[H]ardOCP OC's T-Bred 1800+ @10*183 rock stable!!

[krunk7]

Just thought I'd post this after the initial poor oc results of the 2200+. They used a PAl8045 for cooling and got a 300mhz overclock with 100% stability. I think this definately bodes well for the T-Bred and may mean AMD will save face after all.

1800+ T-Bred @ 10*183

 

[Mikewarrior2]

this will save face for amd? Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiggghhhhhhhhttttttttt...

did you chekc out hardocp's heatsinks for overclocking the tbred? The vast majority failed.

How about neither the Thermalright SL7000 or SK6 would work overclocking the tbred without a delta fan?

Rigth now, teh cooling situation when overclocking the tbred is pretty much a joke. To try and pick and choose and focus on the fact that they got a 300mhz overclockign with one of the best heatsinks + a very high cfm fan is fine, but you have to look at hte big picture. Previous proven performers aren't performing with tbred.


Mike

 

[Duvie]

Do the math genius!!! 10x183 = 1830mhz or just 30mhz over 2200+ levels...

It is obvious that the chips still can barely get over the 2200+ level many had teted the 2200+ at early...So AMD realizes the yields are low and downgrade them to 1800+. Now if they sell them at the same price as regular 1800+ palominos then we have something to talk about....Otherwise this still does not look good. Many have gotten palominos this high.....

EDIT: the more I read I am not liking it even more...This thing needs 1.85vcore..."stable at 155f" That is 68c!!!! Damn that is hot. Even hardocp shows this is basically ocing like their 2200+ was. AMD is saving face. With so many 2200+ at nearly the edge default wise (not being able to take 30mhz of ocing) it was clear they needed to drop these chips or face several failures and too many defective chips. These also with a few more reviews may be more of the the chips that could not successfully meet the 2200+ level.

 

[BlvdKing]

I think we all know that TBreds are too hot. Anyone planning to overclock should pass on the TBred and go for the P4; it's simply superior right now.

 

[ST4RCUTTER]

Wait for Barton.

Mature .13um process. Larger die. Maybe even 166Mhz FSB.

 

[Jstic]

The chip is barely two weeks old, making a judgment on how well it overclocks is rather premature. Save it for when a large quantity hits the DIY market, then we will know the overclocking capabilities of the Tbred.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

Originally posted by: ST4RCUTTER
Wait for Barton.

Mature .13um process. Larger die. Maybe even 166Mhz FSB.

That sounds great! However, my enthusiasm is dampened by the wide spread rumors that Barton mat get scrapped or come too late

 

[THUGSROOK]

one thing is for sure - it runs hot!

rock stable? lol a lava rock maybe

 

[nemo160]

why complain because they used one of the best coolers on the market? it only makes sense to use an excellent heatsink when your trying to find the limits of the chip
and testing it with other coolers that have worked in the past and failed now just helps those that pick up a tbred to save the time and money of figuring out that you need at least an sk-6 with a delta 38 to oc it
the temps are way higher than anyone would like
still hopefully we'll see new steppings that are more capable soon

 

[Duvie]

You are right...It makes sense to run it with the best possible heatsink. Ocers should do there homework and buy the best....

I merely commented more in this thread taking an obvious downclock of the poor or erratic yields to date of the t-bred is not something to think gives vindication of the t-bred. The fact is current 2200+ run hot now and have limited headroom to go higher then 2200+ without expensive water cooling. Ofcourse there werea few, but they were a few and far between....


I am still a fan of amd...I hope the hammer will be the next athlon to intels p3...The t-bred ain't it....

 

[nemo160]

i agree that the tbred isn't what we all hoped and dreamed of, but the release of 1800+'s isn't a downgrade, 1800+ tbreds were in the works to begin with, just like when northwood came out they released a versions of cpus slower than 2.0 instead of just making them at 2.0 and above
looks like i'll be hanging on to my tbird a bit longer though
heh heh...something may have finally beat my tbird as space heater of the year though

 

[Duvie]

Actually they were both worked on at same time. Amd has always planned on 2200+ first then fill back a bit for the oems....Otherwise they would have been released sooner....

