- Joined
- Jul 29, 2001
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=35353
And they OC pretty good if you ask me
And they OC pretty good if you ask me
-
Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!
The NewCastles are HERE!
- Thread starter The Coolest
- Start date
In the GCPUID utility, is the CPUID string 8000_0001h EAX[31:0] being read?
The older 754 model w/ 512 KB L2 (ClamHammer cut-down L2), the string is 00000F4Ah (model number end with AR),
and the newer 754 model w/ 512 KB L2, the string is 0000FC0h (model number end with AX).
Both are CG rev.
Can a new version of GCPUID be made to show the string 8000_0001h EAX[31:0], in additional to the existing rev such as C0, CG.
I think F4Ah is for ClawHammer and FC0h is for the new NewCastle. Then GCPUID can identify ClawHammer and NewCastle.
The older 754 model w/ 512 KB L2 (ClamHammer cut-down L2), the string is 00000F4Ah (model number end with AR),
and the newer 754 model w/ 512 KB L2, the string is 0000FC0h (model number end with AX).
Both are CG rev.
Can a new version of GCPUID be made to show the string 8000_0001h EAX[31:0], in additional to the existing rev such as C0, CG.
I think F4Ah is for ClawHammer and FC0h is for the new NewCastle. Then GCPUID can identify ClawHammer and NewCastle.
Last edited:
OP
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2001
- Thread Starter
- #3
GCPUID is already capable of identifying all kinds of different hammer procs. There is a certain problem tho, it seems to crash on some A64s. I trying to find the reason to why would it work on some but not work on some others :\
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2001
- Location
- Mauritius
Read the last erratum in the revision guide for an explanation of the problem with CG revision processors.The Coolest said:
http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/TechnicalResources/0,,30_182_739_7203,00.html
OP
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2001
- Thread Starter
- #7
Great... Amd and their problems 
I'll add that to GCPUID, thanks for the heads up. I doubt that is what really causing the problem though... 240 Opterons for example are showing giberish instead of the platform. I will have to take a more carefull look at my code and see if I can fix this issue i'm currently having. The processor in that thread tho, clearly shows up as a Ch, unless CPU-Z author has already fixed this problem in v1.22
I'll add that to GCPUID, thanks for the heads up. I doubt that is what really causing the problem though... 240 Opterons for example are showing giberish instead of the platform. I will have to take a more carefull look at my code and see if I can fix this issue i'm currently having. The processor in that thread tho, clearly shows up as a Ch, unless CPU-Z author has already fixed this problem in v1.22
