The OFFICIAL Asus A8V is one INCREDIBLE motherboard, a true piece of art thread!

Quote:

---

Originally posted by charlie
Now, now............
You can't even compare that 1 benchie, StormPc....lol that was like the drag race car that blows it's engine 3 seconds after the green light and "coasts" for a bad time! We NEVER even got the FX/X800XT functioning correctly.

C

---

Based on Mongoose's stock score (you beat him by 1400 points) I'd say your system ran about as good as his, which kinda proves my point I believe.

I never said it was the CPU's fault. The fact is THE MOTHERBOARDS ARE $HIT!!!

Hopefully this will change. AMD better hope this is the case. The current boards are making their S939 look bad.

sierra_bound,

Yes, but you are on water on CPU and GPU. Superior cooling will almost always give better results even with the same clocks. Charlie and I were both on air.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by StormPC
I never said it was the CPU's fault. The fact is THE MOTHERBOARDS ARE $HIT!!!

Hopefully this will change. AMD better hope this is the case. The current boards are making their S939 look bad.

---

Holy Crap! I agree!

I would not argue that the 939 is definitely teething right now. Too many folks are having little irritating issues to ignore.

I'll agree with you on this point for sure. But that's a far stretch from the previous "S939 = Crap" you were at a while ago.

Glad to see you've come around a little:D

Quote:

---

Originally posted by StormPC
Yes, but you are on water on CPU and GPU. Superior cooling will almost always give better results even with the same clocks.

---

Ahhhhhhh...tell me you mistyped!

Just when I went ahead and agreed with you! Your not seriously saying that one rig will actually bench higher with better cooling with the clocks being the same? OMFG:stick:

I have not "come around". I can't sell hardware to customers unless it's 100% reliable. For you guys it's not a problem because messing with hardware is what you do. Most people don't want to have to flash their BIOS every other day in an attempt to make their computer function the way they want it. So you see, my perspective is different then yours, that's all. When I say something is crap it means I can't sell it retail with confidence that it will function correctly, not that it would not be fun to overclock.

Ok, you want to take it to extreme? Try this!

Bench your system with the heatsink on the CPU. Then bench it with no heatsink. Do the same on your GPU. Now, which one scored better?

Heat is the enemy of the overclocker. Is that not why we try so many things to make our systems run cooler? When a device gets hotter they can't do as much work. Why do you think people run 1 test at a time? That's right, HIGHER SCORES!

Originally posted by StormPC
So you see, my perspective is different then yours, that's all.

I would agree. I've built quite a few custom gaming rigs for clients myself over the years, and I be lying if I didn't sat that I'd have to give pause before trusting any of the new S939 mobos.

Bench your system with the heatsink on the CPU. Then bench it with no heatsink. Do the same on your GPU. Now, which one scored better?

niether.

wow....where to start....try this:

If the "clocks are the same", then they obviously scored even.

High temperatures does not effect the work being done directly. If you take a totally stable system and make it cooler (CPU and GPU), it does NOT bench any higher. If you don't turn up the clocks to make use of new found headroom from cooling things off, you gain nothing. A mhz is a mhz.

If anyone is foolish to run their temps so far out of line that thermal throttling kicks in, then there is a slowdown. But that's simply a mhz reduction....not a temperature induced loss of work per mhz.

Cooler = higher clocks = more performance

You forget the entire middle.


BTW, is that how you bench 3d, one test at a time?

I suppose I should try that.

Not entirely true.

You ignored the question of why people run 1 test at a time, which is to get higher marks with the same clocks. Have you never noticed that higher MHz does not always give you higher scores? When running on air you don't need to run your temps out of line. All you need to do is run them high enough to where current leakage is occurring. When running 3D benches this occurs due to load/stress of benching, even at stock clocks. And even a little can impact scores. Throwing water on (especially when running all 7 tests consecutively) will give higher marks, especially in the latter tests because the heat that builds up during the bench will be better removed by the superior cooling so less leakage occurs.

LOL...

Those who run the tests one at a time obviously do it to cool down between runs. This is to prevent crashing....not make anything run faster. Those systems that find it necessary to take breaks between the runs cannot handle the sustained heat load and are not stable. Its that simple.

A mhz is a mhz.

Man....and you say you build computers? ;)

Heat buildup not only causes crashes, but it slows the computer (CPU and GPU) down as well.

Anyway, the fact that you barely beat my stock aircooled scores with your FX-53 S939 and a Prommie is proof that there is either something wrong with you or your hardware. My score is very good for air. Your score given your hardware and cooling is weak.

