QX9650@7,81sec

[Brandybuck]

Very impressive, I wonder how the heck you made such good time... The FSB sucks as you mention yourself, it must be very aggressive timings, because you cant use high ram freq

CL: 5-5-5-12 PL: 5?

I don't use very agrresive timing , sorry ı forget to show memory timing. I use 776mhz 6-5-5 timing but C1 stepping cpu very good for spi.

[Brandybuck]

Hey guys

I tested 2 different stepping C0 and NEW C1(ES) same system

QX9650 C0 5750mhz ---- 8,125sec
QX9650 C1 5750mhz ---- 7,92sec


I think C1 stepping is very fast for spi , If anybody try c1 stepping , please share

[BenchZowner]

0.2s faster clock per clock ????
If it's true...then wow!
I've got to get a good QX...where's that damn thing called luck when you need it ?

[PPInDaHouse]

Hey guys

I tested 2 different stepping C0 and NEW C1(ES) same system

QX9650 C0 5750mhz ---- 8,125sec
QX9650 C1 5750mhz ---- 7,92sec


I think C1 stepping is very fast for spi , If anybody try c1 stepping , please share

Thanks to share that, its good to know, but thats a very big difference, anyone can confirm this too?

0.2s faster clock per clock ????
If it's true...then wow!
I've got to get a good QX...where's that damn thing called luck when you need it ?

haha, where is luck, what I've been saying last weeks

[Brandybuck]

Should be Andre Yang tried this new stepping

[before]

Hey guys

I tested 2 different stepping C0 and NEW C1(ES) same system

QX9650 C0 5750mhz ---- 8,125sec
QX9650 C1 5750mhz ---- 7,92sec


I think C1 stepping is very fast for spi , If anybody try c1 stepping , please share

Could you please save CPU-Z registers dumps (.txt) and then send them to me or post them in this thread? What needed are 2 dumps, (1) with C0 (2) with C1.

[M.Beier]

Hey guys

I tested 2 different stepping C0 and NEW C1(ES) same system

QX9650 C0 5750mhz ---- 8,125sec
QX9650 C1 5750mhz ---- 7,92sec


I think C1 stepping is very fast for spi , If anybody try c1 stepping , please share

Holy crap, thats ALOT!!!

[kiwi]

hmm, I wonder what results would be with pre 45nm bios Could be up to 0.5s faster clock per clock

[TheKarmakazi]

Very nice results man, sub 8 is a dream! As others have asked what temps were you running at? Any chance we can see a pic of your cpu pot?

[dpa]

you get boost because bios not supports this cpu yet.. same thing as we had when C0 came..

[EXPANDER]

@Brandybuck

Very beautifull Score

[Rol-Co]

Hey guys

I tested 2 different stepping C0 and NEW C1(ES) same system

QX9650 C0 5750mhz ---- 8,125sec
QX9650 C1 5750mhz ---- 7,92sec


I think C1 stepping is very fast for spi , If anybody try c1 stepping , please share

can you do the same test at lower speed and both cpu 1m and 32m, ill guess C1 is slower at 32m

[Stoolman]

Killer score... Good job!

[Stoolman]

can you do the same test at lower speed and both cpu 1m and 32m, ill guess C1 is slower at 32m

This is the same thing as with the first scores we got with 45nm on the Asus boards.. The C1 is faster because the BIOS does not fully support it.
I did a run myself with a 9770 C1 on the same board and scored 7,9 sec on only 5,6GHz.. which is nearly not possible on a board with a bios that supports the new stepping..
Using a Asus board with a unsopported bios is a hell of a lot faster!

[rgkpt]

nice score

[Rol-Co]

This is the same thing as with the first scores we got with 45nm on the Asus boards.. The C1 is faster because the BIOS does not fully support it.
I did a run myself with a 9770 C1 on the same board and scored 7,9 sec on only 5,6GHz.. which is nearly not possible on a board with a bios that supports the new stepping..
Using a Asus board with a unsopported bios is a hell of a lot faster!

i know i kept you guys buisy for a day with that tweak don't you remember, but it is slower at 32m so thats why i ask him to run both.
you will problaby see that 32m c0 wil be faster because of the supported bios.

[Sam__]

thats an awesome time! nice job.

as others said... temps?