|
|
|
The New AMD Building Thread
|
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
24. April 2009 @ 17:32 |
Link to this message
|
|
I would guess either the memory controller in the CPU is not up to it, or the memory isn't good enough. Have you tested the second set on its own at 1066?
|
|
Advertisement
|
 |
|
|
AfterDawn Addict
7 product reviews
|
24. April 2009 @ 17:37 |
Link to this message
|
|
I have a feeling it would run 2 without fault. I will not assume however. Tonight, I will run that test. Unfortunately, something has come up, and I wont be able to play til then :(
To delete, or not to delete. THAT is the question! |
AfterDawn Addict
|
28. April 2009 @ 04:42 |
Link to this message
|
Anandtech's Review and test of the new Phenom II 3.2GHz 955, in an socket AM3 platform. 3.8GHz stable, with stock voltage. Anandtech had it's frustrations with overclocking the pre-production 955s supplied because they were unable to hit 4.0GHz , stable. They are awaiting full retail examples to expand the tests with. Lots of interesting reading, not the least is AMD's Overdrive being able to create program profiles, which tie various games and apps to their pre-set profiles, just by running the game or program executable file. Closing the game or app restores the profile back automatically!
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=3551
Enjoy,
Russ
OH! My UD4H Mb was either shipped today or will ship tomorrow, so my rig should be up and working by weeks end! YAAAAY!
JRS
GigaByte 990FXA-UD5 - AMD FX-8320 @4.0GHz @1.312v - Corsair H-60 liquid CPU Cooler - 4x4 GB GSkill RipJaws DDR3/1866 Cas8, 8-9-9-24 - Corsair 400-R Case - OCZ FATAL1TY 550 watt Modular PSU - Intel 330 120GB SATA III SSD - WD Black 500GB SATA III - WD black 1 TB Sata III - WD Black 500GB SATA II - 2 Asus DRW-24B1ST DVD-Burner - Sony 420W 5.1 PL-II Suround Sound - GigaByte GTX550/1GB 970 Mhz Video - Asus VE247H 23.6" HDMI 1080p Monitor
 |
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
28. April 2009 @ 07:53 |
Link to this message
|
So they can run 3.8Ghz at stock voltage, but can't make 4Ghz with any voltage? I don't really understand that. Sure it wasn't Auto voltage? That encompasses a wide range, in my experience up to 125mV beyond stock.
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
28. April 2009 @ 08:42 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by sammorris:
So they can run 3.8Ghz at stock voltage, but can't make 4Ghz with any voltage? I don't really understand that. Sure it wasn't Auto voltage? That encompasses a wide range, in my experience up to 125mV beyond stock.
Positive! the voltage was there in CPUZ and all the others! These were pre-production chips, and others have gone past 4.0 with the production 955's already! I already know that I want a Phenom II, so I'll have to wait and see what shakes out as to what I'll want, while I save some money! LOL!! :)
Best Regards,
Russ
GigaByte 990FXA-UD5 - AMD FX-8320 @4.0GHz @1.312v - Corsair H-60 liquid CPU Cooler - 4x4 GB GSkill RipJaws DDR3/1866 Cas8, 8-9-9-24 - Corsair 400-R Case - OCZ FATAL1TY 550 watt Modular PSU - Intel 330 120GB SATA III SSD - WD Black 500GB SATA III - WD black 1 TB Sata III - WD Black 500GB SATA II - 2 Asus DRW-24B1ST DVD-Burner - Sony 420W 5.1 PL-II Suround Sound - GigaByte GTX550/1GB 970 Mhz Video - Asus VE247H 23.6" HDMI 1080p Monitor
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
28. April 2009 @ 08:45 |
Link to this message
|
Is the stock voltage higher with the 955 then? I'm having difficulty understanding why CPUs supposedly unlimited by FSB and Memory controller limitations are exhibiting exactly the same symptoms as those that do (Intel) - the faster chip overclocks barely any further, but with less voltage. Sound familiar? :P
|
|
bigwill68
Suspended permanently
|
28. April 2009 @ 09:17 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by sammorris:
So they can run 3.8Ghz at stock voltage, but can't make 4Ghz with any voltage? I don't really understand that. Sure it wasn't Auto voltage? That encompasses a wide range, in my experience up to 125mV beyond stock.
sam the chip will hit 4.3 easily at little below maxs volts depends on the platform...i heard people are getting confused and sticking the chip into am2 boards and not realizing it for a am3 board saying there not getting good results alot of mistakes are bein made with this new chip and results
Done out of Here!
