- Joined
- Apr 19, 2012
-
Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!
Rgone you should like this, more to come
- Thread starter davedree
- Start date
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2013
- Location
- Great White North, MN
Whatcha bump for?
got some benchmark pictures yet or what?
No kidding. Here I though there was more to see. Kind of feel cheated
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2013
- Location
- Great White North, MN
- Thread Starter
- #25
Ok update, I've found the limit to the board using the fx8320, I was spot on in predicting it's potential. The vrms are able to provide 1.40v on all cores under prime95
at 4.5ghz. 4.6ghz is 15 min stable at 1.43v however the board can simply not support anymore voltage at a sustained load in a situation such as p95. The board will throttle to 2900mhz and the coils will scream near the vrm area.
I am compiling some data, then benches will be updated on here.
If you are wondering about peak temps then ignoring the hwmonitor which is a load of crap, then it was 59c Cpu, 43c Core/Package,
at 4.5ghz. 4.6ghz is 15 min stable at 1.43v however the board can simply not support anymore voltage at a sustained load in a situation such as p95. The board will throttle to 2900mhz and the coils will scream near the vrm area.
I am compiling some data, then benches will be updated on here.
If you are wondering about peak temps then ignoring the hwmonitor which is a load of crap, then it was 59c Cpu, 43c Core/Package,
Last edited:
- Thread Starter
- #26
Ok sorry for the long delay in getting these benches up,
I've been so busy I haven't had much time to myself.
Anyway I'll start by mentioning that the mboard is still alive and all is good.
I'm waiting for a friend to lend me a 955 to finish off some of my benches, the reason being is that in a 64bit operating/software environment there are some gains in comparison to a 32bit situation. The b55 won't unlock in a x64 os, so thats why I need the 955.
The board as said before keeps the fx8320 2 hr prime95 stable at 4.5ghz. It's game stable at 4.8ghz, and bench's at 5.0ghz.
The main objectives from this experiment were;
* To see how far a budget 38quid board can be pushed,
* To compare the fx series vs the b55 in gaming and benches and real workloads.
Here's a first comparison of the Fx vs the b55. For the fx6 and fx4 I disabled the modules accordingly in the bios.
The fx used a 2200ht, 2200 cpu-nb and 1600mhz ddr3 ram, 9,9,9,24 1t
The b55 used a 2000 ht, 2600-cpu-nb, ddr3 1600mhz 9,9,9,24 1t and obviously couldn't clock beyond 4.26ghz.
Using handbrake in a Windows 7 x86 environment, I ripped a 720x576 avi video file which is 1.20gb in size, using a regular high profile. The destination and source files were both on the same hdd.
Looking at the results it's impressive to see the fx8 scaling despite having such a low clock speed. What's even more cool is that the fx4 performs pretty much 50% slower than the fx8. More importantly it shows how disappointing the fx4 is in comparison to the b55. Requiring 600mhz -/+ over the clock speed of the b55 to provide parity or slightly outperform the b55.
Big gains from the x64 version, now the fx4 gets the lead once it's clocked up
I've been so busy I haven't had much time to myself.
Anyway I'll start by mentioning that the mboard is still alive and all is good.
I'm waiting for a friend to lend me a 955 to finish off some of my benches, the reason being is that in a 64bit operating/software environment there are some gains in comparison to a 32bit situation. The b55 won't unlock in a x64 os, so thats why I need the 955.
The board as said before keeps the fx8320 2 hr prime95 stable at 4.5ghz. It's game stable at 4.8ghz, and bench's at 5.0ghz.
The main objectives from this experiment were;
* To see how far a budget 38quid board can be pushed,
* To compare the fx series vs the b55 in gaming and benches and real workloads.
Here's a first comparison of the Fx vs the b55. For the fx6 and fx4 I disabled the modules accordingly in the bios.
The fx used a 2200ht, 2200 cpu-nb and 1600mhz ddr3 ram, 9,9,9,24 1t
The b55 used a 2000 ht, 2600-cpu-nb, ddr3 1600mhz 9,9,9,24 1t and obviously couldn't clock beyond 4.26ghz.
Using handbrake in a Windows 7 x86 environment, I ripped a 720x576 avi video file which is 1.20gb in size, using a regular high profile. The destination and source files were both on the same hdd.
