-
Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!
Anyone else excited for the new SB750s?
- Thread starter ChristmasGT
- Start date
- Joined
- May 25, 2007
- Location
- With Yahweh in Colorado
I have kind of falling out of the loop of things can someone tell me what the hipe is plz?
The hype is that SB750 (new southbridge chip) is much improved over SB600. The new southbridge will supposedly enable us to achieve better overclocking. On SB750 boards, I think the 9850 defaults to 2.9GHz and the 9950 defaults to 3.0GHz. AMD must be fairly confident to do that.
- Joined
- May 25, 2007
- Location
- With Yahweh in Colorado
well I did some reading and they are talking like a extra 200Mhz. I wonder how the older AM2 stuff will do. It would be pretty cool to see some of the older 90NM stuff and a 5000+ black clocked on it.
What I dont understand is how the SB would give better clocks. Will this be a ddr2 or ddr3 mobo?
What I dont understand is how the SB would give better clocks. Will this be a ddr2 or ddr3 mobo?
OP
- Joined
- Sep 22, 2004
- Thread Starter
- #26
OP
- Joined
- Sep 22, 2004
- Thread Starter
- #27
Wow in the middle of reading it seemed to have pulled itself down? in case anyone else can't get it here's the final words:
"Actually, these are not our final words as we have significantly more testing to complete on newly arriving boards with the soon to be introduced SB750 South Bridge. So where do we start?
Let's see, AMD has introduced a new South Bridge that is certainly an upgrade to the long in the tooth SB600 and also addresses one feature flaw in the SB700. That feature flaw is RAID 5 and while we are not proponents of host controller RAID 5, early indications is that AMD's implementation is no worse than NVIDIA's or Intel's current solutions. Marketing can check that one off the feature list now. However, we are still disappointed in the PCIe 1.1 interface to the 790FX/780G and upcoming new NB chipsets.
AMD is probably correct that there is plenty of bandwidth available with the current solution, but we cannot help but wonder why they did not include a PCIe 2.0 interface given the amount of time this chipset has been under development. Also, the lack of a native LAN interface is perplexing, not from a performance viewpoint, but the fact that additional costs are incurred by the motherboard companies and ultimately users for the additional interface components. For a company that is specializing on reduced cost and highly integrated solutions, this one is perplexing. However, in the end, the performance of the SB750 rivals that of its competitors at this time, or comes close enough in current testing that we can overlook our. Speaking of performance, early numbers (just received final chipset drivers and late beta RAID drivers) indicate a slight improvement over SB700 but well within the error of margin in our storage test suite.
Of course, the big news is the new low level interface between the SB750 and the Phenom CPU. Advanced Clock Calibration is its name and overclocking is its game (a bad throwback to days gone by). In all seriousness, ACC works and depending on just how "substandard" your Phenom might be at overclocking, it works extremely well. We have several theories about what this interface does and how AMD is doing it, but without explicit information or conformation from AMD we will have to continue theorizing about it. Our testing continues for the new product launches next week, but we were satisfied enough with the current numbers to publish early results. What we are not satisfied with is the lack of information from AMD, but that is their prerogative.
Our test results confirm AMD's statements that a 100MHz to 300MHz improvement in Phenom core speeds are attainable with ACC. This is not a guarantee and some processors will require significantly more tuning than others to get up to speed, but overall our experiences to date with several processors are very positive. Our otherwise clock challenged 9850BE suddenly started acting like a Tour de France rider on steroids with ACC enabled. Our clock improvements ranged from 200MHz to 410MHz depending upon our settings. What was particularly interesting is the fact that our largest improvements occurred when we tried raising HT ref clock and increasing the multiplier at the same time.
Our 9850BE responded especially well in this case with ACC enabled, so much so that we wondered if maybe our original settings were completely off. They were not as it turns out after a few hundred reboots between setting changes on several boards. We also found it was much easier to sustain a high NB speed with ACC enabled and this lead to several significant improvements in memory performance. Finally, we found leaving the program on auto settings provided the quickest and easiest overclock improvements, at least with our processors. Utilizing AOD was much simpler than making constant changes in the BIOS, but in the end, neither one offered an improvement over the other one in performance.
