Printable View
I'm just wondering... why don't the thermal sensors work like they should? I mean... you manage to design a CPU, but something as simple as a temperature measuring device fails:p:
What's funny is that the sensors were OK back in the 939 days, but with 65nm they got pretty much useless.
Not sure if this is OT, but it would definately be a good idea to find out if the Deneb sensors work properly.;) I HATE using everst to measure temps:p:
I ordered a Phenom II 940 BE yesterday. (they are in stock at some stores over here). I should get one Wednesday. I will be comparing it to my Q9450 @ 3,5 GHz. I expect they will be quite matched in therms of performance. Maybe the PHII needs 100-200 MHz more to be on par with the heavy crunching apps.
I did the same with my q9450 and if your intel cpu is at 3.5 then you will need 4ghz or better out of the PII IMO to make it a close match.
my q9450 at 3.4 folds better then my PII at 3.7 by 200-400 ppd better.
cant wait to see some 940 BE's around the states...
My early point about volts, power and heat was not based on volts alone, In this review when all at at 3.7ghz deneb uses more power than i7 so it should be warmer, No? Or is there any good reason why the temp sensors on deneb report it to be radically cooler while using more power?
Uhmm to bad. But i think gaming performance will be quite on par with a few exceptions.Quote:
Originally Posted by jonspd
I will wait a bit before i will try a i7 for comparison. The platform is to expensive. I'm gonna wait for the cheaper P55 boards. In some ocations i7's are slower then Penryn or a PHII. i dont know what this is. Low res they are faster or on par with the competition but sometimes they are slower. The Performance is not good enough if you look at the price. And PHII is a nice upgrade. My second pc already has a 780g board. So i only need to upgrade the bios and change the Phenom X3 8450 for a PHII 940 and we are done. If i want a big boost from my intel rig i will need to change almost everything. Of i will have to buy a way to expensive QX9650 to get above the 4.0 GHz.
But i like low power usage so i keep my Q9450 very close to stock volts. I'm gonna do some efficiency tests with the PHII aswell. Like i did with my 5600+ and Q6600. With the Q6600 i needed 0.25v exta to get from 3.2 to 3.550. But then the power i pulled from the outlet jumped 80 watt. With a efficiency of 83% on my PSU the cpu was pulling about 65 watt extra.
Of that same reason i was running my Opteron 170 on 1.27v with 2.8 GHz. If i wanted to do 3.0 i needed 1.35v and performance per watt went down really fast from that point.
I'm gonna do the same tests with the PHII. Its to bad my Abit 780g has no options to lower the voltage (at least on my X3 witch is running 1.25v). There is a chance that i can run the 940 on 1.25v but there is also a chance the bios will adjust the minimum voltage to 1.35v.
To figure out the power, we need some independent measurement of the heat output. I have done some testing on an Intel i7 965 with a heatsink calibrated against a resistive load at .12C/W. That's a pretty good cooler by the way. Testing was done with the thermal throttling disabled. At 3.2G, 1.15V, rise was 20C (45C in 25C ambient), which gives 166W heat out. At 3.5G, 1.4V , we saw a rise of 31C (56C in 25C ambient). That says power generated by the chip is 31/.12 or 258W. So adding the volts and clock increased the heat load by 56%.Quote:
Originally Posted by gallag
The average of peak internal thermal sensors for the 56C temp was 68C. No real way to tell if the internal temp is 'accurate' but it's in the ball park and is repeatable.
I have not done similar testing on Phenom II but hope to run some tests in the next few weeks. A friend who has one measured (at stock 1.35V and 3G clock, 30 min full load) the base of his sink at 38C, internal temp showed 43C in 25C ambient. His cooler is not calibrated but it is in the .15 C/W range, so that would be around 85W. Only time (and a calibrated cooler) will tell how temp goes up with increased voltage and clock.
The only ONLY place i've ever seen inaccurate temps with either Phenom 1s or phenom II's has been in AOD, and that depends largely on the version.
As phenom II's are not out yet however, nor are the motherboards for which they are intended (which will feature the enhanced C&Q and allow you to set P states manually) Bios support isn't 100% which is kinda pivitol in accurate temp readings as well as power estimations.
But again having used thermal sensors, several pieces of software, bios temp and IR thermometer as far as the Asus 790GX board goes temps report accurately and the chips run very very very cool.