Looking at the results it's impressive to see the fx8 scaling despite having such a low clock speed. What's even more cool is that the fx4 performs pretty much 50% slower than the fx8. More importantly it shows how disappointing the fx4 is in comparison to the b55. Requiring 600mhz -/+ over the clock speed of the b55 to provide parity or slightly outperform the b55.
Big gains from the x64 version, now the fx4 gets the lead once it's clocked up
Last edited:
- Joined
- Apr 20, 2004
- Location
- JAX, Mississauna
@ "davedree", thanks man. We get way more how to overclock my shett than informative writeups on what something is actually capable of acheiving in a real users hands. Thanks.
Nice graphing also man. Easy to read where some are not so eye-friendly.
I don't want an APU "yet" but as many peeps as we see coming into this forum section, so woefully under-prepared for FX power and heat...more might do better with an APU rig.
Again thanks for the information and pics.
RGone...
Nice graphing also man. Easy to read where some are not so eye-friendly.
I don't want an APU "yet" but as many peeps as we see coming into this forum section, so woefully under-prepared for FX power and heat...more might do better with an APU rig.
Again thanks for the information and pics.
RGone...
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2012
I agree, for most it could be a good gamer( with a card) or casual HTPC and not overly expensive.
- Thread Starter
- #29
Thanks Rgone, I remember reading a long time ago a report you carried out on something like bulldozer seems to flatline at 4.3ghz, or was it Piledriver ?
I was fascinated by your level of detail to voltage thresholds and how you graphed relative speed gains vs heat and voltage achieved to get there per each 100mhz. I do appreciate how long it takes to test and retest and then observe and datalog, then present your findings in graphs and write about it. To probably 99% of people on these forums all they want is to be told how to input numbers into the bios or amd overdrive so they can go game on bf4 or something. They don't have any interest in what's involved with the overclocking they just want it to work and work instantly, they proably view a pic of your bios details which you've spent weeks perfecting, and they input it after 20 seconds of looking at your picture, then wonder why it doesnt work.
Its nice to see some members on here who are still playing with phenom II and are actually willing to learn how to work with the amd architecture and how to overclock it.
Can't remember his name think it was poco he showed an x4 at 4.3ghz or higher and it's great to see his thread, its what made me invest in a cheap board to muck around with.
I know you understand the time it takes to go into detail on these things but theres a lot more from me to come, I just am struggling to find time.
My areas are cinebench ,(meaningless score results but the workload time and scaling is great). And many synthetic benches will be posted. I wouldn't mind having a Thuban x6 to see how it hangs out with the fx .
I am aware of the cpu-nb especially with phenom II, I've seen you've also hit on this subject aswell as other members. I haven't played with the cpu-nb on fx yet, but thats another adventure for another day.
Hsa is going to take a while to gain traction but the gains will be amazing. I've been keeping an eye on Kaveri, I feel its a year too late and the ddr3 sucks, but its a start and as long as Amd push hard in the apu direction, I think they have something that genuinely innovates computing. I mean look at how lazy Intel have been for the last 3 years !!! churning out the same crap.
Gaming is one of the concerns that I have with the fx, I have benched 3 games so far and if honest the results don't look great for the fx compared to a 4ghz and over phII x4.
I have more games to test and datalog. Seems an fx needs to be in the 4.9ghz and above range to start making gains on 4.2ghz phII x4 .
Overall I've proved the board in the right hands can hold out pretty welll for a 4+1 budget board. It no way replaces superior am3+ boards but it certainly beats the disastrous 990fx ud3 REV 3
I was fascinated by your level of detail to voltage thresholds and how you graphed relative speed gains vs heat and voltage achieved to get there per each 100mhz. I do appreciate how long it takes to test and retest and then observe and datalog, then present your findings in graphs and write about it. To probably 99% of people on these forums all they want is to be told how to input numbers into the bios or amd overdrive so they can go game on bf4 or something. They don't have any interest in what's involved with the overclocking they just want it to work and work instantly, they proably view a pic of your bios details which you've spent weeks perfecting, and they input it after 20 seconds of looking at your picture, then wonder why it doesnt work.
Its nice to see some members on here who are still playing with phenom II and are actually willing to learn how to work with the amd architecture and how to overclock it.
Can't remember his name think it was poco he showed an x4 at 4.3ghz or higher and it's great to see his thread, its what made me invest in a cheap board to muck around with.
I know you understand the time it takes to go into detail on these things but theres a lot more from me to come, I just am struggling to find time.
My areas are cinebench ,(meaningless score results but the workload time and scaling is great). And many synthetic benches will be posted. I wouldn't mind having a Thuban x6 to see how it hangs out with the fx .
