Worst A64 CPU ever????

[Ackbar]

Originally posted by: Paladyr
Well if it's any consolation to you, you make me feel much better about my CPU .

Thank you!!! hehe .

LOL! That's what I'm here for... to be a posterchild for what could happen to you!

 

[McArra]

Maybe some of you are using non-locked Satas??

 

[Amaroque]

Interesting. I've OC'd a NC, and a Winchester...

Winchester week "51"
ADA3500DIK4BI
CBBID 0451DPBW
1174045A50080

Does 2.6GHz @ 1.45 Vcore (not 100% Prime stable. Prime95 l erred after about 48 hours)
______________________________________________________________________

Newcastle week "27"
ADA3500DEP4AW
CBAEC 0427WPMW
1039254G40133

Does 2.6GHz @ 1.5 Vcore (Prime95 will error after several hours)


In any case, I leave the Winchester at 10*250 4x HT 1:1 (2500MHz), default Vcore (Prime tested for days)

I no longer have the NC, but I got similar results between the two. The only difference being that the Winchester runs about 4°C cooler on average.

 

[fstime]

That chip should do 2.6 on air, maybe its your memory? Never had experiance with value memory.

 

[Markfw]

Originally posted by: BouZouki
That chip should do 2.6 on air, maybe its your memory? Never had experiance with value memory.

I have OCZ PC4000 gold rev 2 at 2.8v, and it won;t run at anything over 255 ! (2395) divider or not (stable that is, no F@H early unit ends) And I have an Antec true 380 PSU, and an IDE drive, and a 9600pro radeon (fanless). Believe me, 2300 is the limit for many 3000+. My 3200 wont go over 200, but I think thats due to the motherboard for that combo.

 

[Paladyr]

with a mem divider at 100, and I've verified that my ram runs 100% stable in this setup at 216mhz, I've eliminated ram as the problem.

My CPU tops out at 2295mhz.

 

[McArra]

I couldn't get past 250FSB wichever divider I used with CH5 chips in my memory. With some cheap Elixir I could... so don't take memory out of the ecuation...

 

[Markfw]

Originally posted by: McArra
I couldn't get past 250FSB wichever divider I used with CH5 chips in my memory. With some cheap Elixir I could... so don't take memory out of the ecuation...

And what do you mean by that ? Of course we have ALL considered memory, and documented WHY they won;t go over the speed we said !

 

[Ackmed]

Originally posted by: Paladyr

Originally posted by: Ackmed
Complaining about a 500Mhz overclock is idiotic. Stop being a baby, overclocks are not a guarantee.

You're just as useless at sharky's.

How is it bad to inform people that certain version of a CPU are poor o/c'ers??? Yea, you're an idiot so leave.

Dont be mad becuse you're ignorant.

 

[magomago]

Yup sorry...but overclocking isn't guarantted. People act like the world is over if you can't get as far in the OC as you are looking for. Just realize you stilll got a NICe overclock and live with it.

 

[McArra]

Originally posted by: Markfw900

Originally posted by: McArra
I couldn't get past 250FSB wichever divider I used with CH5 chips in my memory. With some cheap Elixir I could... so don't take memory out of the ecuation...

And what do you mean by that ? Of course we have ALL considered memory, and documented WHY they won;t go over the speed we said !

I think it was related to compatibility issues, as another guy in Pcperspective had the exact same problem with the K8N neo 2 and CH5 chips... my comp would freeze each time I got to 250FSB or higher. I changed it with an Elixir module and it could go higher without problems.

 

[PascalT]

Originally posted by: Paladyr
Do I have the worst o/c'ing A64 ever??? I just ordered mine last week from zipzoomfly. CPU-Z gives this info about the chip:

Winchester core
Family: F
Model: F
Stepping: 0
Ext. Family: F
Ext. Model: 1F
Revision: DH8-D0

The most I can o/c the CPU is 2295mhz!!!! That sucks! I have the vcore at 1.55 and tried setting the extra vcore setting to 110% and I couldn't go any higher!!!! I had my ram divider set to 150 (underclocking the ram). LDT multi was set to 3x.

So is it official??? Do I have the worst A64 CPU ever????

i can only get mine up to 2250mhz or so. Haven't tried many things yet, but yea. you're not alone.

 

[PascalT]

i realise "only" is still 25% or so. which is pretty good on stock cooling

i think the post week 50 winnies don't OC as much.. i expected 2500+

 

[Paladyr]

Originally posted by: Ackmed

Originally posted by: Paladyr

Originally posted by: Ackmed
Complaining about a 500Mhz overclock is idiotic. Stop being a baby, overclocks are not a guarantee.

You're just as useless at sharky's.

How is it bad to inform people that certain version of a CPU are poor o/c'ers??? Yea, you're an idiot so leave.

Dont be mad becuse you're ignorant.

