• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

How well does BD respond to CPU-NB OC'ing?

MLSCrow

MLSCrow

Member
Just as the title sounds, I'm wondering if Bulldozer architecture responds to CPU-NB overclocking the same way Phenom II does. It will determine whether or not I buy a new motherboard as mine cannot seem to handle anything over 2200MHz.

I know that Thuban responded better to CPU-NB overclocking than frequency OC'ing, which was a surprise. I haven't seen anything about it with regard to BD arch though. If anyone can shed some light on this for me, I'd appreciate it. Thanks.
 
Not sure why nobody has tested this. It probably does help a lot.
Can someone do some OC'ing on an 8120/50 and report back?
I noticed it helped with minimums in games a lot.
 
soccerballtux said:
Not sure why nobody has tested this. It probably does help a lot.
Can someone do some OC'ing on an 8120/50 and report back?
I noticed it helped with minimums in games a lot.
Click to expand...

I've noticed most of the performance people notice via NB overclocking is imagined.
 
Not much of a gain I'm afraid. The L3 is fast as it is in BD,the problem is L1D cache(policy and size) and slowish L2.
 
This is another case of "Thuban was better," unfortunately. A large portion of Thubans would hit 4.0 GHz core and 3.0 GHz L3, leading to a 21% increase in clock speed (on a 1100T - more on others, of course) and a 12.5% increase in performance from cache overclocking. That's about 36% faster than stock.

Bulldozer cores may be individually too slow to really benefit from faster cache, though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top