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 28. April 2009 @ 10:57
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
28. April 2009 @ 09:24 |
Link to this message
|
|
That makes a bit more sense. I wonder how hot the chips would get with an air tower cooler.
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
28. April 2009 @ 09:59 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by sammorris:
Is the stock voltage higher with the 955 then? I'm having difficulty understanding why CPUs supposedly unlimited by FSB and Memory controller limitations are exhibiting exactly the same symptoms as those that do (Intel) - the faster chip overclocks barely any further, but with less voltage. Sound familiar? :P
Sam,
No, the voltage is the same, 1.35 to 1.50v. I know what you are getting at, sounds like Intel all over again. The biggest difference is Intel had no way to improve the overclocking abilities, as they had gone as far as their CPU technology would allow, while we are still waiting for the next generation Phenom II, due out mid year. May is my best educated guess! With the addition of metal gate transistors, it should scale and overclock even better, and run cooler doing it! Lower wattage too! I suspect that it will be a 105w chip, maybe even a 95 watt one, although I doubt it!
Best Regards,
Russ
GigaByte 990FXA-UD5 - AMD FX-8320 @4.0GHz @1.312v - Corsair H-60 liquid CPU Cooler - 4x4 GB GSkill RipJaws DDR3/1866 Cas8, 8-9-9-24 - Corsair 400-R Case - OCZ FATAL1TY 550 watt Modular PSU - Intel 330 120GB SATA III SSD - WD Black 500GB SATA III - WD black 1 TB Sata III - WD Black 500GB SATA II - 2 Asus DRW-24B1ST DVD-Burner - Sony 420W 5.1 PL-II Suround Sound - GigaByte GTX550/1GB 970 Mhz Video - Asus VE247H 23.6" HDMI 1080p Monitor
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
28. April 2009 @ 10:03 |
Link to this message
|
I hope so. Right now, AMD have the performance and performance/price sussed, but fall down everywhere else, power consumption, heat and overclocking ability. The Phenom II X4 955 is very nearly a Q9550 at stock, but uses more 20W more power than one (115W vs 95W), and only overclocks as well as a Q8400/Q9300.
|
AfterDawn Addict
15 product reviews
|
28. April 2009 @ 12:33 |
Link to this message
|
Exactly why I'm happy with my 940 ATM. You really don't get many benefits from the 955. And AFAIK DDR3 will HURT AMD performance. Because of the integrated memory controller, lower latencies, will be better than faster speeds. EDIT: Though the idea is to stay as close to stock RAM speed as possible. So just use low latency RAM to begin with. Low latency DDR2-1066 is awesome.
As far as overall performance... eh, good enough for me. I haven't seen anything that even makes me think about upgrading my CPU. Same with my Q6600. I doubt I'll be upgrading either chip for a while.
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T 4GHz(20 x 200) 1.5v 3000NB 2000HT, Corsair Hydro H110 w/ 4 x 140mm 1500RPM fans Push/Pull, Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD5, 8GB(2 x 4GB) G.Skill RipJaws DDR3-1600 @ 1600MHz CL9 1.55v, Gigabyte GTX760 OC 4GB(1170/1700), Corsair 750HX
Detailed PC Specs: http://my.afterdawn.com/estuansis/blog_entry.cfm/11388This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 28. April 2009 @ 21:32
|
AfterDawn Addict
7 product reviews
|
28. April 2009 @ 12:42 |
Link to this message
|
|
yup! Unless a software, game, etc is released, that requires more processing strength than I have...I dont see the need to upgrade for quite some time. Im as happy as a fly on sh*t LOL!
To delete, or not to delete. THAT is the question! |
AfterDawn Addict
|
28. April 2009 @ 16:27 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by sammorris:
I hope so. Right now, AMD have the performance and performance/price sussed, but fall down everywhere else, power consumption, heat and overclocking ability. The Phenom II X4 955 is very nearly a Q9550 at stock, but uses more 20W more power than one (115W vs 95W), and only overclocks as well as a Q8400/Q9300.
Sam,
I've been meaning to ask. Why do you get all fussed over 20w. It can't be "save the planet"! Besides, the difference in power consumption between the 955 and the Q9550 is only 1.5w at idle and 7w at full load! The current 940 shows the same 1.5w difference at idle, but drops to only 6w more under load! I haven't seen any complaints about heat at all, except from the idiot faction. I know I wouldn't plan to run one at 4.3GHz (fairly common, at less than max volts), with a Freezer 64-Pro or the stock cooler! LOL!!
BTW! My MB is here!!! Got to get busy putting it back together.