Mike is exactly right. Unless you get into a thermal throttling situation a computer is completely deterministic, based on it's clocks and software. Given the same clocks and software it doesn't matter if you're running at +50C or -50C, the results are identical. The gain at -50C comes from being able to increase clock speed. I know what I'm talking about (over 30 years in Electrical Engineering, the last 15 designing ASIC's) and it sounds like Mike does also.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by bmg
Mike is exactly right. Unless you get into a thermal throttling situation a computer is completely deterministic, based on it's clocks and software. Given the same clocks and software it doesn't matter if you're running at +50C or -50C, the results are identical. The gain at -50C comes from being able to increase clock speed. I know what I'm talking about (over 30 years in Electrical Engineering, the last 15 designing ASIC's) and it sounds like Mike does also.

---

You're wrong. Thermal throttling is not the only way heat can cause a problem for a CPU or GPU.

For me this discussion is finished. You guys knock yourselves out.;)

Quote:

---

Originally posted by StormPC
You're wrong. Thermal throttling is not the only way heat can cause a problem for a CPU or GPU.

For me this discussion is finished. You guys knock yourselves out.;)

---

Wouldn't want you to embarrass yourself further. Leakage current obviously increases heat and heat increases leakage, but so what? Come back and post more about this after you've studied digital design. We're talking about a programmable digital system here. If it's not completely deterministic then it's malfunctioning. Most of the best 3DMark scores are with "malfunctioning" video cards, causing artifacts, etc., but that's how that game is played.

Jeez...some of the ignorance displayed in this thread is amazing. ;)

Ever heard the phrase "put up or shut up"?

So beat my non-vmodded 100% aircooled non-OS tweaked S754 score in 2k1 (see sig) with a non-modded 100% aircooled non-OS tweaked S939 2k1 score. Anybody?

Bones:

You are an ignorance expert of some kind I take it?:bs:

bmg:

But so what? You are saying the leakage and heat are the same on water cooling as on air? You are the one who should be embarrassed.:slap:

StormPC, here is a little lesson for you in physics (partly).

1 mhz is 1mhz. 1mhz does not become 2mhz until you cool it to the point of superconducting.. and when you reach that point you no longer have a working computer.

Is that simple ehough?


EDIT

2 for 1 day!

Current leakage will be the same on any cooling given then same temperature, clock speed, and voltage. All the extra cooling is allowing is for the voltage to pass through with less resistance (heat is a product of resistance, but more resistance occurs due to heat..).

So.

Given:

CPU @ 1ghz
Cooling @ water/air/phase
voltage @ 1.8v
Temperature @ 50c

Current leakage = The same.

Temperature influences current leakage, not whether its air, water, or phase change.

Also on a related note: The thicker your wire the more current it can handle..




This is all pretty basic stuff StormPC.. really... saying anything you have said would have gotten you laughed out of a physics class.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by StormPC
No apology necessary for me, as I never take anything personally, not even from people (like Eric) that I know, but especially NOT from someone I don't (you).

Which one of my systems is obsolete? I don't know where you get the idea that I have only one system, but it was not from me. I guess it's normal for certain persons (usually small ones) to assume that what they believe and truth are one and the same. Anybody who has read any of my posts is aware of the fact that I do not limit myself to a single system or even a single platform. I'd appreciate it if you would actually read my posts (perhaps with the assumption that maybe I'm not out to get you just because you bought S939) before you let my posts "get to you".

Charlie and I were able to get only one 3D bench out of the FX-53, and it was with stock clocks (2400MHz), so one of the 3700+ benches we ran (also 2400MHz) was with identical settings and hardware. The following was the result:

FX-53 S939 w/X800XT, all stock clocks, 2k1: 26573

3700+ S754 w/X800XT, all stock clocks, 2k1: 27425

Compair these scores with Mongoose's stock 3500+ S939 at 2200MHz, 2k1: 25161

hallowen's 9800XT and S939 running 100MHz higher CPU than my gaming rig (S940 FX-51 and 9800XT, aircooled w/no mods or tweaks) is still 1400+ points off my 2k1 score. Is this good?

Hardly impressive numbers for the S939s. Either something is wrong with the A8V or the S939 is no faster than any other A64. NOBODY has even halfway decent numbers with a S939 based system. That's wierd to me.

