WARNING!!! New Venice chips not OC'ing well!!!

**Rezag1000** · 05-14-2005, 06:02 AM

I have been browsing several forums as well as this one and have noticed a disturbing pattern. New Venice chips are overclocking very badly. And let me explain badly.

These people, including me, have not been able to get their chips above 2.4 ghz. Mine fails Prime95 within seconds @ 2.6 ghz @ 1.6v. So if you are interested in buying a Venice chip, then I suggest you go out to a store and try to chose a good stepping. Sorry if this is off topic, but I just thought we should have a warning for everyone.

Good Luck with your CPUs!!!

**Vincentvega18** · 05-14-2005, 06:21 AM

Actually, i think amd is just doing some very intelligent binning. Not good for us b/c we cant o/c the cheaper cpus as high but everyone wants at least 2.8ghz so spring for the 3500/3800+. Theres no written rule that every 3000+ should do anything other than stock.

**adz** · 05-14-2005, 06:25 AM

part of the success of those model was due to their ease of oc...

**Napoleonic** · 05-14-2005, 06:28 AM

overclocking (nowdays) = gambling

**Kosmic71** · 05-14-2005, 06:29 AM

Originally Posted by adz

part of the success of those model was due to their ease of oc...

Yep.

And we're at Xtremesystems and 2.4 stable isn't xtreme enough lol! I'm sooo glad that I didn't sell my 3500+ ClawHammer, 2.6 @ 1.456v stock voltage and HSF.

**Kosmic71** · 05-14-2005, 06:30 AM

Originally Posted by Napoleonic

overclocking (nowdays) = gambling

Yea, but the house is winning too much these days.

**Napoleonic** · 05-14-2005, 06:39 AM

Originally Posted by Kosmic71

Yea, but the house is winning too much these days.

YEAH......

they became smarter, first send better oced CPUs for reviewers.......made us

and bought.........then they begin make their CPUs worse for ocing........

**Vincentvega18** · 05-14-2005, 06:55 AM

No, they dont just make them worse for o/c, they are a buisness, and as such they know that they can sell a better product for more than a poor one.....this is where speed binning comes from. You havent ever seen an fx-55 stable at stock and no more on stock cooling have you?

**Kosmic71** · 05-14-2005, 07:07 AM

I think that in the future, if we want to sell our good OCing CPUs, prices should go UP in a big way!!!

they are becoming rare.

**ben805** · 05-14-2005, 08:56 AM

tell me about it, I should of keep my 0444MPM winchester, sold it dirt cheap for only $120 on ebay!

**fatty** · 05-14-2005, 09:00 AM

Well this was done with a venice 3800 at 3.3 jig

linkage

so some must be ok

**grey_** · 05-14-2005, 10:54 AM

List of good steppings please?

[edit] Found list here: http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...ad.php?t=62353

**cupra** · 05-14-2005, 11:05 AM

aua, that was so expected, not all the venice are amazing overclockinrs, some are good and anothers are less (like all the cpus...).

**sinsinking** · 05-14-2005, 11:09 AM

True, i do expect venice do better than Winnie atm, better say at this stepping.
but still, there are some not doing as well as the others.
i saw few of 3000+ can go to 2.8-9 on air with 1.55v. amazing enough?
but most of them can do at least 2.4ghz.

**sinsinking** · 05-14-2005, 11:11 AM

and also, using a lower multipie cpu with tccd performance is better than vx
higher mutlipie cpu can use tighter timing ram.
actually, ur setup is very close to me that i gonna get...
DFI nForce 4 Ultra-D(must have)
G.Skills PC4800LA 2x512mb(already have)
AMD Athlon 64 3000+ Venice(great C/P)
Fortron Blue Storm 500w(great C/P)
Ati X800XL(great C/P)
Hitachi 80 GB SATA II(extra money will get two for raid0)

**Monkeyyy** · 05-14-2005, 11:36 AM

so should I consider myself lucky for doing 2840 stable on air with my venice 3500?

one thing I noticed was that I couldn't get my venice to post past 2.25GHz until I made some serious changes to the memory timings (settings that were previously posted by RGone for my dfi nf4 Ultra-D for winchester didn't quite work for my venice). the mem controller doesn't seem to handle the same settings as winchester (i think they loosened the memcontroller to make it more compatible, but these are rumblings that a noob like me picked up going through a bunch of forums).

one thing I have noticed is that alot of the posts that say the venice is a poor overclocker compared to their old winchester that did 2.8 on air is that they all sound like this:
just got my venice from store, popped out my winchester, put in the venice, and now I can't even post at 2.5 GHz.
my hope is that these people are in fact trying different mem settings than the ones that worked for their winchester.