Intel makes 1.6's even up as far as this month even though they have hit 2.533 with there release....Fact is all the chips are basically 2.53's....The were all cut from the same wafer. Some may have not passed test at higher speeds and were downgraded or they all could have passed higher speeds but were downsized to fulfill market demand Not everyone wants the 2.533ghz p4 and spend 500+ to get it.


Trust me AMD was shooting for 2200+ and made these lower chips.....Sure that chip could be a great buy, however ppl with xps are getting to same level often with the same heat and vcore. That is the true story.

Lets not forget this 1800+ took vcore of 1.85 to get it....Isn't that a full .2v higher then default???

 

[CrazySaint]

Originally posted by: Duvie
Actually they were both worked on at same time. Amd has always planned on 2200+ first then fill back a bit for the oems....Otherwise they would have been released sooner....

Intel makes 1.6's even up as far as this month even though they have hit 2.533 with there release....Fact is all the chips are basically 2.53's....The were all cut from the same wafer. Some may have not passed test at higher speeds and were downgraded or they all could have passed higher speeds but were downsized to fulfill market demand Not everyone wants the 2.533ghz p4 and spend 500+ to get it.


Trust me AMD was shooting for 2200+ and made these lower chips.....Sure that chip could be a great buy, however ppl with xps are getting to same level often with the same heat and vcore. That is the true story.

Lets not forget this 1800+ took vcore of 1.85 to get it....Isn't that a full .2v higher then default???

Actually, the 1700, 1800, and 1900 have default vcores of 1.5v, making 1.85v a full .35 higher than default :Q

 

[Mikewarrior2]

Nemo160,

It isn't a knock on using the best heatsink. Its the obvious fact that the small die size is making a large number of previous "top-level" heatsinks such as the Thermalright SK6 look very inadequate. Look at the thermalright sk6 results further... they had to use the 7K rpm Delta fan to overclock the tbred, adn even then the temps were very high. ~71C. Not too good. approximate voltage of the overclocked tbred is in the 83-90W range. Take the sk6 tested C/W of around .32 and you would figure the CPU should be roungly 26.5C over ambient. Now look at the hardocp temps: 159F(70C) and ~81F ambient(~27C). So with the hardocp tested c/w, the sk6 is performing roughly at .45 to .5. All of a sudden, the performance of a high end heatsink is definately hurt by a new, smaller core.

the other scary sign is that amd needs to add .15 (1.5 to 1.65) of Vcore to go from 1600mhz to 1800mhz.


Mike

 

[krunk7]

Ok, guys. 1) The 1800+/.13 was planned for production from the start. It was not in response to the initial poor OC performance of the 2200+. 2) If your overclocking and want to get a 300mhz OC, than you better be using a top HSF or your p@$%ing in the wind 3) AND they jacked the vcore up to 1.95v when testing the other HS's

We then switched to some less expensive HSFs. I also jacked the Vcore up a notch to 1.95 Vcore. My thinking here is that if one of the mainstream coolers can work at 1.95 volts, you would have a better chance and getting one to work at your house too.

4) I never said they didn't run hot, BUT

These damn things run hot! And do keep in mind that we had the voltage pumped a little high as well so our temp numbers may be a bit inflated .

4)

Do the math genius!!!

You do the math Einstein. The 1800+ will be a hell of a lot cheaper than the 2200+. If I can slap my Swifty on it and get the same performance as a 2200+ for a lot less $$, than THAT is what overclocking is all about.

Why do I think this bodes well for AMD, because at least it shows SOME potential for the T-Bred and that not ALL the T-Bred's will be poor overclocker IF you have a decent setup. Why MAY it mean AMD will save face? Because PERHAPS the T-Bred Core will mature enough to afford decent OC on their top end models as well (don't forget they're design plans call for at least a 2400+ model and if the design does progress and I can get just a 200mhz OC and out perform a P4 2.5ghz@stock than I'm still getting the best performance to investment ratio).

Will the top end of the T-Bred line be a dead end for Overclockers? There's a good chance, but maybe not. What would I buy right now? A 2100+ pally, because I don't have the $$ to build an entirely new system around a P4 and the 2200's suck.