Everyone else seems to be discussing this intelligently... wonder why you aren't??? Not capable perhaps???

Ignorant would be to say "oh well, got a bad chip" and brush it off as nothing. Intelligent would be to post it so that everyone knows about it and it can be brought to the public's attention that the current A64 CPUs being shipped are not o/c'ing like the old ones used to. That means that either AMD is doing something different when they manufacture them or this is only a temporary thing that "educated" people can avoid.

Now go crawl back in your ignorant, blissful hole.

 

[Ackmed]

I would feel bad if I was as ignorant as you too.

Lets look at your topic name at Sharkeys. "A64 939 CPUs SUCK right now!!!!" You call that intelligent? That is pure ignorance, plain and simple. Its also ignorant to hink you have the worst A64 ever.

Care to show me where a 500Mhz is considered "poor"? Care to show me where most people get more?

 

[fsstrike]

Mine is probably the worst. It is a Clawhammer with a c0 stepping, and I can get it past 2.2

 

[Markfw]

Originally posted by: fsstrike
Mine is probably the worst. It is a Clawhammer with a c0 stepping, and I can get it past 2.2

No AGP lock ?? I have the same problem on a 939 Abit AV8 .

 

[Paladyr]

[replying to ackmed]

hahahahaha.

You just don't get it do you???

The title was to grab everyone's attention. The current A64 chips DO suck compared to the old ones. To argue against that would be r3tarded. You've already made yourself out to be a complete you know what at sharky, and now you're doing it here. Feel free to continue!!!! I've already had SEVERAL people thank me for posting the info so obviously it was a very good idea to post it.

 

[MrK6]

Damn, if you're going to act like children don't expect help. Now 500Mhz is a pretty good overclock to start with, but everybody's system is different. My CPU was unstable at 2.37GHz @ 1.65v, but is perfectly stable at 2.352 @ 1.6v. Why? Because I screwed around with timings, multipliers, and dividers and got some new memory too. 237x10 is unstable @ 1.65v, but 294x8 is perfectly stable at 1.6v. Fool around with everything before you give up, many computers are very finicky about overclocked settings, you just have to find the sweet spot :thumbsup:

 

[Amaroque]

Originally posted by: MrK6
Damn, if you're going to act like children don't expect help.

:thumbsup:

 

[Markfw]

Originally posted by: MrK6
Damn, if you're going to act like children don't expect help. Now 500Mhz is a pretty good overclock to start with, but everybody's system is different. My CPU was unstable at 2.37GHz @ 1.65v, but is perfectly stable at 2.352 @ 1.6v. Why? Because I screwed around with timings, multipliers, and dividers and got some new memory too. 237x10 is unstable @ 1.65v, but 294x8 is perfectly stable at 1.6v. Fool around with everything before you give up, many computers are very finicky about overclocked settings, you just have to find the sweet spot :thumbsup:

How many freakin times do I have to post ? Some of you don;t get it, some chips just won;t go any faster. Read my other posts you moron...

 

[Paladyr]

yea clearly we have eliminated all other variables.

The cpu's aren't clocking as high as earlier A64s, plain and simple!

 

[Markfw]

Originally posted by: Paladyr
yea clearly we have eliminated all other variables.

The cpu's aren't clocking as high as earlier A64s, plain and simple!

Actually I wouldn't go quite that far. Just SOME chips won;t clock that high.

 

[Amaroque]

Originally posted by: Markfw900

Originally posted by: Paladyr
yea clearly we have eliminated all other variables.

The cpu's aren't clocking as high as earlier A64s, plain and simple!

Actually I wouldn't go quite that far. Just SOME chips won;t clock that high.

Exactly. You can't make blanket statements like that with any accuracy. Supposedly my week 51 A64 is a bad week. But it clocks to 2.6 GHz.

In any case, the week printed on the IHS is the packaging date, and not the manufacturing date.

I don't see much relevance comparing the dates. There probably is some correlation between the manufacturing date, and the packaging date, but it is most likely a loose correlation between the dates at best.

 

[RichUK]

Originally posted by: Amaroque

Originally posted by: Markfw900

Originally posted by: Paladyr
yea clearly we have eliminated all other variables.

The cpu's aren't clocking as high as earlier A64s, plain and simple!

Actually I wouldn't go quite that far. Just SOME chips won;t clock that high.

Exactly. You can't make blanket statements like that with any accuracy. Supposedly my week 51 A64 is a bad week. But it clocks to 2.6 GHz.

In any case, the week printed on the IHS is the packaging date, and not the manufacturing date.




I don't see much relevance comparing the dates. There probably is some correlation between the manufacturing date, and the packaging date, but it is most likely a loose correlation between the dates at best.

Question do you think that with your exact system if you were using OCZ 3200 plat rev2 would you get the same sort of results ???

"Edit" this Q for Amaroque