With voltage jacked up to 1.425V and NB at 1.25V, I show approx 127W at 3.6GHz on my system. Considering that retail chips will very likely still be at 1.35V, I'd say 3.5 is quite reasonable.
With voltage jacked up to 1.425V and NB at 1.25V, I show approx 127W at 3.6GHz on my system. Considering that retail chips will very likely still be at 1.35V, I'd say 3.5 is quite reasonable.
So, next 12 months are dedicated for 20 % clock increase(3 GHz -> 3.6 GHz)? Their process is still new as they had to rush to get the PhII out. I'd place my bets on 4 GHz @ Q4. 3.8 GHz is a must.
Are you running on the stock cooler? Ambient? Air-flow?Quote:
Originally Posted by Particle
Now think of someone in Florida in the summer with no air and stock cooler. :shrug:
Considering the voltage difference, I don't think you can really put forth that supposition.
But AMD put such supposition (read tested thermal operating thresholds) into its TDP rating. Bottom line, IF AMD could release a 4Ghz chip today, I bet you a million bucks, they would. The same goes for Intel, and they (c2Q at least) overclock/tolerate heat better with stock cooler, than PHII. :yepp:Quote:
Originally Posted by Particle
Wasn't PII supposed to have a 300c+ thermal operating envelope (-180+ - 125?
Show me a PHII priming at 90c. I can show you my C2Q oc to 4Ghz priming at 90c.
phenom II throttles it self at 72C.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zucker2k
my temp log volts where ran at 1.700/1.728 volts on load
19:39:17,71°,,,55°,71°,100%,3010.15 MHz,
19:39:27,71°,,,55°,71°,100%,802.71 MHz,
my 9850 would hit 78C before locking up.
Is trottling triggered by the on-board (cpu) sensor or it's triggered in bios? If so, could it be disabled? I can disable trottling in my bios.Quote:
Originally Posted by demonkevy666
don't knowQuote:
Originally Posted by Zucker2k
I had my temps on ignore on my bios though.
some other boards might have throttling options in bios (jetway boards do HA07/06) this one don't (asus M3A79-T-deluxe)
Hello dear AMD hater, as you might very well know, temperature does not really play significant role when it comes to stability unless the CPU is unstable already due to too low vCore. That means, if it can't prime @ 90C, bump the vCore and it can. ... ran Orthos for 2 hours w/o fan since cat ate the fan wires, temps +100C, fully stable @ stock.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zucker2k
I am sure you knew this, thus I wonder why did you post it? My theory: "My C2Q is better.". Prove me wrong, if you can. ;)
Very uncalled for, but that's fine. According to your theory, a cpu can run at 200c stable if it is supplied with the right amount of voltage. :clap:Quote:
Originally Posted by Calmatory
Of course there is absolute limit, which is dependent on a lot of things, as you very well know. But twisting the discussion to your own favour is nothing new from you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zucker2k
(Is there a thread to report posts which have nothing to do with the thread and which possibly flamebaits? Would become handy.)
Just a friendly reminder, a discussion is one thing but please watch the name-calling, we don't really want yet another thread getting locked :rolleyes:
Where is the absolute limit, according to you, for the PHII?Quote:
Originally Posted by Calmatory
Edit: I don't mean to question your reading comprehension, but how is the argument that thermal dissipation has an impact on AMDs ability to release a 3.5Ghz quad not related to this thread? Sorry man, I used to think you knew you what you were talking about, but after this, I'm a bit suspicious.
what we need is someone with an ammeter, and a PHII at 3.5ghz on the stock vcore/stock NB. Considering a 125W TDP 940 uses ~68-77W, I'd be curious if 3.5ghz approaches the 125W TDP.
Snip!Quote:
Originally Posted by Zucker2k
I always get the feeling that Intel & AMD at times hold back from releasing stock speed at what they really could to the enthusiast market to give themselves head room to sell higher stock later on when they could of done so from the get go to temped you to buy again other than the mega priced extreme models & to make overclock % look better.
Seeing as 3.5 -3.6 on stock volts is common to what i see on this from at least, then AMD should cut the milking bull & have 3.0 3.2 3.4 binned versions now but would of course lose OC headroom at this present time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zucker2k
It'd be very nice if AMD can boost up the P2 speeds up to 3.5GHz. That would heat up the competition, so there are going to be more faster products at lower prices.
The absolute limit, free from any built-in security, would depend on motherboard PCB and internal materials. If those are ruled out, it's becoming pure physics as when molecules/electrons would be moving too fast.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zucker2k
Same as bottom limit, 0K, although Im curious what would happen on ~5K since at ~30K there seems to be no limit:confused:
Anyway, to get on topic again, we've seen certain TDP improvements on B3 already, and since a C2 is already pretty much capable of 3.5Ghz at stock I dont see how certain TDP improvements and say C3 couldnt. In the end 2.8Ghz C2 has 125W IIRC, 2.8Ghz C3 is already 95W, and this is how AMD worked for years. It's more likely they bring out a 6Ghz chip than they wont hit 3.5Ghz within normal TDP.
xx hours of Prime95 != stable, I hope you guys understand that...
who cares about 100% stability, you have more change to encouter a BSOD originating from windows (software error) then a computer crash from a 99% stable computer (hardware error)Quote:
Originally Posted by STaRGaZeR
Couldnt be more wrong. Nothing better than people blamign SW from HW errors.Quote:
Originally Posted by GeertDB
Also i´m sure we could all run Core 2 at 4Ghz and Phenoms at 3.5-4Ghz in specialized caretaken environments.
It just doesnt work for the 99.99% of other people.
Who cares? Mate, AMD and Intel both sell stable processors. xx hours of Prime95 is not what AMD or Intel consider stable, by any means. If you feel confortable with your 12h stable Prime it's fine, for AMD is not. Your response is amazing :eek:Quote:
Originally Posted by GeertDB
hum? i was talking about a 99% stable system...Quote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
not a system that only can run Superpi 1M stable, don't misinterpret my words... you are an adult with a good pair of brains (i hope) so don't act like child
what is 100%stable to you? 24 hours of prime? 48 hours? OCCT? I consider my system 99% stable if it can run OCCT. The change to have an hardware error with such a system is smaller than to have an software error.
i have plenty of software errors on my laptop/stock clocked family pc...
then don't overclock your cpu...Quote:
Originally Posted by STaRGaZeR
" Rereads title of this forum: XTREME SYSTEMS"
You're not retarded, so don't behave like one please. This thread is about 3,5GHz stock clocked AMD Phenom II's. For AMD to sell these they have to be stable at stock clocks and volts, that means 3,5GHz stable by the standards of AMD. People in this thread is saying nah, that's piece of cake, mine can do 3,6GHz with stock volts... and that means :banana::banana::banana::banana:, here in XS or in Namibia.Quote:
Originally Posted by GeertDB
Ok fellas, drop it. Stability is not very important in this context, let's just say, a program that stresses the cpu for about 8hrs straight; my candidate is prime 95 small ffts. It's not made for Intel systems, but to find prime numbers. They test servers far longer. If I had my wish, prime 95 in-place large ffts would be ideal.