Same here mate :D Testing i920 @ 4ghz as we speak for compare with Deneb :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by Astennu
Nice. Let me know what apps you are gonna test and your setup. Maybe we can do some cross compare.
My answer to the previous post was *obviously* about temp sensors and numbers people like to think is real temps.Quote:
Originally Posted by roofsniper
This regards CPU's from both "camps".
Fortunately in the Intel camp there are people realizing this and try to do something about it (Unclewebb).
This should also be the case for AMD users.
Personally I use this numbers as an indication/representation for my system, AMD or Intel.
Edit:
Uncle Jimbo has by far the most scientific approach to this issue. Same with Unclewebb (RealTemp author).
The 45nm process allows higher voltage than Intel's equivalent. SOI + Immersion lithography do the magic. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by gallag
Edit: clocks.. Voltage! Too tired today. :(
The first people on my dutch forum got one. First result with SB600 and a Artic Freezer 64 Pro was 3.8 GHz 1.5v. Nothing special there. I was hoping to see 3.8 near stock volts but i guess you need a SB750 for that.
He did have his HTT bus set to 1800. If he lowers it to 1000 He Might get a bit higher.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Astennu
Yea I'm hoping to pick up i7 around april (b-day) when the am3 cpus start to hit.
I'm currently on a sb600 and all of my testing was done at 1800ht also as you talked about maybe I should try 1k or lower...
1k-ht is only for extreme cooling such as ln2.
The artic freezer 64 pro is not exactly beefy..especially when pushing voltage to 1.5.
Unless you are using water or cold going past 1.45v is less beneficial the higher the voltage increase...when going for high clocks on air a $28 heatsink isn't what i'd use as a accurate measurement of potential, though considering the that is the heatsink and voltage is that high, the clock is rather impressive.
Yes lowering the HT can be helpful, but mainly to prevent coldbug, or when going for clocks in excess of 4ghz. Check the Cpuz banner below,
245x16 3932mhz, 2457 HT and NB clock on air ACC disabled @ 1.475v i believe, granted it's on a 790GX 750SB board, but still was able to pull 4ghz on SB600 790FX without breaking much of a sweat and HT speed at default.
http://valid.canardpc.com/cache/banner/476776.png
I'm not sure, but IF AMD is demo-ing the Phenom II in CES, I heard that no more <1k HTT in the new revision is needed. I think Sampsa whispered that quietly in the Xtreme 3D section...
Probably a new stepping.
That would be nice for some 3d damage.
Lhe and high ht would never work by my guess.
If youre phenom 2 doesnt exceed Core 2 clock for clock in games.
Turn up HT link. grants you some extra % ~5 with good enough graphics cards.
Excited about the rumoured amd Lhe run @ CES!!! seriously... i cannot wait.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zucker2k
Still waiting. :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by AbelJemka
shhhh he has nothing don't make him post again.
So thanks to my ignoring being half asleep and forgetting to manuelly set the CPU multi when i was testing the limits of the HT, i ended up with this @ 1.5v (actual voltage is 1.536 as can be seen in shot of hardware tab)
Not even going to pretend it's stable cause it's far from at that voltage, froze trying to verify cpu-z. But still, considering it's an unmodded board, air cooling with DuOrb...it's mildly impressive, no? :D
Also since kitty was present during this achievment i think he deserves some of the credit thus i include a nice shot of him laying on top of my 22inch compaq qvision CRT where he spends a fair amount of time as it keeps his tummy toasty ;) plus....kinda looks like he's working some voodoo with his eyes...somewhat unsettling but kitty is king.
lol at cpu temperature 33C no way the boards going to be toast before the chip according to your bios lol
very nice...
hope all retail versions will be as good as that... ^_^
MB temp on this board either refers to NB or SB or the PWMs, but yes running a bit warmer then usual as i had voltage jacked up somewhat high to test HT limits
NB VID 1.38
NB Voltage 1.45
HT voltage 1.38
SB voltage 1.35
But really only running about 5-10c over normal stock idle temps
@ jcmarfliph
thanks, there is a fair chance that the retail 940 BE's will do a bit better since some things were fine tuned from ES chips this is from. But you have to figure that if it will do 4.8 on air, even getting into the OS for a couple miniutes that with a half way decent water set up there is loads of headroom to continue clocking up.
So you were testing hypertransport but I see core 4.8g, nb 2.0g and no hypertransport., im confused.
Either way booting with 4.8g and not blowing anything is nice.