However, I doubt that people are just replacing the winchester with venice without changing the mem settings. I think that in fact my cpu is like the others that were initially ordered from newegg. They all seem to be more than decent overclockers. Anyways, I'm gonna open up my system tomorrow to lap the CPU and will jot down the stepping to add to the linkage. I think I can hit 2.9 if I could just shave another 5* off my temps.

**ewitte** · 05-14-2005, 11:44 AM

I think the 3000+ is a gamble to begin with. The better overclocks should come from the 3700+ and above (3800+,4000+,FX,etc). Most people I've seen got at least 2.7Ghz out of their 3700+. I'm running 2.8Ghz 1.64v and can run unstable up to around 2.92Ghz 1.728v

Although its good enough to occasionally run a 1M Superi

I hit a wall around 2.65Ghz stock voltage.

Eric

**Scrufdog** · 05-14-2005, 11:45 AM

I overclock just like everyone else around here, so I like a good OC'n chip.

However, I dont see anywhere in any AMD specs or AMD anouncements that their chips are supposed to be overclocking well. I'm sorry, but I get tired of hearing people cry that they cant get a 150% out of their cpu. If you get 1 more Mhz out of your fsb then be happy, your getting more than you payed for. If you want a guarantee 2.6Ghz AMD chip, by a friggin FX-55. The big answer to that seems to be money, but if you cant afford 2.6, then you aint gonna get it unless you get lucky. So if you get lucky and score that 2.6 overclock by happy. If you score a 2.2G and payed for a 1.8 then be happy, your getting more than you payed for. Overclocking is a hobby, not a law.

**ozzimark** · 05-14-2005, 11:51 AM

Originally Posted by Monkeyyy

<snip>
one thing I noticed was that I couldn't get my venice to post past 2.25GHz until I made some serious changes to the memory timings (settings that were previously posted by RGone for my dfi nf4 Ultra-D for winchester didn't quite work for my venice). the mem controller doesn't seem to handle the same settings as winchester (i think they loosened the memcontroller to make it more compatible, but these are rumblings that a noob like me picked up going through a bunch of forums).
<snip>

something similar is the same for me. my newark is very different than my old clawhammer. with enough tweaking, it flies, but if i try to go about things the same way, forget it.

**Chocobo** · 05-14-2005, 11:55 AM

Originally Posted by Scrufdog

Overclocking is a hobby, not a law.

Word

**dippyskoodlez** · 05-14-2005, 12:25 PM

This thread will probably be seen by a few noobs and shy them away and start some bad rumors..

I just built a venice 0515 system, and it did 2.8ghz at 1.45vcore, so theres one more good venice to add to the list. Also got a 3ghz cpu-z verify.

EDIT: it was a 3200+, and XP-120 with silent 120mm fan.

**Rudzer** · 05-14-2005, 01:02 PM

Yep i can confirm in first-hand what you are saying :/

**AMD-me** · 05-14-2005, 01:46 PM

man, so should I buy now? I am getting upset, mabe I'll just wait for dual core

**ImportantAwareness89** · 05-14-2005, 01:59 PM

And how are the SD chips then? Good or bad?

**Dissolved** · 05-14-2005, 02:08 PM

Originally Posted by AMD-me

man, so should I buy now? I am getting upset, mabe I'll just wait for dual core

id just buy a 3200+ or higher.

Thread: WARNING!!! New Venice chips not OC'ing well!!!

Thread Tools

Search Thread

Rate This Thread

Display

WARNING!!! New Venice chips not OC'ing well!!!

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions