Sorry, I can't do anything since I can't test those drivers, OS and setup yet.Originally Posted by dr_drache
Ask MSI for new drivers here, they should reply quick: http://ocss.msi.com.tw/index.php?mod=questions&dop=list
I don't read the forum at all, not since late 2006 and don't read INQ/FUD either for a while now. Worthless. But along with many others that is. I can't be bothered with trash, there's enough in life to handle without more stupid geeks playing God over the net.1 forum is enough for me to post in since I don't have the time, with too much to do in life. My profession in the major sciences and no scientist I know out of many all over the world has even the amount of time I do to post from work, they have enough to do and learn about away from even family life.
True that, the design is only supposed to be for high perf. per watt at low clock speeds sub 3G, in opposition to what Intel intended. But they didn't achieve high perf. per watt with K10h while Intel has more of it. With the reviews, same here. The biggest muckup so far I've seen in reviews was with Phenom, they really needed a lot more time to understand and experiment before giving us reviews of a product they didn't understand. Usually I get more perf. at exact settings than all reviews but for those using x86_x64 where I use x86. Then you have SP1 which is even worse if used.I say k10 athlon is just fine, I think a lot of the sites are doin something wrong, because I get numbers better than theirs 90% of the time once I get the hardware figured out. But AMD will outright tell you, the base athlon architecture was never meant for high clock speeds, it was meant for high ipc, which I think is why they're moving up to a longer pipeline with the next arch after deneb.
I don't read into what people guess much but 2.8G native at 45nm should be at 150W TDP and no less. They have heat problems with native designs esp. if they put a 35-55W IMC with 3 DRAM controllers in there. 32nm, 35% reduction is standard but won't be achieved since they're moving from MCM to Native, 136-150W 3.2G 45nm MCM, so let's say Native+IMC 3G at 130W TDP. I doubt you'll have more than 3.4G native quad release for a while yet without plus 150W TDP, but speed doesn't matter, Perf. per MHz does. If they can achieve more than 1.1x the Penryn perf. per clock with equal settings, they've improved and more than 1.3x will be very good (not just in one specialized non-realistic bench).I honestly think Intel is gonna start having higher TDP's on their processors with Nehalem. AMD's been keeping fairly competitive out power usage, with a processor that has an IMC/nb on die, which is actually pretty impressive. I don't think Intel is gonna hit the speeds that people think they will though, I also don't think Intel is gonna release a retail processor clocked at higher than 3.6ghz.
With K10h, I doubt Shanghai is the one we'll want but that to me will be Budapest.
Ah yeah, hard to find here and same price here as a Q6600+5000+ BE+3800 EE OR a 9500+9600 BE.
For me as a non-gamer, it's no point. My 3850 and 2600 give me good enough per if I want to dabble in a quick game at all medium settings with 2x or 4x AA. I will pickup another 3870 soon though, I was thinking about how four of them would be earlier just to test MSI board and Phenom. Depends if I get another Phenom first. Has anyone tried quad CrossFire on the MSI board that you know of? Hows the performance compared to 2x 3870X2?
Not sure. Just a higher bin part it seems, higher official MHz. Most people don't oc so that would appeal to them as well as to those who only oc 100-300MHz. If they hit 3G with sub 1.4V stable, and 9850 I doubt will hit 2.85G unlike how we hit 2.6G stable with BEs fine, then people will flock to upgrade from previous Phenoms, X2s and general AMD platform buyers. Here's what's releasing in a week or two (I would say April 8th for stock) including Phenom 9050, Kuma coming quicker than expected and 5600+ Black Edition: http://www.digitimes.com/mobos/a20080317PD209.htmlNow on another thing, I'm curious whats going to set the FX82 apart from the 9850BE. Just wondering if the FX's aren't going to be cherry picked BE's that had the ability to clock the NB/IMC higher at stock voltages. Thats about the only way I think they could get more performance out of them to justify the FX label.
They're not releasing. 2P systems are postponed till Deneb at the earliest. 1P FX are AM2+. Roadmap is getting pushed little by little further back and it seems the FX might not even launch if they push things back by 3 more months.And does anyone know if the fx91-92 that are socket 1207+ are gonna be 4x4 compatible?
Similar volts to mine. 2691MHz at 1.225VID/1.248V for perfect stability and 1863 NB at 1.038VID. More than this required voltage increase. That's two days before I cleared CMOS and it died.And yeah, in 1.1b3 I was running 2.7ghz by 2ghz, 1.262v (1.248v actual with C&Q disabled) core VID, 1.1v NB/IMC VID, was the same for 2.6ghz core, and was doing 2.4ghz NB/IMC at 1.250v VID. Currently running 2.6ghz core, at 1.250VID under bios P0J, 1.240v actual, 1.04v under C&Q mode, voltages are set to auto. So yeah, Part of the Phenom stability equation I'm really starting to believe has to do with bios maturity.
I asked the distributor and they're saying that this CPU is not known to die or be faulty and it's extremely rare. They are having problem believing it's my 2nd one dying in a row and insisting I check with a new MB. 9850 they say is 5th April earliest possible.
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks