Getting Cache Back . . . .

Full Article - Overclockers.Com


From The Article "Getting Cache Back . . . ." - Ed Stroligo - 9/8/03

The enterprising folks at Overclockers.ru (summary in English here) have found that these new Duron do come with 256K cache, and that AMD merely snips a bridge to knock out 192K of that.

Well, they immediately proceded to undo the snip, and voila, they had a Duron with 256K cache. Well, sometimes. They had one that didn't work.

This seems to indicate that Durons consist of those CPUs cache-castrated for the sake of castration, and those castrated because there is actually something wrong with part of the cache.

XBit Labs points out that Thortons might be turned into Bartons using the same trick. Provided AMD doesn't hide the bridges, something like this is likely to work.

Click to expand...

NOTE: This Information Is Edited :- Reading The Full Article Is Recomended

1) This is indeed interesting Information, has anybody tried this technique ? - How did you get on.
2) Have you considered buying Duron before ? Are you considering buying one now because of this information ?
3) What do you think this means for other AMD processors such as Thortons
4) As an overclocker what does this information mean to you and your future processor choices ?

WOW AMD leaving it in the open for the OCers out there, you just got to love them for it
PS it would be nice if they could show a pic of the bridges, as this looks like the cheapest way to get the skills to start modding chips
[edit] Here is a link to the mod for all interested http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/display/20030908004407.html
I snagged it from this thread http://forum.oc-forums.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=230008 where they are starting to talk about it [/edit]

1) This is indeed interesting Information, has anybody tried this technique ? - How did you get on.

Not yet.


2) Have you considered buying Duron before ? Are you considering buying one now because of this information ?

I currently own an old duron as a backup. I would consider one of these assuming I'd save a bundle over whatever the standard AMD processor is at the time...


3) What do you think this means for other AMD processors such as Thortons ?

Depending on the success rate unlocking these, I'd think it would hurt their pocket with educated enthusiasts (lose sales of more expensive chips).


4) As an overclocker what does this information mean to you and your future processor choices ?

Nothing yet, proof's in the pudding.

4) This is insane - now AMD put out another supremely moddable/overclockable chip for less money - yet they still run on the same lump of silicon.

Now instead of buying a $60 processor and cranking it up to 2.4GHz we can buy a $35 processor, mod it and crank it up to 2,4GHz, assuming the same sort of process is used (Tbred B JIUHB mask or whatever)

How are AMD going to pay for their production costs if they keep hammering (pun intended) away at the lowest price end?

you have to remember the percentage of people that would actually attempt this mod has to be less than one percent. less than 5% certainly overclock their computer and fewer thatn that would attempt bridge modding. i don't think this strategy will hurt amd at all. the average home user who builds a computer buys what one cpu every two years. In the last six months I've bought seven. I'd buy one just to try it. but i'm much more interested in trying the thorton mod to barton.

I don't think the price differance justifies the risk and hassle factor.

The L5 XP to MP mod is a no brainer as there's a significant price savings for no risk to the CPU. If it doesn't work in SMP, then you just clean off the conductive ink and you've got a perfectly fine XP again.

I agree with Audioaficiando.

The risk/hassle is not worth it for $10-$20 price savings.

On the other hand, a duron that does as well as the JIUHBs might post higher WCPUID screenshots due to the lesser amount of cache....

It all depends on your outlook. Some guys will mod the toaster if it's technically feasible. I volt modded my latest motherboard before I even installed it because I could and the chances of success are high for simple modifictations such as these if you have the experience working with electronics--or just want to develop it.

I agree that allow situations like this to exist certainly can't help the average cpu selling price that AMD collects and thus it may well damage their already staggeringly bad profitablity. There is a secondary effect in that many more cpus will be sold, as they will be cheap enough that people can buy lots of extras to play with (blow up even) that they wouldn't buy if the price were stiff. But on the whole it's probably not the best move product planning and marketing wise.

If possible it will be a joy to the hard core guys. Water coolers, phase change guys, and anyone thrilled by making a killer computer out of 35 dollar components will be in heaven. The experienced overclockers will no doubt take a ball of this nature and run with it and it will be interestig to see exactly what advances stem from the flury of activity.

You also have to remember it's cheaper for AMD to use one core, and modify it slightly over their entire line, than it is for them to use 6 diferent cores....

For all we know AMD saw they had a bunch of bartons laying around that had one half or their cache not functioning, they thought, instead of throwing them out, let's castrate them, and sell them as Duron.... it makes sense... taking waste, and making profit from it