Phenom II X1 570 4.2GHz single-core, good idea? So far, so good....

[coercitiv]

Yea, I dont get this obsession with purchasing ancient hardware. Even the cheapest big core celeron or even a single module AMD apu, hell, probably even a cat core 5300 would be faster than a single core phenom. Just buy a modern cpu.

Not only that, but the jump from 1C to 2C CPUs was by far the greatest in system responsiveness: even back at the start, having a 2.6Ghz Athlon 64 was worse than using 2Ghz Athlon 64 X2, and that was a 30% clock difference. Nowadays the entry level CPU from both Intel and AMD offer so much perf/dollar over ancient hardware that it's simply not worth to spend money on anything older than Haswell Pentium or FM2 Athlon X4.

Even the bastion of ST perf usage, the infamous Firefox is currently switching to an optimized MT model: they finally isolated UI process from render, and future builds will also feature separate process for each tab. With the modernization of the last important browser I struggle to think of any other piece of software used in daily activities that requires good CPU performance and is still using a ST model.

Just for giggles I limited my HTPC to 1 core and looked at CPU utilization after login - the system loads just 2 programs - a media server and and a torrent client:

• 1 core @ 4Ghz - 100% load when the 2 programs started
• 2 cores @ 3.5Ghz - 90% load and the load time was significantly shorter, even with the frequency handicap
  
• 4 cores @ 4Ghz - 55% load

 

[kwalkingcraze]

Advanced > Core ON/OFF function > Set to manual, reboot?

It's used to disable one core to run as single core only. It does not unlock cores. Core unlocking feature is optional for Asus but standard for Gigabyte. HDMI output is optional for Asus in all sockets at extra cost while standard for Gigabyte at no cost. AMD Richland is optional for Asus in prebuilt PCs (A8-5500 Trinity is standard), but standard in Acer, Dell, HP, and etc. I can go on... Asus just never impress me.

 

[Doom2pro]

Gigabyte 78LMT-USB3 has them all standard.

That is exactly the board that I use to unlock my Phenom II X2 to a quad... Good board.

 

[Doom2pro]

I just bought a lot of 2 Phenom II X2's for 18.00 on ebay. No guarantee they will unlock the 4 cores but I'm using them to replace single core Semprons in old HP workstations so it doesn't really matter. They are really cheap if you have old systems to play around with.

There are sellers that guarantee they unlock and boot into windows, that is where I got mine from, the one I got mine from also would return and replace (or refund) if there were stability issues, but your millage may vary.

 

[kwalkingcraze]

I have one Phenom II X2 570 that can run 4.4GHz easily with 2nd core disabled at 1.5V. Is it worth it?

 

[TurtleCrusher]

If you were running Windows 98 or earlier than I say yes. Even if you could somehow split that Phenom 2 to have one core at 3.6Ghz and a second at 1.8Ghz I truly think using it would be dramatically faster than a single core at 4.4Ghz.

 

[NTMBK]

I have one Phenom II X2 570 that can run 4.4GHz easily with 2nd core disabled at 1.5V. Is it worth it?

For any general purpose use, no. You want that second core to run crap like update installation, virus scanning, Javascript compilation, your music in the background while you work on something else, whatever.

Either try to unlock cores on your CPU (you might be able to turn it into a quad core if you're lucky and have the right motherboard), or go buy a cheap Phenom II X4 on eBay.

 

[maddogmcgee]

I have been researching used parts for a business I am starting.

For 330 AUD (260 USD) I can get a "Desktop Core i7 3770 3.4GHz 8GB 500GB DVDRW and Win 7 " delivered
If I drop the ram to 4gb and a sandy bridge era PC, I can knock about 100AUD or so off the price.

Spending any money on 1-2 cores CPU's sounds insane.........unless your like me and kinda want to build a 486 machine to relive my childhood.

 

[kwalkingcraze]

For any general purpose use, no. You want that second core to run crap like update installation, virus scanning, Javascript compilation, your music in the background while you work on something else, whatever.

Either try to unlock cores on your CPU (you might be able to turn it into a quad core if you're lucky and have the right motherboard), or go buy a cheap Phenom II X4 on eBay.

Dual-core at 4.4GHz requires over 1.60V, but the Asus 970 Pro Gaming AURA motherboard blocks it, won't let me go over 1.6V. It misses a few inches, almost work. I tried. Single-core runs fine at only 1.48V. 4.3GHz runs fine at 1.50V, but I want more.

In order to match Celeron G1820's single-thread performance (which was my noble goal), I need to bump up my speed to 4.7GHz speed, but it's unreachable due to limits in K10 architecture. At 4.4GHz, it is identical to Celeron G1620.

Is there such thing as a AM3 board that I can go 1.70 CPU voltage? If my Asus can set over 1.60 CPU voltage, which setting in BIOS menu I need to unlock or modify?

Unlocking cores are only available on non-Asus brand boards. I don't need it, as it would push down to 3.9GHz easily at 1.5V with 4 cores.

