computer engineering and typically show a CPUs "clock cycles taken per benchmark". At XS they use the same formula with a twist to get a smaller value representing "efficiency" which is still denoting the same thing, although not in 10E-9 as it should be. Time cancels out in the real equation since CPU speed is in itself is consisting of time. :)
*The button color which disables the patch through AOD to some extent is this: http://img221.imageshack.us/img221/9...odbttonmm3.png
You can close AOD after you've hit that button to that color and the chosen setting will still remain until a restart.
KTE i have been following your test of the 9500 from the start and now also the BE , it seems the BE is not what we hoped for. My question though, would you advice getting a BE ( i have a 9500) or not. Currently my CPU don't wanna run stable past 2500 which it did before and i see you running more than that. Also is there a degration in performance like the other Phenoms on the BE?