2003 week last unlocked Barton was manufactured

[Bobby]

I got to play with both 2500+ Bartons and they were both unlocked. I didn't get to try too much but 9-12 seemed to work fine. They were both on an Abit NF7 board v2.0 (not NF7-S).

-Bobby

 

[jjyiz28]

Locked means you can't change the multiplier, like you couldn't with Athlon XP Palomino's.

If you have PC2700 RAM, the default is 166, overclockable to average 180, 190 FSB, depending on brand.

If you have PC3200 RAM, the default is 200, that's 11 x 200 = 2200
If you can overclock PC3200 to 209 FSB, you get 11 x 209 = 2299

For 2.4 GHz, you'll need RAM that can do 219 FSB and that's not average.

since when do you have to run your fsb and mem in sync??? use ratios to run your ram is spd speed, and run the fsb higher. running in async is not catatrophic. ie) i'd rather run 200fsb/166mem rather than 166fsb/166mem. but i'd rather run 166fsb/166mem than 166fsb/200mem.

 

[c627627]

Good point jjyiz28, there's that option if we can't figure out how to unlock the new Bartons.

Still, in sync is much better for overall performance...

 

[temp123456]

AQYFA 0340
AQYFA 0341
are locked
AQXFA 0336 are unlocked

 

[c627627]

Thanks for that "temp123456".

We only have one example of pre week 39 lock, so until another one appears, the working assumption is that Bartons were altered week 39 and later but not all of them.

I doubt that they did this to simply move us to 2600+, that doesn't make sense, this is the working assumption, imo:

AMD is locking them because this summer someone was remarking them after locking them at a higher multi and then reselling them.

Same reason intel started locking them too back in the late 90's. Some one was buying the 233 chips and remarking them as 266 and 300MHz chips. I mean they did it too alot of them. Supposedly this summer resellers where getting whole shipments in with some of the CPUs being remarked.

 

[blazer99]

and the list grows ... but where's the pattern?

btw ... some have described their chip as a "y-chip" or some other letter. the chip i'm getting has a many-digit-code (right after the axda2500#) that starts with a "9", not a letter. does anyone actually know what that stands for or means?

 

[Spanko]

This thread has been linked on the frontpage on HardOCP and they said they were going to ask AMD about this barton locking on monday and "hope to get an official response" so maybe this will all be cleared up then. Im glad they saw this and are doing this, I really want to hear AMDs response!

 

[shiyan]

since when do you have to run your fsb and mem in sync??? use ratios to run your ram is spd speed, and run the fsb higher. running in async is not catatrophic. ie) i'd rather run 200fsb/166mem rather than 166fsb/166mem. but i'd rather run 166fsb/166mem than 166fsb/200mem.

good point jjyiz28, I thought people were aware of this.

pretty much all the modern AMD motherboards support async FSB:RAM, KT600, nForce2, KT880. Even a lot of the older motherboards supported async running of the memory, although they might lack the PCI dividers to run the high FSBs...

I think it will be mainly people with the older motherboards who really don't have a good solution for this locked multiplier problem. For example I am able to run my 2400+ (TbredB) on my KT266A, and overclocked it with higher multipliers. If I bought a locked Barton for that board, I'd have to run my PCI at dangerous speeds.

I doubt people with dual channel DDR lose that much system performance if they ran the memory slower than the FSB, as dual channel DDR provides plenty of bandwidth anyway. I should try this out when I get back to my dorm tomorrow.

 

[BowerR64]

is it possible that it wasnt a locked chip but maybe a fake?

maybe they did somthing to the chip not to lock it but to clock it up and make money off it.

is that possible?

ignore my post if im like way off i havnt been fallowing everything latley

 

[c627627]

BowerR64, this is being reported by users here and in Europe and in Australia...

But on a funny note:

Sure, we're all outraged, but understand that this is the logical thing for AMD to do. However, note that AMD is still leaving die-hard overclockers an escape path; the FX-5x. You now have to pay dearly to enjoy the luxury of an unlocked multiplier, but it is an open option.

All your quote are belong to us:





Gautam made fun of [H] in several of our threads so I know he's not working for them.

Originally posted by Gautam a few weeks ago:
Ok guys, this has gone far enough. Now we're quoting the [H]...

Now [H] is quoting you, buddy...

 

[sensai]

hmmn i was thinking about getting an xp3000 or so...now im not sure...if amd is gonna keep their cpu's locked.. well i might as well get a pentium...

 

[pelikan]

Async performance is too low to consider IMO. There's plenty of ram that runs 220-230 FSB. I don't see why overclockers would need to consider running async.

 

[RoyBoy]

My AQZEA 0333 is unlocked and cooking right now. Gotta love it.

 

[forming]

I just got a 2500+ Barton from newegg this week. It shipped monday, November 3, and it is a AQXEA 0330 MPMW.

So far 2.5Ghz on stock voltages with a slk900, 50cfm 92mm fan. Glad I ordered when I did

Oh yeah, its unlocked too.

 

[shiyan]

Async performance is too low to consider IMO. There's plenty of ram that runs 220-230 FSB. I don't see why overclockers would need to consider running async.

that's true, but you do need ram with BH5 chips, and there are a lot of people who bought a lot of RAM from some time ago, which might not run at such high speeds.

running async does come with a performance hit, and not acceptable for people chasing every last fps, but for people on a budget with a lot of PC2100 or PC2700 on their hands, running async is a viable option.

remember there are people who overclock for the pleasure of overclocking, as a hobby, and there are people who overclock to save some money.

running the RAM asynchronously is not an option for that first group, but is acceptable for that second group.

 

[pelikan]

I just got a 2500+ Barton from newegg this week. It shipped monday, November 3, and it is a AQXEA 0330 MPMW.

So far 2.5Ghz on stock voltages with a slk900, 50cfm 92mm fan. Glad I ordered when I did

Oh yeah, its unlocked too.

I've never heard of a chip going that fast with stock voltage. Is that prime stable? What FSB and multi?

 

[blazer99]

woa ... well done!


what multis and fsb?

getting late ... running on caffeine now ...

 

[pelikan]

that's true, but you do need ram with BH5 chips, and there are a lot of people who bought a lot of RAM from some time ago, which might not run at such high speeds.

running async does come with a performance hit, and not acceptable for people chasing every last fps, but for people on a budget with a lot of PC2100 or PC2700 on their hands, running async is a viable option.

remember there are people who overclock for the pleasure of overclocking, as a hobby, and there are people who overclock to save some money.

running the RAM asynchronously is not an option for that first group, but is acceptable for that second group.

Yeah, no doubt. I forget that some people are not working with the fastest parts.

 

[jjyiz28]

Async performance is too low to consider IMO. There's plenty of ram that runs 220-230 FSB. I don't see why overclockers would need to consider running async.

too low?? i think it was around like 5%, average. lazy to find the benchmarks. i'm not willing to spend a premiem on fast ram just to run in sync, jsut for that 5% boost.

 

[blazer99]

besides liquid cooling systems ... what "quiet" (or at least as quiet as stock amd cpu fan?) would y'all recommend?

I'd prefer to keep it all stock cooling initially, but later, when I'm more tempted to see how far it will go, I imagine I'll need some better cooling.