Best Regards,
Russ
GigaByte 990FXA-UD5 - AMD FX-8320 @4.0GHz @1.312v - Corsair H-60 liquid CPU Cooler - 4x4 GB GSkill RipJaws DDR3/1866 Cas8, 8-9-9-24 - Corsair 400-R Case - OCZ FATAL1TY 550 watt Modular PSU - Intel 330 120GB SATA III SSD - WD Black 500GB SATA III - WD black 1 TB Sata III - WD Black 500GB SATA II - 2 Asus DRW-24B1ST DVD-Burner - Sony 420W 5.1 PL-II Suround Sound - GigaByte GTX550/1GB 970 Mhz Video - Asus VE247H 23.6" HDMI 1080p Monitor
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
28. April 2009 @ 16:54 |
Link to this message
|
|
i will agree with russ here :)
also the new 7850 BE ir raping the E5300 at gaming :D
MGR (Micro Gaming Rig) .|. Intel Q6600 @ 3.45GHz .|. Asus P35 P5K-E/WiFi .|. 4GB 1066MHz Geil Black Dragon RAM .|. Samsung F60 SSD .|. Corsair H50-1 Cooler .|. Sapphire 4870 512MB .|. Lian Li PC-A70B .|. Be Queit P7 Dark Power Pro 850W PSU .|. 24" 1920x1200 DGM (MVA Panel) .|. 24" 1920x1080 Dell (TN Panel) .|. |
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
28. April 2009 @ 17:22 |
Link to this message
|
20W, which is what I've read from the sites I trust, is a significant amount of extra heat to dissipate, and a significant extra cost if your PC is at load as often as mine is.
|
|
bigwill68
Suspended permanently
|
28. April 2009 @ 18:06 |
Link to this message
|
Done out of Here!
|
AfterDawn Addict
7 product reviews
|
28. April 2009 @ 18:41 |
Link to this message
|
10 Sata ports, Dual Lan, AM3, higher memory speed, IM JEALOUS LOL! But im also content with what I have so :P
To delete, or not to delete. THAT is the question! |
AfterDawn Addict
|
28. April 2009 @ 21:50 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by sammorris:
20W, which is what I've read from the sites I trust, is a significant amount of extra heat to dissipate, and a significant extra cost if your PC is at load as often as mine is.
Sam,
Anandtech ran these tests, literally justa few days ago! This is what they show for Power consumption!
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=3551&p=15
Best Regards,
Russ
GigaByte 990FXA-UD5 - AMD FX-8320 @4.0GHz @1.312v - Corsair H-60 liquid CPU Cooler - 4x4 GB GSkill RipJaws DDR3/1866 Cas8, 8-9-9-24 - Corsair 400-R Case - OCZ FATAL1TY 550 watt Modular PSU - Intel 330 120GB SATA III SSD - WD Black 500GB SATA III - WD black 1 TB Sata III - WD Black 500GB SATA II - 2 Asus DRW-24B1ST DVD-Burner - Sony 420W 5.1 PL-II Suround Sound - GigaByte GTX550/1GB 970 Mhz Video - Asus VE247H 23.6" HDMI 1080p Monitor
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
28. April 2009 @ 21:58 |
Link to this message
|
PCMark Vantage?
I'll take this test over that one thanks :P
http://www.silentpcreview.com/article938-page4.html
Notable statistics:
Peformance
NOD32: 955BE: 100%, Q9550: 84.5%, Q9650: 102.8%
WinRAR: 955BE: 100%, Q9550: 106.3%, Q9650: 108.2%
iTunes: 955BE: 100%, Q9550: 129.2%, Q9650: 137.0%
TMPEGEnc: 955BE: 100%, Q9550: 87.8%, Q9650: 92.0%
Energy usage for task
NOD32: Q9650: 100%, Q9550: 121.7%, 955BE: 149.5% (137.8% undervolted)
WinRAR: Q9650: 100%, Q9550: 101.8%, 955BE: 141.3% (128.1% undervolted)
iTunes: Q9650: 100%, Q9550: 104.8%, 955BE: 204.0% (183.2% undervolted)
TMPEGEnc: Q9650: 100%, Q9550: 103.0%, 955BE: 130.2% (116.1% undervolted)
The 955BE is astonishingly fast at TMPEGEnc, but due to the astonishingly high power consumption at c. 130W, it's still 25% less efficient, 12% if undervolted to 1.225V.
