http://img57.photobucket.com/albums/...n520/FX939.jpg
MB:K8T800Pro
Printable View
is there also a super pi 1m result?
http://home.pchome.com.tw/net/boss_50/539391.JPGQuote:
Originally posted by EmineM
is there also a super pi 1m result?
this CPU-Z is Old
socket 939?
really?
so how much faster is it in 3dmark? and I cant see the numbers of superpi and I wouldnt understand the differences anyway. also that ram timing is bad. 2-2-2-5 rocks.
I dont know IF 35s at Pi 1M, 304 for cpumark or 31 min at Pi 32M is good compared to the FX53 S940 with the same timings of course.
ya.....use this MainboardQuote:
Originally posted by cpulloverclock
socket 939?
really?
http://img57.photobucket.com/albums/...0/DSCF0005.jpg
I was wondering what the importance of this was. You got the board and the 939 chip already? Yikes. Sweet.
ok 28+28+27+27 + 27*31-8 = 939 pinsQuote:
Originally posted by sxs112
ya.....use this Mainboard
http://img57.photobucket.com/albums/...0/DSCF0005.jpg
U are a beta tester?? :D
Good ole Asus board eh?
How you like it though?
`s
35s SuperPi 1M stock is not bad. Could you say something about o/cing potential? Is it possible to tighten the timings at least tRCD?
3DMark run?
ASUS takes to my question to be least, therefore I only then am willing to use their product. If has a better choice, I certainly or can choose others' productQuote:
Originally posted by `schr0et
Good ole Asus board eh?
How you like it though?
`s
Friend of mine tests:p:Quote:
Originally posted by cpulloverclock
ok 28+28+27+27 + 27*31-8 = 939 pins
U are a beta tester?? :D
That's a pretty insane score I think for a chip at stock speeds! I can only do 34 seconds at the speed in my sig!
Because is the VIA ES board, therefore the not O/C option, runs 3dmark2001 is does not have the questionQuote:
Originally posted by QuadDamage
35s SuperPi 1M stock is not bad. Could you say something about o/cing potential? Is it possible to tighten the timings at least tRCD?
3DMark run?
I have my 940 pin FX53 running 32m atm with your timings. i can tell that that 939s is faster. im getting 13m 07s @ loop 10. I also have antivirus running and a bunch of other junk running tho.
I will post a screeny as soon as its done.
damn fast...
sxs112:
you can use clockgen to overclock that maybe
soft not support:rolleyes:Quote:
Originally posted by Evil_Spork
sxs112:
you can use clockgen to overclock that maybe
Ok here is a stock 940s FX53 on a untweaked OS with nortons runnning.
http://24.158.154.102/images/32mfx53.jpg
http://24.158.154.102/images/1mfx53.jpg
i'm sure clockgen doesn't support this chipset yet.Quote:
Originally posted by Evil_Spork
sxs112:
you can use clockgen to overclock that maybe
I can tell it's very fast. Too bad it's an ES mobo.
Im going to run it again with nortons and everything turned off with auto timings in the bios which i feel is better to find a stock score..
edit: stock fx53 940 run with nothing running in the background
http://24.158.154.102/images/32mfx53stock.jpg
Hmmmm....
So the 939 looks APPRECIABLY faster... now the next questions are:
How does it OC?
How will the Mobo/Chipsets perform?
When will it be here?
How does it do with BH-5 and tight timings/high fsb with locked pci/agp??
C
yes it does :)Quote:
Originally posted by charlie
Hmmmm....
So the 939 looks APPRECIABLY faster... now the next questions are:
How does it OC?
How will the Mobo/Chipsets perform?
When will it be here?
How does it do with BH-5 and tight timings/high fsb with locked pci/agp??
C
btw since i was at it i ran a max bench also (temps @ 3c)
http://24.158.154.102/images/1m29sec.jpg
Nice, this is looking promising...
Now I just have to decide between a 939 or a 3.0c
hmmmmmm