We purchased a retail processor that seems to have been blessed by the processor Pope before it left the FAB and arrived in the office. As such, we only recognized a 100MHz improvement in core speed with ACC enabled on the Foxconn board. We were able to tune the SB600 equipped ASUS board to the point where the difference was only 50MHz at the top end. What we did not report on today since we are still verifying the test results, is that ACC did make a significant difference in NB speed with this processor in the midrange clocks from 3GHz to 3.2GHz with NB speeds ranging from 2520 to 2600 at these speeds. Compared to the Foxconn board with ACC turned off or the ASUS board, our maximum NB speeds hovered around 2200 to 2400 with slightly more CPU and NB Vid required.
AMD informed us that we should be able to run lower voltages and improved HT ref clock speeds with the Phenoms. We are currently testing these claims but at this point we do see lower voltages being required at a variety of clock speeds but have not noticed any true improvements in HT ref clocks, yet. As always, your mileage will vary depending upon your CPU and motherboard, but we believe most users will see some improvement, maybe not enough to spend additional money on upgrading the motherboard. That said, we feel like this technology will benefit the enthusiast and feel like it is probably a safe purchase at this time for those users who have to have the latest and greatest technology.
The complaints about the Phenom processor not clocking as well under Vista 64 when compared to Vista 32 are for the most part true. We had varying degrees of separation in the final core speed numbers depending upon settings, enough so that we would have to recommend XP Pro or Vista 32 over their 64-bit counterparts for those who need to squeeze the last ounce of performance from their systems. Once again, the differences varied greatly depending on the motherboard, processor, BIOS settings and if ACC was enabled or not. While the final system settings under Vista 64 were acceptable to us, we know for many this will not be the case. We hope to have some answers soon from AMD.
In the end, we know after a good 60 hours of testing, over 600 different settings, 400+ screen shots, and countless reboots that Advanced Clock Calibration works, yet we do not know anymore about ACC at this point from AMD than SpongeBob SquarePants. "
"Actually, these are not our final words as we have significantly more testing to complete on newly arriving boards with the soon to be introduced SB750 South Bridge. So where do we start?
Let's see, AMD has introduced a new South Bridge that is certainly an upgrade to the long in the tooth SB600 and also addresses one feature flaw in the SB700. That feature flaw is RAID 5 and while we are not proponents of host controller RAID 5, early indications is that AMD's implementation is no worse than NVIDIA's or Intel's current solutions. Marketing can check that one off the feature list now. However, we are still disappointed in the PCIe 1.1 interface to the 790FX/780G and upcoming new NB chipsets.
AMD is probably correct that there is plenty of bandwidth available with the current solution, but we cannot help but wonder why they did not include a PCIe 2.0 interface given the amount of time this chipset has been under development. Also, the lack of a native LAN interface is perplexing, not from a performance viewpoint, but the fact that additional costs are incurred by the motherboard companies and ultimately users for the additional interface components. For a company that is specializing on reduced cost and highly integrated solutions, this one is perplexing. However, in the end, the performance of the SB750 rivals that of its competitors at this time, or comes close enough in current testing that we can overlook our. Speaking of performance, early numbers (just received final chipset drivers and late beta RAID drivers) indicate a slight improvement over SB700 but well within the error of margin in our storage test suite.
Of course, the big news is the new low level interface between the SB750 and the Phenom CPU. Advanced Clock Calibration is its name and overclocking is its game (a bad throwback to days gone by). In all seriousness, ACC works and depending on just how "substandard" your Phenom might be at overclocking, it works extremely well. We have several theories about what this interface does and how AMD is doing it, but without explicit information or conformation from AMD we will have to continue theorizing about it. Our testing continues for the new product launches next week, but we were satisfied enough with the current numbers to publish early results. What we are not satisfied with is the lack of information from AMD, but that is their prerogative.
Our test results confirm AMD's statements that a 100MHz to 300MHz improvement in Phenom core speeds are attainable with ACC. This is not a guarantee and some processors will require significantly more tuning than others to get up to speed, but overall our experiences to date with several processors are very positive. Our otherwise clock challenged 9850BE suddenly started acting like a Tour de France rider on steroids with ACC enabled. Our clock improvements ranged from 200MHz to 410MHz depending upon our settings. What was particularly interesting is the fact that our largest improvements occurred when we tried raising HT ref clock and increasing the multiplier at the same time.
Our 9850BE responded especially well in this case with ACC enabled, so much so that we wondered if maybe our original settings were completely off. They were not as it turns out after a few hundred reboots between setting changes on several boards. We also found it was much easier to sustain a high NB speed with ACC enabled and this lead to several significant improvements in memory performance. Finally, we found leaving the program on auto settings provided the quickest and easiest overclock improvements, at least with our processors. Utilizing AOD was much simpler than making constant changes in the BIOS, but in the end, neither one offered an improvement over the other one in performance.