In NOD32, 25% and 12% is also about right, and the 955BE handily beats the Q9550, but not quite the Q9650 (Though running a Q9550 at 3Ghz is not at all difficult)
In WinRAR, the efficiency figures are closer to 40% / 25% which is rather poor. iTUnes shows the worst efficiency though, the Phenom II using twice as much energy to perform the same task.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 28. April 2009 @ 22:38
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
29. April 2009 @ 02:03 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by bigwill68:
Mr.Russ
Whats your thoughts here on this Mb below? it looks like this joker is loaded...lol
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.as...3128377
Hey Will,
I was looking at that one for the future myself. First I have to save for the Phenom II. Which one, will be determined at the time of purchase. I want to wait for the next release before I come close to making up my mind.
Russ
GigaByte 990FXA-UD5 - AMD FX-8320 @4.0GHz @1.312v - Corsair H-60 liquid CPU Cooler - 4x4 GB GSkill RipJaws DDR3/1866 Cas8, 8-9-9-24 - Corsair 400-R Case - OCZ FATAL1TY 550 watt Modular PSU - Intel 330 120GB SATA III SSD - WD Black 500GB SATA III - WD black 1 TB Sata III - WD Black 500GB SATA II - 2 Asus DRW-24B1ST DVD-Burner - Sony 420W 5.1 PL-II Suround Sound - GigaByte GTX550/1GB 970 Mhz Video - Asus VE247H 23.6" HDMI 1080p Monitor
|
AfterDawn Addict
15 product reviews
|
29. April 2009 @ 02:16 |
Link to this message
|
|
Right on man. That is one sexy motherboard. I would have jumped on it had it been available when I went Phenom II. My DFI board is quite capable though and not worth the extra cost to replace.
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T 4GHz(20 x 200) 1.5v 3000NB 2000HT, Corsair Hydro H110 w/ 4 x 140mm 1500RPM fans Push/Pull, Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD5, 8GB(2 x 4GB) G.Skill RipJaws DDR3-1600 @ 1600MHz CL9 1.55v, Gigabyte GTX760 OC 4GB(1170/1700), Corsair 750HX
Detailed PC Specs: http://my.afterdawn.com/estuansis/blog_entry.cfm/11388
|
AfterDawn Addict
7 product reviews
|
29. April 2009 @ 02:36 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Estuansis:
Right on man. That is one sexy motherboard. I would have jumped on it had it been available when I went Phenom II. My DFI board is quite capable though and not worth the extra cost to replace.
Indeed LOL! I'll be patient with my board, until its time to upgrade. Im not interested in spending MORE on a new board. 10 Sata ports!!! NOW your talking LOL! Coupled with the 955 could be like a dream ehh? 3.8 with no voltage bump! NICE NICE NICE. :D
Who knows. Maybe in a few months, I can sell my board, in the hopes of yet a new build. We'll see. My mother is considering an upgrade. Perhaps I can give her the deal of a life time.
To delete, or not to delete. THAT is the question! |
AfterDawn Addict
|
29. April 2009 @ 04:15 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by sammorris:
PCMark Vantage?
I'll take this test over that one thanks :P
http://www.silentpcreview.com/article938-page4.html
Notable statistics:
Peformance
NOD32: 955BE: 100%, Q9550: 84.5%, Q9650: 102.8%
WinRAR: 955BE: 100%, Q9550: 106.3%, Q9650: 108.2%
iTunes: 955BE: 100%, Q9550: 129.2%, Q9650: 137.0%
TMPEGEnc: 955BE: 100%, Q9550: 87.8%, Q9650: 92.0%
Energy usage for task
NOD32: Q9650: 100%, Q9550: 121.7%, 955BE: 149.5% (137.8% undervolted)
WinRAR: Q9650: 100%, Q9550: 101.8%, 955BE: 141.3% (128.1% undervolted)
iTunes: Q9650: 100%, Q9550: 104.8%, 955BE: 204.0% (183.2% undervolted)
TMPEGEnc: Q9650: 100%, Q9550: 103.0%, 955BE: 130.2% (116.1% undervolted)
The 955BE is astonishingly fast at TMPEGEnc, but due to the astonishingly high power consumption at c. 130W, it's still 25% less efficient, 12% if undervolted to 1.225V.
In NOD32, 25% and 12% is also about right, and the 955BE handily beats the Q9550, but not quite the Q9650 (Though running a Q9550 at 3Ghz is not at all difficult)
In WinRAR, the efficiency figures are closer to 40% / 25% which is rather poor. iTUnes shows the worst efficiency though, the Phenom II using twice as much energy to perform the same task.
