Quote:
Originally Posted by Rammsteiner
I would tend to agree with KTE and say that right now due to growing pains with this New Phenom Technology there for the most part will be no consistency with Stepping / Overclocking Headroom like we saw on the end of Socket 939 Platform with X2 & Opteron Chips.
As always with AMD, newer revisions give better results. I know we're only on the 2nd rev which was mainly for TLB.
But it's just that the yields are so bad on this one. Voltage hardly matters.
:shocked:Quote:
Originally Posted by Brother Esau (Old Thread)
This might explain why my OS goes T**s up in minutes but I can run the olde proggies all night. :censored:
I'll have to do some checking but can a non phenom OC well with a 64bit os?
Yes the 6400BE flies on this board.Quote:
Originally Posted by AlabamaCajun
See the early posts in this thread;
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...d.php?t=169812
I think, that a Phenom actually might be unstable on a 32bit OS where it is at a 64bit OS. Maybe it just takes longer for it to achieve a crash. But it doesnt make sense that a 32bit OS would give higher OC's because it uses less registers... In the end it would use some registers for something and crash anyway?
Ive no clue about the interface between hardware and software, so apologies for that. But I dont think it would (and should) matter.
I can vouch for the lower OC on a 64 bit OS.
Running 32 bit Vista 2.9 was prime stable, could run Seti all day without issue.
Running 64 bit Vista 2.7 max anything over and BSOD, and lock ups.....
Running 64 bit means 64 hammers nailing at once that might equate to more draw from the on die power rails.
i dont have any 32bit OS's to try it out on (all i have is 64bit Debian sid, xp64, vista64) but across all of these operating systems i am extremely stable up until 2956mhz... any higher and i am unstable no matter what voltage i try and no matter what htt im trying, but according to how some others are doing these seem to be good results, and i got a lucky chip =/. sucks tho, because i was really hoping for a 3.0GHZ chip and i got one JUST short of it... :( . when is the 9950 due to release? lol..
Quote:
Originally Posted by GunterFalstaff
Yeah you any everyone one else here bro:p:
@ALABAMACAJUN......You get those sticks to boot @1066 y doing what I said?
Windows Server 2008 Enterprise 60 days trial :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by GunterFalstaff
I haven't tried yet, I've got a couple of things going while it's stable. I may try again in the next few days. I was concerned these GSkills were not compatible but I've seen no real indication they would be. I've got 2 sets of these and one set of 6400s.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brother Esau
But the point is, Prime stable doesnt mean stable. I couldnt believe it my self, but it's true. The fact I ran 14.5 hours Prime stable was WORTHLESS, it would freeze anyway.Quote:
Originally Posted by Slagathor
If anything over 2.7Ghz BSOD's on 64bit, but runs Prime stable and such sorts at 2.9 on a 32bit OS... Really man, it still doesnt say anything. Best way to test stability is by using it 24/7, game a little, play music etc etc. And dont shut down the PC, leave it on for days while you do your 24/7 stuff. If it's still running fine after, then you can consider it to be stable pretty much yes:p:. If it crashes after all, then it's most likely you'll reach the same OC as on a 64bit before it stops crashing.
I mean, Tony's OC is done on 64bit after all;).
MRL does with Phenom too, one of the first and most important calculations performed at boot involves it :yepp:Quote:
Originally Posted by Rammsteiner
Attachment 77609
Ty for that KTE...
Although it's quite confusing lol.
tCL in MEMCLK's is just the tCL we read in say CPU-Z and set in BIOS right? Or do they mean the 1000/effective speed*tCL?
The normal BIOS set Cl ;)
That made my brain itch!:shock2: Great numbers though.
:coffee: :shock: :sofa:Quote:
Originally Posted by KTE
http://www.abload.de/img/mrl1y8f.jpg
http://www.abload.de/img/mrl2wsu.jpg
I think this training results are the cause for the different MRL values I got with for example different mem voltages.
^ Yep and they can differ each time - many times you get no boot with a too low MRL or too high NB/too low MRL combo; I know I have :yepp:
RAM and NB clocking looks very dependent on it here though.
I've been thinking before... could the C1 errors be a failure in the MRL setting computation at boot? :confused:
I dont know if that would be possible. Maybe by bad BIOS programming, but not by manual settings I think. At least I cant set a MRL value in BIOS. But I do know by saving in Memset at any default start up your system goes mad and you'll need to delete the save file in safe mode.Quote:
Originally Posted by KTE
Also, HT multi on DFI higher than default doesnt seem to work. Not that I care atm because my system made a big crash with using 240HTT and both NB and HT at 10x multi... 00ps:shocked:
I did I did, I ran ot for a while at 2900mhz...
Played a lot of Oblivion, 3DMark's, PCMark's, BF series, F.E.A.R, I still love F.E.A.R., it;s got to be the best game of all time.....
And I crunch Seti 24/7, olny BSOD's I got were cause by silly things I did, well, tried to do..... :p:
Maybe the CPU need'd more juice???
I even did some 3.0 Super Pi runs, and nary a glitch, 64 bit, 2.8 Super Pi dies....
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rammsteiner
Im happy for you mate. Although I still dont think it's really stable, sorry to say. I'd believe it if it was on for serious a week long 24/7 without any reboot and everyday used for normal stuff. And idle at night, or playing music (speakers muted) etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by Slagathor
What about crunching at night, cause I'll do it......
I have a 40GB HDD I can install on to do it.....
ok, so i tried out running my cores at different speeds for the first time... it was interesting >.<... i HATE AOD, random lockups and freezes and hangs all the time... anyways, it turns out i have a bad core #1... all of my other cores were able to successfuly run at 3.1 stable but the moment my core #1 was set at anything above 2.956... i lock up... =/. just my luck... im being held back but just one lousy core, lol
Seeing all this I did a little sploring. I tried 14X in the BIOS at 1.32V, C1 came on for 2 secs and it booted at 2.5 :p
Fired up AOD, slammed it to 14 on all four cores hit 1.32V and hit GO then Closed AOD.
Good! Still running, I usually don't make it this far.
Time for a little CPUZ to see if it really went there BAM!, rebooted.
I flashed back to the Dec 2007 BIOS due to stock instability.
Should I go back to 416 with the Pheno in my sig or get a different one?
Conventional wisdom is to go with latest but in some cases a problem can arise. I may be able to get 2.8 with the optimal BIOS or just get a stable 2.7G. I would go the split different divider deal with each core but prefer to run them in tandem.