AMD Phenom X3 710 --> X4

[konakona]

ok, looks like my NB is running very hot, need to slap on a fan on it or something.
temp readings from Speedfan: 48 / 27 / 26 / 0 @idle

assumingthis guy is right, my NB is running lava hot

ACC is off to prevent that weird artifacting in video/games

after lowering the chipset/htt voltages: 42 / 27 / 26/ 30 @idle


mmm... coffeeeeeee

 

[heyheybooboo]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003 ~~~~~

I have a few questions regarding monitoring utilities, such as:

What is the most used temp monitoring, voltage monitoring, software for PhenomII's?
What are the correct testing parameters for OCCT? Just in case I'm doing this wrong.
VCore shows 1.31v under full load. Is this what PhenomII X4's report?

Thanks!

HWMonitor works for me on the newer AMD 7xx chipsets. The only problem I've ever had with it was with older nForce stuff like the 6150/430 chips.

With OCCT v3 I run the 'medium' on CPUs figuring it takes from both large and small. I think the small data sets are more stressful but don't know how 'real world' the test is. He claims his GPU test is as stressful as Fur (or more so) - might be interesting to see how it goes with the IGP. I've been meaning to give it a spin with my 780g but just haven't gotten around to it.

For comparisons to other CPUs I usually snag the Vegas Movie Studio trial and run my standard Simpsons episode recode. It seems to favor AMD (but they need all the help they can get - LOL).

 

[konakona]

For what it's worth, just finished an hour of OCCT's medium run on the CPU @3.120.1ghz (240x13). temps were never higher than 41.5C, so I suspect the problem is elsewhere.

2400NB and 2000HT, 400DDR2 cas4 5-5-5-15 while at that.


HT speed does get affected by the HT Link Speed setting in the bios, but not the NB; NB is at 2500 with 250 ref clock no matter what I try, which is why the computer is unstable I think.

EDIT: I guess thats what DID is supposed to change. will get back to the thread after I get to play around with that a bit.

EDIT2: even with lower HT/NB at 2000ghz, the chip just can't take 3.3ghz. Either that, or ref clock of 250 is too high for the board. seems to work fine @ 3.125ghz / 1.4v, gonna have to convince myself to live with that tough luck. ACC may help I heard, but the fourth core is getting in the way (see my earlier posts)

 

[Keysplayr]

I was just comparing Anandtechs article on PIIX4 810 and PIIX3 720.

Looking at Cinebench first, I ran both Single and Multi CPU tests. What I found doesn't really sync with AT's results. POVRay and 3dsmax9 will follow.

Example: Scores for PII X3 720 and PII X4 920, and my unlocked 720 (X4 920)

Cinebench results:
Screenshot
Anandtech article

Single CPU test:
AT 720.....................................3275
AT 920.....................................3244
My unlocked 720 (X4 920).........2495

Multi CPU test:
AT 720......................................8765
AT 920.....................................11440
My unlocked 720 (X4 920)..........9070


Looking at my screenshot, the MHz (real freq.) remains at 4x200. Supposed to be 14x200.
I have Cool n Quiet disabled and the CPU runs at full speed always. 2800MHz. Any thoughts?

POV Ray 3.7 results:
Screenshot

Multi CPU test:
AT 720......................................1665
AT 920......................................2217
My unlocked 720 (X4 920)..........2334

3dsmax9 is next.

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
I was just comparing Anandtechs article on PIIX4 810 and PIIX3 720.

Looking at Cinebench first, I ran both Single and Multi CPU tests. What I found doesn't really sync with AT's results. POVRay and 3dsmax9 will follow.

Keys that is intriguing to see your system does worse than AT's for cinebench but better than AT's for povray.

What other differences exist between your rig and the test rig setup for the AT article? I'd be suspicious of the ram, number of sticks, density of the sticks, ram timings, etc.

Also see what differences there are in your OS versus AT's OS setup?

And lastly, hard-drive and GPU? For these 2D desktop benches I'd like to think the GPU is a non-issue, but did AT stick an X-25 M in their review rig?

 

[Flipped Gazelle]

Cinebench r10, X3 720 --> X4 @ 3.2 Ghz

64 bit:
Single CPU - 3699
Multi CPU - 13463

32 bit:
Single CPU - 2904
Multi CPU - 10440

Cinebench is displaying real freq. as 4 x _____

POV is 2639.

Looks to me like AT is running Cinebench 64 bit; 32 bit is slower.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: Idontcare

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
I was just comparing Anandtechs article on PIIX4 810 and PIIX3 720.

Looking at Cinebench first, I ran both Single and Multi CPU tests. What I found doesn't really sync with AT's results. POVRay and 3dsmax9 will follow.

Keys that is intriguing to see your system does worse than AT's for cinebench but better than AT's for povray.

What other differences exist between your rig and the test rig setup for the AT article? I'd be suspicious of the ram, number of sticks, density of the sticks, ram timings, etc.

Also see what differences there are in your OS versus AT's OS setup?

And lastly, hard-drive and GPU? For these 2D desktop benches I'd like to think the GPU is a non-issue, but did AT stick an X-25 M in their review rig?