Sam,
You yourself recently told someone that you can't just set an Intel and an AMD to the same clock speed and test them because they scale differently, and in my opinion, undervolting is just plain cheating.
All you mention is 4 tests! Anandtech ran 24 tests, including some Multi-threaded ones against a wide range of Intel's as well as other AMD's, and when the smoke cleared the AMD 955 had done well enough for Anandtech to say, "The Phenom II X4 955 draws slightly more power than the Core 2 Quad Q9550, but not by a significant amount. Based on its performance, the 955 takes the energy efficiency crown away from the Q9550 in the majority of our tests".
TechSpot says the difference is +11w at idle for the AM3, and +13w for the AM2+. Under load, they show a completely different picture, where the 955 AM3 draws 31w less than the Q9550 under load, and the AM2+ draws 25w less. These were "Retail" chips. the first one's out!
One other thing I would like to ask about Silentpcreview's tests. Where are you getting that 130w figure from?
Please note, that they are rated by their loaded power draw, from lowest to highest. None of the CPUs tested were below 140Cw at idle, and that was the i7 920! I think in the overall scheme of things, there will be very little distance between the 9550/9650 and the 955. In fact since the 955 doesn't draw as much power under load in the real world, they should be fairly equal overall for everyday real world use. It makes AMD more than competitive with the Q9550, mainly because mainstream buyers don't OC, and that's where they money is to be made! The 955 also takes a couple of pot shots at the Q9650 and the i7 920 along the way! Indeed, AMD is back and competitive again, and we still won't have the Full Monty until some time in May! Good stuff for AMD and Intel fans alike! It should keep the prices down!
Best Regards,
Russ
GigaByte 990FXA-UD5 - AMD FX-8320 @4.0GHz @1.312v - Corsair H-60 liquid CPU Cooler - 4x4 GB GSkill RipJaws DDR3/1866 Cas8, 8-9-9-24 - Corsair 400-R Case - OCZ FATAL1TY 550 watt Modular PSU - Intel 330 120GB SATA III SSD - WD Black 500GB SATA III - WD black 1 TB Sata III - WD Black 500GB SATA II - 2 Asus DRW-24B1ST DVD-Burner - Sony 420W 5.1 PL-II Suround Sound - GigaByte GTX550/1GB 970 Mhz Video - Asus VE247H 23.6" HDMI 1080p Monitor
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
29. April 2009 @ 06:46 |
Link to this message
|
130W is a rough approximation. Taking a 75% efficiency figure (PSU + Vreg) off the difference in load gives me 35W. Assuming the Q9650 uses 95W, 95+35=130W.
You'll notice they didn't undervolt the Core 2 to save energy, even though they could have. What difference does it make? Undervolting the AMD lets it do the same job and use less power doing it, I don't see what the problem is.
Also note, the Q9650 is merely in there because it's the CPU they happened to run the test with. The Q9550 results, while simulated, are amost identical to what an actual Q9550 would achieve.
The purpose of these 4 tests is to illustrate that there are 4 different situations where the power consumption was measured, and in each one, the AMD CPU was way behind the Intel power-wise.
I'll pass on reading what Anandtech has to say on this, but SPCR have one of the most thorough power testing methods I know, so I'll take their power results over anyone else's. Also, I think you're belittling the overclocking argument. True, not everybody does it, but I think you'd be surprised to find out just how many people do, when you start buying £200 CPUs.
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
29. April 2009 @ 08:11 |
Link to this message
|
but they are both great OCers, DDR3 costs around the same as DDR2, the mobos are around the same price and same priced CPUs.
ones better in soem tests, the other is better in others.
so the obvious choice is to use a via nano CPU in a netbook.... wait, worng conversation :P xD
in the end, you should recommend either one, as IMO they are good as each other, and wellcome back AMD :), if the perosn prefers intel, recommend that, if they want AMD choose this, now there is no need to recommend the other company.
asi remember incracing the clock speed of AMD CPUs, also increace the speed of the "uncore", and so they scale much better OCed :)
anyways ill go back under my rock now :D
MGR (Micro Gaming Rig) .|. Intel Q6600 @ 3.45GHz .|. Asus P35 P5K-E/WiFi .|. 4GB 1066MHz Geil Black Dragon RAM .|. Samsung F60 SSD .|. Corsair H50-1 Cooler .|. Sapphire 4870 512MB .|. Lian Li PC-A70B .|. Be Queit P7 Dark Power Pro 850W PSU .|. 24" 1920x1200 DGM (MVA Panel) .|. 24" 1920x1080 Dell (TN Panel) .|.
|
|