I will start a new thread after I have tested the S939 against the S754 with identical setups except for MBD and CPU to report the results, and full compares with card clocks will be included. Should be interesting.:D

You guys can deny all you want, but it's not looking good for S939!:rolleyes:

---

wow, given the way these a64 x800 combo's dont scale its surprizing a 2.4ghz x800xt 3700 beat my 2.2ghz x800xt stock 3500+. a 200mhz and cache advantage compared to the advantage of dual channel. omg! going to 233x10 gets me 26.9k no tweaks, no realtime and in the stock order a pure strait run. And i love how charlies set up at a bit over 26k is normal because sierra's set up at the same clocks is run cooler. That explains the 1700 point diffrence, yup.

And there was something up with charlies score, fx53 s939 x800xt at stock without tweaks should get damn close to 28k if not over like has been shown allready.

here's a stock fx53 s939 and x800pro at [urlhttp://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=7924580]26317[/url] and then there's sierra's score below. guess how many points i gained from a x800pro to x800xt at stock with my 3500+, yup about 1700. thats got to be some mystical :banana: :banana: :banana: :banana: to come up with a coincidence like that.

Hei Mongoose, not trying to offense anyone here, ok? Is it just me being too thick or english is not my first language? I hardly can understand what you were trying to say man. It was just too deep -maybe you can be a bit more direct?? :rolleyes:

Wow, so much fun while I was sleeping.

It seems to be hit or miss with the vdimm issue and the A8V. First board had no issue what so ever, but the one I just got back from rma, freezes at windows if I have it set to 2.8 vdimm unless its at higher than 200fsb. I also had to set the memory timmings agressively at that voltage. It runs fine at any other vdimm setting.

The gigabyte reacts the same way with higher vdimm and running bh-5. I can't say if they have similar issues with other types of memory, but I'll be trying some eb later this week

Quote:

---

Originally posted by H2OGun
Hei Mongoose, not trying to offense anyone here, ok? Is it just me being too thick or english is not my first language? I hardly can understand what you were trying to say man. It was just too deep -maybe you can be a bit more direct?? :rolleyes:

---

heavy sarcasm in that post.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by pkrew
Wow, so much fun while I was sleeping.

It seems to be hit or miss with the vdimm issue and the A8V. First board had no issue what so ever, but the one I just got back from rma, freezes at windows if I have it set to 2.8 vdimm unless its at higher than 200fsb. I also had to set the memory timmings agressively at that voltage. It runs fine at any other vdimm setting.

---

I have the same problems with freezing in windows. I was able to get 2.9v to the mem by raising the HTT to 230 in the bios. It seems that the HTT needs to scale with the mem voltage or windows locks up and it needs to be done from bios and not using clock-gen.

All I know is that with auto and bios 1005.020 I am real stable at 252 htt ddr400 sync, at 5X HT. Any setting other than auto was freezing the screen in windows, or getting into windows. I'm running the 3700eb's now, but the Corsair Xl's had the exact same behavior. Some wierd voltage issue. I'm very curious how the "booster" will effect this. Otherwise I'm pretty happy right about now and I have a bit more room to go.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by mdzcpa
Those who run the tests one at a time obviously do it to cool down between runs. This is to prevent crashing....not make anything run faster. Those systems that find it necessary to take breaks between the runs cannot handle the sustained heat load and are not stable. Its that simple.

---

It's too bad FM doesn't distinguish who runs the tests one at a time versus those who run all the tests straight through.

As for the VDimm issue, when my board is set at default speed (200), I occasionally get a temporary black-out at the Windows splash screen, but never any freeze-up. And since I rarely have it set at default, it hasn't been a real issue with me. This is with 1005.021.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by cowpuppy
I have the same problems with freezing in windows. I was able to get 2.9v to the mem by raising the HTT to 230 in the bios. It seems that the HTT needs to scale with the mem voltage or windows locks up and it needs to be done from bios and not using clock-gen.

---

Glad to see you got that to work, what type of memory are you using?

Also, charlie, when you were getting the problem with your HD not being recognized, were you using the on-board promise raid controller?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by StormPC

But so what? You are saying the leakage and heat are the same on water cooling as on air? You are the one who should be embarrassed.:slap:

---

I said nothing of the sort, leakage is a function of temperature (usually exponential) and leakage increases temperature, but so what?? Obviously cooling a cmos based system will let you push the frequency higher, but it does nothing to improve performance at a constant frequency, which is what you claim.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by pkrew
Glad to see you got that to work, what type of memory are you using?

Also, charlie, when you were getting the problem with your HD not being recognized, were you using the on-board promise raid controller?

---

right now I have the 3700EB in. 2x512

xgman, is everything running smoothly? No new problems to report?