3700 San Diego vs. 3200 Venice: Round 2!

[ben805]

Now get this, it's going to get even more complicated....the Venice can do SuperPI 32M at 318 x9 @1.71v, the San Diego can't. But the Venice ran out of steam and called it quit altogether and threw in the white towel at >2.89Ghz, higher vcore doesn't help. While in the mean time....the San Diego kept going like the Energizer Bunny up to about 2.93Ghz @1.71v.

And this, is the reason why it made me believe that my SD should have a higher ceiling.

[s7e9h3n]

Now get this, it's going to get even more complicated....the Venice can do SuperPI 32M at 318 x9 @1.71v, the San Diego can't. But the Venice called it quit altogether and threw in the white towel at >2.89Ghz, higher vcore doesn't help. While in the mean time....the San Diego kept going like the Energizer Bunny up to about 2.93Ghz @1.71v.

Ok, it's obvious what's happening on the 32m runs. Basically, the sd is getting too hot to finish the run, but the venice stays cool enough to do so. TBH with yah, I don't think your San Diego is particularly better than your Venice. All things considered, there isn't much difference between a cpu which can do 2.89 @ 1.71 and one that can do 2.93 @ 1.71. The only reason the SD is still running is because of it's higher tdp rating:

Seems to me these cpu's weren't binned for speed, rather by strength of mem controller and ability to dissipate more current (in other words, the ability to run hotter)

[ben805]

oh sh*t!! max temperature for both of them are only 65'C but I had my SD up to 70'C couple times for like 2~3 min, hope I didn't damaged anything I thought my SD has max temp of 75'C

[s7e9h3n]

oh sh*t!! max temperature for both of them are only 65'C but I had my SD up to 70'C couple times for like 2~3 min, hope I didn't damaged anything I thought my SD has max temp of 75'C

Somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that's max case temp