AT's system
MSI DKA790GX Platinum (AMD 790GX) (Article says that "ASUS was kind enough to send their upcoming Socket-AM3 motherboard for today's review." But list this MSI board in the test setup list. So, unsure of what board was actually used.
80GB SSD "hard disk"
Qimonda DDR3 -1066 4x1GB (7-7-7-20)
Vista Ultimate 64-bit
GeForece GTX280

My system
Gigabyte MA790GP-U4DH (AMD 790GX)
120GB WD1200 120GB HDD
G.SKILL DDR2 -1066 2x2GB (6-6-6-18)
Vista Home Premium 32-bit
GeForce 8400GS 256MB

 

[imported_Redmist]

Cinebench r10, X2 6000+ at 3.2

64 bit:
Single CPU - 2983
Multi CPU - 5427

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: Flipped Gazelle
Cinebench r10, X3 720 --> X4 @ 3.2 Ghz

64 bit:
Single CPU - 3699
Multi CPU - 13463

32 bit:
Single CPU - 2904
Multi CPU - 10440

Cinebench is displaying real freq. as 4 x _____

POV is 2639.

Looks to me like AT is running Cinebench 64 bit; 32 bit is slower.

Interesting.

So I upped the multiplier to 16x.

Cinebench r10, X3 720 --> X4 @ 3.2 Ghz
32 bit:
Single CPU - 2909
Multi CPU - 10309

I guess 64 bit OS has an effect for sure. But at least we can say we now have PhenomII X4 960's.

FG, what Voltage are you running again at 3.2GHz? I get some graphical anomolies when I up the multi to 17x (3400MHz) but 16x seems perfect (3200MHz). I'll scroll up and see if you posted it earlier.

 

[Flipped Gazelle]

Keys, right now I'm running 1.45v in BIOS (1.44 reported by Everest) to get 3.2

 

[Keysplayr]

Crap, sorry. I hit EDIT instead of quote. Nothing was altered in your post.

Thanks. I'm was running stock voltage for the 3.2GHz. I bumped it up from 1.325 to 1.375 and tried 3.4. Still no good. But now I see where you are. 3.2GHz at stock voltage and stock cooler for me so far. And a side note, my DDR2 was set to 800MHz for the Cinebench 10309 multi run. I upped it to 1066 (it is DDR2 1066) and got 10383.

Go Figure. Still learning. A work in progress. hehe. Fun though. So it looks like we are both maxxed out at @ 3.2 on stock cooling. Hey lets face it, this stock cooler is a cheapo for sure. All aluminum, no copper or heat pipes. I'll be upgrading the cooler soon enough. I'm just glad we have the 4 cores running. That alone is worth it.

Congrats on your Quad Core!! :beer:

 

[konakona]

3.198 (246x13) is only stable with 1.4v to the chipset and 1.525 to the CPU, and lowered HT/NB speeds to go with.
3.185 (245x13) works fine with 1.425 to the CPU only... what gives?

granted, I need to do more testing with the vcore. glad that now I am able to get to 3.2 at least

 

[Keysplayr]

Sounds like your at a threshold point. 3.2 is very respectable. You're on stock cooling?

 

[konakona]

no, I am using Sunbeam CCF. both the CPU and HS are lapped, temp never went over 42C at load...
I played around with the CPU DID and 260FSB passed 1hour of OCCT with 1/2 for the DID.
The CPU it is then. Whatever, its the GPU that matters

 

[Flipped Gazelle]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
Crap, sorry. I hit EDIT instead of quote. Nothing was altered in your post.

Thanks. I'm was running stock voltage for the 3.2GHz. I bumped it up from 1.325 to 1.375 and tried 3.4. Still no good. But now I see where you are. 3.2GHz at stock voltage and stock cooler for me so far. And a side note, my DDR2 was set to 800MHz for the Cinebench 10309 multi run. I upped it to 1066 (it is DDR2 1066) and got 10383.

Go Figure. Still learning. A work in progress. hehe. Fun though. So it looks like we are both maxxed out at @ 3.2 on stock cooling. Hey lets face it, this stock cooler is a cheapo for sure. All aluminum, no copper or heat pipes. I'll be upgrading the cooler soon enough. I'm just glad we have the 4 cores running. That alone is worth it.

Congrats on your Quad Core!! :beer:

I have a new cooler on the way, so I hope to eke a little more outta this chip.

Even with the stock HSF, I can't complain - an extra 600mhz and an extra core... :shocked: That's an incredible value. If the stock HSF were a bit quieter, I probably wouldn't even bother with a new cooler.

4 cores and seven years ago... (sorry, I just had to!) :laugh:

 

[Keysplayr]

Maybe you could update your first post, or maybe start a new thread with the number weeks of the CPU's that unlocked successfully.
I think it's still just luck, but either way, it still may form a pattern.

