Athlon 64 3000+ with 11x multiplier

[Sampsa]

Hello,

One of our readers discovered that his Athlon 64 3000+ (Venice) with LBBLE-stepping (0518) has multipliers unlocked between 5 - 11x. Normally 9x is maxium with 3000+ CPU (9 x 200 MHz). Is this just one case or are there similar CPUs around like this one?

[TMM]

looks a bit suss. the "3000" is a different size to the rest of the text in the first line? Failed 3500+?

And the "05" and "8" in "0518" look a bit off aswell - maybe it just me for the 05 and 8 though...

Is the CPU-Z bugged or is it unrecognisable and hence a new revision?

[Sampsa]

More pics:

http://koti.mbnet.fi/aop13/athlon64/

CPU-Z becomes bugged if the multiplier is raised.

[Benny Lodewijk]

I have two processor with same stepping, can't wait to test

[Boble76]

They've tried the CPU on two different motherboards and the multipliers is unlocked in both motherboards..so it can't be a bug in the CPU-Z.

[Athens[2004]]

i wish , mine 939 3.0+ [@300X9 stock voltage @ & 310X9 stock voltage with chiller phase change] winchester could have 11multi

[S&M]

Strange stuff - but hey - wouldnt mind buying it if he decides to sell ... lol ...

[don_vercetti]

is this true of all 3000+ then?

or just these certain steppings?

[Jamo]

is this true of all 3000+ then?

or just these certain steppings?

certainly not true of them all, its strange how those letters appear to be different sizes, all the ones i've seen are pretty much bang on all the time

[Legoless]

What if he mounted 3000+ IHS on 3500+? And changed specification?

[AcEmAsTr]

or perhaps it really is a 3000+ with 11x multi? don't be so quick to judge

[Reefa_Madness]

There is no valid reason for the information stamped on the IHS to be in different sized letters is there? Look at the pics of the other two 3000s with the same codes...those are not sized differently.

That looks a little weird, possibly as mentioned above, someone is playing around with procs and switching IHS. That is certainly plausible, more so than for there to be a 3000 with an 11 multi. By design doen't that makes it a "3500" (2.2GHz)...by that I mean that a "3000" with an 11 multi would have to be running at less than a 200 MHz for it to be a "3000" (1.8GHz).

[ChongL]

not neccessarily...if it is real and "unlocked," the default multi could still be 9x, but you can adjust up to 11x...assuming this is true

[Reefa_Madness]

...assuming this is true

Isn't that the real question?

I don't really care one way or another, but just making an observation about the "3000" in question.

AMD's only known unlocked cpu is the very high end FX. The thought of AMD making this option available on a few of its entry level 3000 cpus just doesn't seem very likely, does it?

I'm sure stranger things have occurred, but again, I just find it unlikely that its true and more likely that its someone playing around.

[s7e9h3n]

I know there was a bug with a particular Gigabyte board in the past....

[HousERaT]

This smells of a gag...... code doesn't look right and what are the odds that a cpu with a funny looking code has a default multi unlocked up two multis? I'm not ready to believe it just yet.

[sai]

And the "05" and "8" in "0518" look a bit off aswell - maybe it just me for the 05 and 8 though...

Sorry but what the heck are you talking about?

05 = year 18 = week

or what are you trying to say?

[texuspete00]

The 8 is kind of floating away from the rest of the numbers for one.

Oh well, whatever insight sampsa inputs I'll believe. edit: Oh sounds like he just got the pic from some one else. So should we picking it apart then? I don't really have a tin-foil hat. The letters thing is definitely visably strange. Beyond that, well he'd be as good a judge as anyone.

[Reefa_Madness]

Sorry but what the heck are you talking about?

05 = year 18 = week

or what are you trying to say?

He is saying that if you look at the numbers for the dates and compare them to the other numbers on the codes the size of the numbers is not the same, just like the "3000" in the first line is larger than the numbers and letters on the other sides.

Compare the size and shape of the codes on the IHS shown in post #1 to those pictured in post #4 and you will (should) see a clear difference in them. Those pictured in post #4 are consistent in their size, as opposed to those pictured in the first post.

[Ugly n Grey]

It's a secret conspiracy by AMD, first "frequency doesn't matter" now "multis don't matter".

Seriously, looks liek were are being rooked, time to ignore this one. Speculation is interesting, but the most probable explanation is the likely explanation.

[JasonE4]

Yeah, I doubt that's real..

[marius7]

Could AMD gives us 11x for venice 3000+ passed 05 = year 18 = week ??????

[don_vercetti]

that would stop it being a 3000+ wouldn't it. It would become a 3500+.

[ragnarok95]

Sorry but what the heck are you talking about?

05 = year 18 = week

or what are you trying to say?

look before you shoot smart ass.

[fullup3]

looks like it was just a mess up huh? maybe a hung over worker from the weekend not paying attention to what he has doing on the assembly line.