We purchased a retail processor that seems to have been blessed by the processor Pope before it left the FAB and arrived in the office. As such, we only recognized a 100MHz improvement in core speed with ACC enabled on the Foxconn board. We were able to tune the SB600 equipped ASUS board to the point where the difference was only 50MHz at the top end. What we did not report on today since we are still verifying the test results, is that ACC did make a significant difference in NB speed with this processor in the midrange clocks from 3GHz to 3.2GHz with NB speeds ranging from 2520 to 2600 at these speeds. Compared to the Foxconn board with ACC turned off or the ASUS board, our maximum NB speeds hovered around 2200 to 2400 with slightly more CPU and NB Vid required.
AMD informed us that we should be able to run lower voltages and improved HT ref clock speeds with the Phenoms. We are currently testing these claims but at this point we do see lower voltages being required at a variety of clock speeds but have not noticed any true improvements in HT ref clocks, yet. As always, your mileage will vary depending upon your CPU and motherboard, but we believe most users will see some improvement, maybe not enough to spend additional money on upgrading the motherboard. That said, we feel like this technology will benefit the enthusiast and feel like it is probably a safe purchase at this time for those users who have to have the latest and greatest technology.
The complaints about the Phenom processor not clocking as well under Vista 64 when compared to Vista 32 are for the most part true. We had varying degrees of separation in the final core speed numbers depending upon settings, enough so that we would have to recommend XP Pro or Vista 32 over their 64-bit counterparts for those who need to squeeze the last ounce of performance from their systems. Once again, the differences varied greatly depending on the motherboard, processor, BIOS settings and if ACC was enabled or not. While the final system settings under Vista 64 were acceptable to us, we know for many this will not be the case. We hope to have some answers soon from AMD.
In the end, we know after a good 60 hours of testing, over 600 different settings, 400+ screen shots, and countless reboots that Advanced Clock Calibration works, yet we do not know anymore about ACC at this point from AMD than SpongeBob SquarePants. "
- Joined
- May 26, 2004
- Location
- Japan, Tokyo, Ueno.
DDR2, there will the new chipstes for the DDR3 mobos the 8XX line.
The K8 cpus do not have the pins to connect directly to the SB so it won't make a difference in OCing those processors.
OP
- Joined
- Sep 22, 2004
- Thread Starter
- #29
now the question is what the better bang for the buck is going to end up being, a 9850BE or a 9950, I can't wait to see more reviews and see if they fall in line, 3.5ghz on a 200 dollar quad isn't bad at all,
it'd be nice to pick up a 9850BE and use the extra 30 dollars difference between the 9950 and picking up an Ultra 120 or Tuniq Tower so that can go a long ways
it'd be nice to pick up a 9850BE and use the extra 30 dollars difference between the 9950 and picking up an Ultra 120 or Tuniq Tower so that can go a long ways
QuietIce
Disabled
- Joined
- May 7, 2006
- Location
- Anywhere but there
I'll probably hold out for an SB750 - if nothing else to put the "old" 9850BE into and hopefully get better than 3.0 GHz ... 
OP
- Joined
- Sep 22, 2004
- Thread Starter
- #33
OP
- Joined
- Sep 22, 2004
- Thread Starter
- #34
Anandtech testing a B2:
http://anandtech.com/weblog/showpost.aspx?i=473
3.3ghz with a 9600BE! even if that is indeed a lot of voltage, thats a heck of alot better! I've been hearing from various websites August 6th will be the release date, originally it was supposed to be this week, but for some reason it was pushed back
http://anandtech.com/weblog/showpost.aspx?i=473
3.3ghz with a 9600BE! even if that is indeed a lot of voltage, thats a heck of alot better! I've been hearing from various websites August 6th will be the release date, originally it was supposed to be this week, but for some reason it was pushed back
- Joined
- May 26, 2004
- Location
- Japan, Tokyo, Ueno.
Have to admint with B2 in the game this is getting interesting if it works with the TLB patch switched off 3G capable quads for like 120$.
Hopefully ACC has little to no effect on performance, I am looking forward to some beches.
Hopefully ACC has little to no effect on performance, I am looking forward to some beches.
- Joined
- May 26, 2004
- Location
- Japan, Tokyo, Ueno.
Yes, these will replace current SBs but as far as I know new 790 boards come out first.