Mine - CACZC AC 0904DPCW PII X3 720

 

[Modular]

Originally posted by: konakona
3.198 (246x13) is only stable with 1.4v to the chipset and 1.525 to the CPU, and lowered HT/NB speeds to go with.
3.185 (245x13) works fine with 1.425 to the CPU only... what gives?

granted, I need to do more testing with the vcore. glad that now I am able to get to 3.2 at least

I don't remember if you posted this or not, but did you separate all the components to find their individual max before you started consolidating and reaching these numbers?

If not, go here and learn how. The thread is for A64's and X2's, but the basics are still there. There's also an overclocking guide for AM2 MOBO's somewhere on the web. It was put together by some guys at Xtremesystems and is highly recommended. The real thing that might be holding you back is your RAM speeds. The dividers work very differently on this platform that they do with 939 stuff.

The most important thing is to separate the components before you overclock the whole package. For all you know, your MOBO can't hit higher than 245 stably, or that your ram is maxed out and needs a lower divider, etc.

 

[konakona]

Modular, thanks for the link. In fact I already had that link open along with some other stuff I found over at Guru3d and OCForums.
Admittedly the lazy side of me assumed these chips are easy to overclock and try to do it quick and dirty first. Once I convinced myself otherwise, I went back and tested ref clock and NB max separately with OCCT; ref clock was fine up to 300mhz (didn't go any higher), and NB was ok with 2150 (again, that was the heighest I tried).

With that information at hand, I tried 250x13 @1.525vcore and a high memory divider (1/2), with no avail unfortunately. I must reluctantly conclude that this is probably the hard limit for the CPU For now, I am gonna try to find the right vcore to leave it at 245x13, then fine tune the ram timings.

 

[Flipped Gazelle]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
Maybe you could update your first post, or maybe start a new thread with the number weeks of the CPU's that unlocked successfully.
I think it's still just luck, but either way, it still may form a pattern.

Mine - CACZC AC 0904DPCW PII X3 720

Good idea. Here's the new thread.

 

[deimos3428]

Hopefully not too off topic but the relatively easy "unlocking" of the X3 --> X4, at least on some boards, has me wondering, "Would it be theoretically possible to unlock the core multiplier on non-BE processors, too?" Has anybody any insight on why or why not this wouldn't work?

Even though the BIOS apparently could not correctly identify my 710 after unlocking the fourth core, or before I upgrade it to the latest version, it still somehow knew the maximum multiplier was 13. Does anyone know how/where this value is stored?

This is admittedly pure speculation, but given that AMD didn't go to the trouble of really disabling the fourth core by laser cutting it, they may not have done much to stop the locked multiplier from being unlocked as well. Any thoughts?

 

[deimos3428]

Originally posted by: heyheybooboo
HWMonitor works for me on the newer AMD 7xx chipsets. The only problem I've ever had with it was with older nForce stuff like the 6150/430 chips.

Nice utility. It can't detect the temperature of the 4th core on my unlocked 710, but I assume it's about the same as the three. Somewhat humorously, it detects it as "AMD Phenom II 910".

Armed with accurate temperature sensors, I'm back to overclocking...


{edit}
...or not. It seems it somehow reverted back to a tri-core. Perhaps I reset the BIOS to saved defaults and forgot, but if so it's even stranger that it detected as a 910. I re-unlocked it and it shows four cores for temperature sensors -- but they all state 0C.

 

[poohbear]

Flipped Gazelle did u ever get that new cooler and update your O/C results?

 

[Keysplayr]

I'm wondering the same thing. I'm still trying to decide which cooler to get. Or if I should even bother. Cause I can't tell what temps this thing is running at no matter what temp monitor I use. Most say 0C. So I dunno.

 

[deimos3428]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
I'm wondering the same thing. I'm still trying to decide which cooler to get. Or if I should even bother. Cause I can't tell what temps this thing is running at no matter what temp monitor I use. Most say 0C. So I dunno.

In my case OCCT only displays the core temps on the unlocked X3. My motherboard utility, OC Tuner, works on both but consistently reports 5-6C higher. I think it uses a slightly different sensor, but what was important is that the two values were in lockstep.

So what I ended up doing last night was doing the overclock/testing on the locked X3 first. OCCT had temp about 50C loaded, OC Tuner showed 55C. That was at 240, CPU voltage 1.4v, CPU/NB voltage 1.3v, and stable.

Since I got that where I wanted it, I unlocked the core and the OCCT temperature gauges went dark. That's ok, I knew that the OC Tuner would report 5C higher than the "real" values. With the 4th core unlocked, OC tuner reported the temp increased another 5C, reporting 60-61C at load...meaning "real" temperature that OCCT ought to have reported would be 55-56C.

I could have pushed it a tad further I suppose, but that's close enough to 62C for my liking, using the stock cooler and the case fan set on low, so I stopped there.

And yes, I confirmed that HWMonitor detects the processor as a 910 even before I unlock. I'd be interested if others can confirm this, both those that can and can't unlock.

 

[Flipped Gazelle]

Originally posted by: poohbear
Flipped Gazelle did u ever get that new cooler and update your O/C results?

The new cooler arrived about 2 hrs ago - SilenX IXC-120HA2. Unfortunately, I made a miscalculation and had to remove the 25cm side case fan, as the Silenx is so tall.

Testing right now.