 

[NTMBK]

Dual-core at 4.4GHz requires over 1.60V, but the Asus 970 Pro Gaming AURA motherboard blocks it, won't let me go over 1.6V. It misses a few inches, almost work. I tried. Single-core runs fine at only 1.48V. 4.3GHz runs fine at 1.50V, but I want more.

In order to match Celeron G1820's single-thread performance (which was my noble goal), I need to bump up my speed to 4.7GHz speed, but it's unreachable due to limits in K10 architecture. At 4.4GHz, it is identical to Celeron G1620.

Is there such thing as a AM3 board that I can go 1.70 CPU voltage? If my Asus can set over 1.60 CPU voltage, which setting in BIOS menu I need to unlock or modify?

Unlocking cores are only available on non-Asus brand boards. I don't need it, as it would push down to 3.9GHz easily at 1.5V with 4 cores.

What are you trying to achieve? Are you trying to make a usable system, or is this just overclocking for fun? Just want to make sure we're on the same page 🙂

 

[kwalkingcraze]

What are you trying to achieve? Are you trying to make a usable system, or is this just overclocking for fun? Just want to make sure we're on the same page 🙂

If the internet is disabled and not connected, it is stable at 4.4GHz dual-core for Microsoft Office and DVD playback only at 1.59V. Only playing YouTube videos, downloading, and USB hard drive transfer will turn blue screen. My noble goal was to overclock my Phenom 570 to match Celeron G1820's performance for today's time, but no luck so far. So, I only have a LGA1155 Celeron G1610 equivalent.

I'm required to hang on to my 570 until FX-6300 reaches $10 used. I refuse to enter the AM4 socket because the Ryzen CPUs won't depreciate down to less than $10 used until after 2030 year, and the continuing price increase of DDR4 RAMs are a big mess. Buy boards now, buy CPUs later.

 

[amd6502]

I'm required to hang on to my 570 until FX-6300 reaches $10 used.

I don't think that's ever going to happen. First, shipping rates are constantly climbing and dollar devaluing. Secondly the FX is going to remain an irreplaceable classic; it's the last of the bunch to ever come without an ARM psp coprocessor.

I agree though, DDR4 prices are a big mess. The whole memory industry is a whole mess and could cause the whole sector to tank next year. Hopefully IBM will save the day once again though and make the breakthrough they need with memristor storage.

 

[VirtualLarry]

I'm required to hang on to my 570 until FX-6300 reaches $10 used. I refuse to enter the AM4 socket because the Ryzen CPUs won't depreciate down to less than $10 used until after 2030 year, and the continuing price increase of DDR4 RAMs are a big mess. Buy boards now, buy CPUs later.

On the other hand, buying new, you get a lot of value with a Ryzen 3 1200, and OC to 3.9Ghz (maybe?) on stock cooler.
Even if it does cost $109.99. (I was debating on getting one earlier tonight.)

 

[kwalkingcraze]

On the other hand, buying new, you get a lot of value with a Ryzen 3 1200, and OC to 3.9Ghz (maybe?) on stock cooler.
Even if it does cost $109.99. (I was debating on getting one earlier tonight.)

There was a $99.49 Ryzen 3 1200 deal on eBay just a few days ago. Expect this one to reach $89.99 soon during Christmas time.

https://slickdeals.net/f/10453984-a...-3-1300x-115-ryzen-3-1200-99-50-more-free-s-h

 

[kwalkingcraze]

I don't think that's ever going to happen. First, shipping rates are constantly climbing and dollar devaluing. Secondly the FX is going to remain an irreplaceable classic; it's the last of the bunch to ever come without an ARM psp coprocessor.

Except for FX-4100. It's reaching less than $30 fast.

 

[VirtualLarry]

If the internet is disabled and not connected, it is stable at 4.4GHz dual-core for Microsoft Office and DVD playback only at 1.59V. Only playing YouTube videos, downloading, and USB hard drive transfer will turn blue screen. My noble goal was to overclock my Phenom 570 to match Celeron G1820's performance for today's time, but no luck so far. So, I only have a LGA1155 Celeron G1610 equivalent.

That's kind of interesting to me, that the Haswell Celerons were so powerful. I mean, I know that they are pretty darn acceptable for an entry-level system, and often faster than most contemporary AMD CPUs and APUs.

I've got a friend with an Athlon II X4 640 3.0GHz CPU, and I sold him a rig with a G4560 in it. I'm guessing it should be 2x faster, at the least.

 

[kwalkingcraze]

That's kind of interesting to me, that the Haswell Celerons were so powerful. I mean, I know that they are pretty darn acceptable for an entry-level system, and often faster than most contemporary AMD CPUs and APUs.

I've got a friend with an Athlon II X4 640 3.0GHz CPU, and I sold him a rig with a G4560 in it. I'm guessing it should be 2x faster, at the least.

I find the Phenom II AM3s plenty powerful as long as the frequency speed is over 4.2GHz. But very few people have one that can reach 4.2GHz since most of the K10s can only go 3.5GHz max. It's also power-hungry here, I believe its TDP rating is over 125W at 1.52V. Only the dual-cores can achieve 4.3GHz that I have. If it's a quad-core, it drops down to 3.7GHz fast on same voltage, and then you have a slow computer with only 1250 single-thread score. I'm at closer to 1500.

