- Joined
- Dec 16, 2003
- Location
- ON, CA
-
Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!
GA-MA790X-UD4P Bios F5A
- Thread starter Psykoikonov
- Start date
- Joined
- May 8, 2003
- Location
- BC
Has anyone tried this BIOS yet? Is there any changes to any overclocks? I currently have the F3 BIOS and haven't bothered updating it yet.
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2009
- Location
- Toronto, Canada
I'm more concerned about the 720BE unlocked core cold boot bug.
Does this BIOS revision fix the problem?
Does this BIOS revision fix the problem?
- Joined
- May 8, 2003
- Location
- BC
Why are you phase cooling or using LN2?
http://www.amdzone.com/index.php/ne...76-amd-now-using-liquid-helium-for-overclocks
The Phenom II was supposed to have no cold bug.
http://www.amdzone.com/index.php/ne...76-amd-now-using-liquid-helium-for-overclocks
The Phenom II was supposed to have no cold bug.
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2009
- Location
- Toronto, Canada
Sorry... not the cold bug, but cold boot bug.
On unlocked 720BEs, if you decide to simply restart the computer, it will POST and boot into windows fine. You can then prime/occt/linpack for hours and it will not crash.
However, if you shut down the computer and wait 5 minutes before turning it on again, the computer will fail to POST.
This only happens on 720BE's with unlocked 4th cores.
On unlocked 720BEs, if you decide to simply restart the computer, it will POST and boot into windows fine. You can then prime/occt/linpack for hours and it will not crash.
However, if you shut down the computer and wait 5 minutes before turning it on again, the computer will fail to POST.
This only happens on 720BE's with unlocked 4th cores.
- Joined
- May 8, 2003
- Location
- BC
Hmmm, interesting. Well, I don't have to worry about the 4th core as my bios doesn't even have the ACC option required to do that.
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2009
- Location
- Toronto, Canada
Actually, you might want to try this bios. Refer to this thread about the MA790GP-UD4H
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=223992
Gigabyte might have made the same changes to this UD4P bios as to the UD4H. You might have luck enabling ACC and unlocking the 4th core.
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=223992
Gigabyte might have made the same changes to this UD4P bios as to the UD4H. You might have luck enabling ACC and unlocking the 4th core.
Last edited:
- Joined
- May 8, 2003
- Location
- BC
So in that thread, the people say the F5a bios has the ACC option back in it. I guess I will have to give it a try.
Is it worth trying to unlock the 4th core? Are there noticeable performance gains? I haven't seen anyone overclock a "4th core unlocked x3" as high as an x3 that was still on 3 cores.
Is it worth trying to unlock the 4th core? Are there noticeable performance gains? I haven't seen anyone overclock a "4th core unlocked x3" as high as an x3 that was still on 3 cores.
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2009
- Location
- Toronto, Canada
It is a luck of the draw thing.
In my case, I wasn't able to push my chip very far. I was looking at 1.48v for 3.6GHz and 2600MHz CPU-NB running on 3 cores. I could have pushed to 3.7, but I figured >1.5v wasn't worth it.
I was lucky enough however to have a stable 4th core. I'm currently running 3.5GHz with 1.48, but only 2000MHz CPU-NB. Any higher on the NB and the system goes unstable.
In terms of performance wise, I can't say I see a difference between 3 cores and 4 cores. Then again, the only games I'm playing are Killing Fields and L4D. Both are hardly graphics/cpu intensive. I'm also not encoding or running any simulations to warrant the processing power of 3 cores, let alone 4.
In my case, I wasn't able to push my chip very far. I was looking at 1.48v for 3.6GHz and 2600MHz CPU-NB running on 3 cores. I could have pushed to 3.7, but I figured >1.5v wasn't worth it.
I was lucky enough however to have a stable 4th core. I'm currently running 3.5GHz with 1.48, but only 2000MHz CPU-NB. Any higher on the NB and the system goes unstable.
In terms of performance wise, I can't say I see a difference between 3 cores and 4 cores. Then again, the only games I'm playing are Killing Fields and L4D. Both are hardly graphics/cpu intensive. I'm also not encoding or running any simulations to warrant the processing power of 3 cores, let alone 4.
- Joined
- May 8, 2003
- Location
- BC
Enabling ACC caused my system to not post and somehow managed to wreck my RAID array, so I had to stop my overclocking to reinstall windows 
Scrapping the 4th core idea, I have noticed that while stress testing, CPUID HW Monitor now reports my temperatures to be higher than before, mainly the TMPIN1 temperature which has gone up about 5C. This temperature used to be a lot closer to the Core 0,1,& 2 temps, but is now about 16C higher.
It's hard to get a definitive answer as to what each temperature sensor is, but I thought I read that TMPIN1 was the main CPU sensor while the Core ones were internal? Which ones should I be more concerned about? I was told that keeping my CPU under 50C was good, but that person was referring to the Core temps. Right now my core temps are at 38C while the TMPIN1 is at 54C. Am I still ok? Are the core temps the ones I should focus on keeping down?
Scrapping the 4th core idea, I have noticed that while stress testing, CPUID HW Monitor now reports my temperatures to be higher than before, mainly the TMPIN1 temperature which has gone up about 5C. This temperature used to be a lot closer to the Core 0,1,& 2 temps, but is now about 16C higher.
It's hard to get a definitive answer as to what each temperature sensor is, but I thought I read that TMPIN1 was the main CPU sensor while the Core ones were internal? Which ones should I be more concerned about? I was told that keeping my CPU under 50C was good, but that person was referring to the Core temps. Right now my core temps are at 38C while the TMPIN1 is at 54C. Am I still ok? Are the core temps the ones I should focus on keeping down?
Similar threads
