- Jun 25, 2005
- 269
- 0
- 0
what sort of results are people getting with the 89W s939 4400+ processors?
I have been very happy with my own results, and I am curious to see if everyone else is having similar luck.
So far, I have managed to get a prime stable 2.7ghx (245 x 11) with stock cooling at 1.375V.
Idle temps: 38C (C'n'Q disabled)
Load Temps: 55C
This is with an AMD FX series heatsink (4 heatpipes), and I am pretty sure I could go up to 2.8ghz without upping the voltage at all (I just barely fail prime at 2.62ghz with 1.3625V, I can test for a few hours, but i usually get errors or crashes if I try more than 6 hours of testing, so I am pretty sure that I have more headroom at 1.3725V).
anyway, from these early results it looks like I could think about 2.9 or maybe even 3.0 if I got a better heatsink and upped the volts to 1.4 or higher.
What sort of numbers are other people seeing with these processors? are my results typical, above average? below?
I have been very happy with my own results, and I am curious to see if everyone else is having similar luck.
So far, I have managed to get a prime stable 2.7ghx (245 x 11) with stock cooling at 1.375V.
Idle temps: 38C (C'n'Q disabled)
Load Temps: 55C
This is with an AMD FX series heatsink (4 heatpipes), and I am pretty sure I could go up to 2.8ghz without upping the voltage at all (I just barely fail prime at 2.62ghz with 1.3625V, I can test for a few hours, but i usually get errors or crashes if I try more than 6 hours of testing, so I am pretty sure that I have more headroom at 1.3725V).
anyway, from these early results it looks like I could think about 2.9 or maybe even 3.0 if I got a better heatsink and upped the volts to 1.4 or higher.
What sort of numbers are other people seeing with these processors? are my results typical, above average? below?