 

[amd6502]

Except for FX-4100. It's reaching less than $30 fast.

Well, that's the very bottom end AM3+ product. That faildozer 1 quad will struggle to match Phenom II X3 and X4's. The only reason it's selling for that much might be miners who simply need any bottom end cheap CPU.

 

[Boris Morozov]

I thought 1.5v was too high for a phenom? I have an x4 965be and couldn't get it stable 4GHz @ 1.475v and didn't want to push higher.. old motherboard too. I can only make voltage changes at .25 increments.

 

[kwalkingcraze]

I thought 1.5v was too high for a phenom? I have an x4 965be and couldn't get it stable 4GHz @ 1.475v and didn't want to push higher.. old motherboard too. I can only make voltage changes at .25 increments.

Yes, the K10s are pretty sensitive in lowering frequency speed number quickly if there are too many cores opened. My Phenom 570 has a newer manufactured date of December 2013, so the improved process allows it to go beyond 4.0GHz very easily. At 4.2GHz, it runs at 1.43V, while 4.3GHz runs at 1.53V.

But the quad-cores can only go up to 3.6GHz in most cases, which is considered slow today for 2017 with around 1250 single-thread score. If I lose two additional cores, go up to 4.3GHz, it brings the single-thread score up to 1500, just on par with Celeron G1630 and acceptable today for 2018.

https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=AMD+Phenom+II+X2+570

3.5GHz X 1.23 = 4.3GHz
1213 X 1.23 = 1492 single-thread

Total benchmark: 1960 X 1.23 = 2411 (very close to Celeron G1610)

 

[kwalkingcraze]

Well, that's the very bottom end AM3+ product. That faildozer 1 quad will struggle to match Phenom II X3 and X4's. The only reason it's selling for that much might be miners who simply need any bottom end cheap CPU.

I also own the FX-4100, and the Phenom 570 at 4.3GHz is sometimes faster than FX-4100 at 4.3GHz in some cases. Not sure why... Probably the higher single-thread.

 

[VirtualLarry]

I really wish that you could overclock Haswell and even Ivy Bridge Celerons. You mention overclocking a dual-core (made from a quad-core die?) Phenom II CPU to match the stock speeds of a Haswell / IVB Celeron, but imagine if you could overclock them?

Ok, granted, we have the Haswell G3258 CPUs, which are overclockable Pentium chips, which are pretty-much just as good or better than overclocking a Celeron, except for the price, and for whatever reason, Intel crippled the DRAM clock on the G3258 to DDR3-1333. It would have been nice if they had allowed 1600, since most DDR3 RAM on the market is 1600 anyways. It would have been like releasing an unlocked-multiplier version of the E8400 (ignore for a moment that you could FSB overclock those), but limited it to DDR2-667 memory, when most RAM on the market was DDR2-800. Segmentation like that, for no other reason than segmentation's sake itself, really stinks.

Of course, technically, you are supposed to use a Z97 chipset to overclock the Haswell G3258, and not a cheap H81 board. Which lets you use whatever DRAM speed your memory supports. So, maybe to Intel's engineers, it was really a technical non-issue at the time it was envisioned. But then came cheap H81-chipset overclocking, which didn't let you OC the RAM at all, thus the limitation.

That's one reason why I really like AMD, they don't arbitrarily limit their CPU's capabilities, generally. You get fully unlocked CPUs with Ryzen, memory-compatibility up to whatever the board + CPU will run with, full opcode support across all of their SKUs. (Yes, I know that BullDozer and derivatives support more opcodes than Ryzen.)

 

[NTMBK]

If the internet is disabled and not connected, it is stable at 4.4GHz dual-core for Microsoft Office and DVD playback only at 1.59V. Only playing YouTube videos, downloading, and USB hard drive transfer will turn blue screen.

There's no such thing as "stable without connecting to the internet". That's unstable, full stop.

 

[TurtleCrusher]

Except for FX-4100. It's reaching less than $30 fast.

That might turn into the ultra budget gaming cpu for builds soon. If you have an AM3+ board I'd be picking up the 8300/8310 as fast as possible. An 8 core cpu (that can run at a low voltage 60-70w) might become incredibly valuable.

 

[kwalkingcraze]

That might turn into the ultra budget gaming cpu for builds soon. If you have an AM3+ board I'd be picking up the 8300/8310 as fast as possible. An 8 core cpu (that can run at a low voltage 60-70w) might become incredibly valuable.

I consider the $15 Phenom II X2 570 BE the base, ultra-budget gaming CPU, due to its faster single-thread speed than FX-4100. Any K10 processor below 4.3GHz max speed, regardless of number of cores, isn't worth owning now for 2018. At least 1500 single-thread score is recommended now. Ryzen 3 1200 is rated at 1756, so it's only 255 points faster than my Phenom 570 BE at 4.3GHz.