The New AMD Building Thread

So sitting very comfortably and coolly at 3.8GHz with my 1090T. Goes to 3.6 with stock 1.325v but requires a large increase to 1.4v to be able to run 3.8 stable. At 1.4v the temps are largely unaffected. To get any higher requires in the neighborhood of 1.45 to 1.475, which is still well within safe for temps, but poking the edge of my tolerances.

NB OC'd to 2400MHz with 1.2v, HTT left stock.

Overall is noticeably faster than my 955 at the same speed. Sometimes due to the better architecture and memory controller, sometimes due to the extra core. What I know for sure is that it's unlocked a new tier of performance for my 6850s. They seem slightly more adequate recently. Was the 955 really that much of a bottleneck? Games like Crysis 2 and Battlefield 3 have transformed. I can't suddenly turn on AA or anything as the memory limit still applies, but performance has nonetheless increased significantly. Enough to make the difference between playable and unplayable in Crysis 2. I've clocked almost a 30% improvement in areas. That's not all due to extra cores.

 

Not sure on that one tbh, the CPU test for Crysis 2 not only shows no benefit from going from Phenom II X4 to X6, but also shows a frame rate where the X4 should already be perfectly smooth. Battlefield 3 also puports not to be too heavily CPU limited in vanilla form (expansions may differ) but does show around a 15% improvement per mhz when using an X6 versus an X4.

 

So the new IMC must be of very large benefit for the architecture. Much more than I thought possible. It's gotta be in the neighborhood of 10% if SuperPi gives any clues. Add the extra cores and you have a fairly impressive CPU for the time it was new. Too bad I bought it so far behind the curve, but I'm glad I was able to snag one before they went out of style

If anything it's the first cost effective upgrade I've made in a while.

 

As I've said a few times recently, I may not say that many kind words about AMD CPUs, but the best thing they've made since the early X2s is the Phenom II X6 series. In its heyday, it was not only a well-priced 6-core CPU (compared to the i7s which although superior, were admittedly absurdly expensive), but more than that it was good as a 4-core CPU too, which is something the FX range of today just doesn't have.

I'm in no hurry to upgrade my i5 despite its 3 years of age, because at its current 54% overclock, which it's held stable since new, it can still give AMD's flagship FX-8350 a run for its money, in a fully multi-threaded environment. Now granted, you could overclock the FX-8350 a little bit too to give it an advantage, but you wouldn't see a huge gain, and look what happens when you run something 1/2/4 threaded instead of 8 threads. My dusty three year old machine completely destroys it. So you can see, if people are happy with the FX-8350, I'm certainly happy with my little i5, and at the rate CPU advances are currently progressing, it's looking like the time I replace it is when something finally breaks, not when it's technologically outclassed. That is technology truly standing the test of time.

The Phenom IIs may be a little older and slower per-core, but they're still hanging in there too. A Phenom II core is still good enough to get the majority of the jobs done, as you can still see Jeff. Truthfully, you'd maybe see a bit more performance with a newer CPU, but I think it'd be a little wasteful without getting something with more video memory alongside it.

 

Sam,

For whatever reason, the 1090t needs a lot less voltage in the 990X 950SB boards than it does in the older 890X, and 790X boards. The FX-8320, even less. But check this out.

FX-8320 at 4026MHz @1.312v CPU Multiplier x20, FSB 201MHz



But watch what happens lowering the Multiplier and raising the FSB.

FX-8320 at 4217MHz @1.280v CPU Multiplier x19, FSB 222MHZ



All I changed was the multiplier and the FSB, I didn't change anything else, but it did lower the memory multiplier to 800MHz. I set the CPU voltage to 3.12v, and added 0.025v to the CPU NB VID, and the LLC to the 3rd position up, High. Everything stable, but I don't like the temps.

You want to see crazy, see what you think of this one. The claim is this is a Phenom II x4 960, running as a Phenom II x6 1605, 6 core. Some of the numbers make no sense to me at all. Scroll down close to the bottom of page 145. Check the cPU voltage as well.

http://www.overclock.net/t/1048912/...s-club-help-thread-fx-8350-support-added/1440

I have my own thoughts, but I want to see what you guys think.

Russ

 

No surprises there Russ! The 960T is a core locked 1090T, plain and simple. Have seen a few of them unlocked now, though with varying results. Some people have managed Penta-cores with them. Some have managed full hex-cores. Some have stability issues with either of the two cores unlocked at stock speeds. Still others seem to be cherry picked hex-cores just with 2 cores disabled and so still OC like mad when unlocked.

I was able to unlock my X3 720BE to a full quad core, though it would only manage 3.2GHz stable with the 4th core unlocked. Even met someone lucky enough to get an engineering sample 7750BE Kuma that would unlock to a full Phenom I X4.

As far as the MB goes, please get back to me on that Russ. I am eager to try it and see what it does for my OCing