 

[Mikewarrior2]

Show's potential?

Honestly, how does this show any potential? The CHip needs a top-end heatsink with a 60+ CFM fan and 1.85V just to hit the speed of a top end Tbred. That is seriously disappointing. Now, if they had pulled it off with a normal, eveyrday heatsink like, say the taisol cgk760 included in the review, then it would have shown potential.

had it even worked with a slower fan on the PAL8045, it would have shown potential. Had it worked with teh SLK600 and SK6 with a slightly slower fan, it would have shown some potential.

If the chips aren't overclocking unless you have the very best in cooling and the very best in noise-cancelling headphones, it aint good news. and on top of that, XP1800+ Palomino's are known to overclock to 1.8ghz, without the massive voltage increase and with standard heatsinks, not ear-drum bursting ones.

SO, if you ask me, this review shows no real potential in the tbred for overclocking. Of course, its only one article, so its faulty to base everything on one. But ot say that htis article "show's potential" is downright foolish.


Mike

 

[krunk7]

The only thing I was pointing out is that although the other heatsinks failed HardOCp was running the cpu at 1.95v when it tested them. That's .45v higher than spec. The only surprising thing to me is that ANY of them were able cool it at all. Also IF AMD can improve on the core design and the top ends eventually OC better, they would exceed anything the pally's can produce given that AMD intends to carry the T-Bred core to at least 2400+. Case in point: the same things were said about the 1.4 tbirds. that they were at the top end of their line and were poor Overclockers, but the stepping improved and though they never overclocked as good as the 1ghz ratio wize, they are able to reach speeds that the best 1ghz can't. I'm just pointing out that to condemn the entire t-bred line because of the poor performance of their first release may be a bit hasty and the later stepping of the 1800+ shows SOME potential for improvement.

 

[Duvie]

How does this bode well....There are palomino xp chips of 1800+ that are doing 1800mhz with air cooling with some of those same inadequate hsf...and that is a .18 micron process....


I agree if you want a 300mhz increase you need a damn fine hsf....BUt the thoruoghbred seems like a disappointment...The vcore is higher then I thought it would be...The temps are still too high...I thought the .13 micron shift was going to add some life...Right now I am wondering how they will get 2500+ out the door...Damn go straight to hammer!!!

 

[krunk7]

The main problem that the T-Bred's seem to be fighting are their area/wattage ratio. The Barton's may alleviate this to some extent since they are supposed to have a die size almost equal to the Pally's.

 

[nemo160]

i have an sk-6 with a delta right now on my 1.4 tbird and the delta 38 doesn't bother me at all
the first one i had whined quite a bit but the second one is actually pretty quiet..i had to double check my rpm readings to make sure it was going full bore
all the noise that's coming out of my case is from the sunon 120's...and that's not high pitched so its not too bad
if i were going to bump up to a tbred though, i'd almost defintely add an slk-800 and a fairly high speed 80

 

[Mikewarrior2]

you're of a select few that the Delta38 doesn't bother?





Mike

 

[nemo160]

my case does a pretty good job of killing noise, but this second delta i got just doesn't whine, if i unplug my dual 120's my comp is just as quiet as my roommates running a stock hsf
one of my friends has a delta 38 that whines pretty good though...i don't know if they changed the blade design a bit in the later ones or what..my temps were the same with the first fan ( a bit noisy) and the second ( no whining) and rpm monitoring shows it always being over 7000 rpm

 

[krunk7]

Check out Oppainter's results: 2363mhz. And before anyone gets all aggro., I know that he's running a
220 pelt and bumping 8c on full load.

 

[Mikewarrior2]

and JCViggen (at HardOCP forums) got a 1.6a to 3.x ghz. The hardcore coolers will forever be able to overclock to new limits



Mike

 

[SSXeon5]

Its sad how all the AMDZelots used to make fun of the p4 and say how the nforce and TBred would kill them and be AMDs saviour .... ahahhahah .... o man thats funny. And I really did slightly feat the TBred and thought the p4 might have some stiff competition .... well that got they oly oc 25-30Mhz PAahahaha .... thats sad.

SSXeon