I am aware of the cpu-nb especially with phenom II, I've seen you've also hit on this subject aswell as other members. I haven't played with the cpu-nb on fx yet, but thats another adventure for another day.
Hsa is going to take a while to gain traction but the gains will be amazing. I've been keeping an eye on Kaveri, I feel its a year too late and the ddr3 sucks, but its a start and as long as Amd push hard in the apu direction, I think they have something that genuinely innovates computing. I mean look at how lazy Intel have been for the last 3 years !!! churning out the same crap.
Gaming is one of the concerns that I have with the fx, I have benched 3 games so far and if honest the results don't look great for the fx compared to a 4ghz and over phII x4.
I have more games to test and datalog. Seems an fx needs to be in the 4.9ghz and above range to start making gains on 4.2ghz phII x4 .
Overall I've proved the board in the right hands can hold out pretty welll for a 4+1 budget board. It no way replaces superior am3+ boards but it certainly beats the disastrous 990fx ud3 REV 3
Last edited:
- Thread Starter
- #31
I don't know I think there's something in the windows registry which senses its
a b55 by its unique cpu id and then restarts the boot process.
please explain why windows 7 x86 unlocks fine not a problem,
but win 7 x64, win x64sp1, win 8.1 will not install when the b55 is unlocked, but if you install the x64 os's in an x2 555 mode, then unlock to a b55 it will reset just after the post ?
a b55 by its unique cpu id and then restarts the boot process.
please explain why windows 7 x86 unlocks fine not a problem,
but win 7 x64, win x64sp1, win 8.1 will not install when the b55 is unlocked, but if you install the x64 os's in an x2 555 mode, then unlock to a b55 it will reset just after the post ?
- Thread Starter
- #33
Oh yeah I agree in the old days it was by acc and an external chip, now it's by the bios, although most modern boards have thrown the core unlock away.
But it makes no sense that a windows x64 won't work but an x86 does, to me it seems the os is sensing the cpu and refusing it.
But it makes no sense that a windows x64 won't work but an x86 does, to me it seems the os is sensing the cpu and refusing it.
- Thread Starter
- #34
- Joined
- Apr 20, 2004
- Location
- JAX, Mississauna
I don't want to get feisty but in this b55's situation it does.
Key phrase here might be better worded if it says > My unlocked to b55 will not work in Win 7 64 bit but does in Win 7 32 bit. I am guessing the unlock is working but the unlocked cores are offing the 64 bit's ability to run. 64 bit is a bit more sensitvie in some aspects for sure.
RGone...ster.
- Thread Starter
- #36
Yeah thats a better way of putting it Rgone,
when unlocked as a b55, even disabling core 3 and 4 the computer will finish its post and just as it finishes the irq table to then load windows, you hear the hdd cache for a second then stop, then the computer restarts.
when unlocked as a b55, even disabling core 3 and 4 the computer will finish its post and just as it finishes the irq table to then load windows, you hear the hdd cache for a second then stop, then the computer restarts.
Exactly my point, thanks.
The unlock works, the chip just has some flaw the will not run a 64 bit OS. It's not the OS's fault, it's the chip.
- Thread Starter
- #38
Exactly the chip unlocks, it clearly is at fault but my original statement although needs to be phrased better like Rgone has said, ''The b55 won't unlock in a x64 os'' still stands.
The chip won't work in an x64 environment which is what I said from the start, hence I needed to use a 965.
Anyways I have discovered something from playing with the 965 I'm borrowing in x64 using handbrake, the scaling of the fx4 provides better performance than the phenom II once it reaches higher clocks. In 32bit mode the fx4 struggled in comparison.
Updated graph of 64 bit above.
The chip won't work in an x64 environment which is what I said from the start, hence I needed to use a 965.
Anyways I have discovered something from playing with the 965 I'm borrowing in x64 using handbrake, the scaling of the fx4 provides better performance than the phenom II once it reaches higher clocks. In 32bit mode the fx4 struggled in comparison.
Updated graph of 64 bit above.
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2009
- Location
- Clearwater FL
I'm not familiar with AMD chips myself these days, but is the PVP turned off in the BIOS?
I'm looking through everything in the post again, nice job BTW.
I'm just wondering if by what you're stating there is a PVP option in there that you could turn off that is on.
I'm being obtuse perhaps, but thought I'd ask.
Similar threads
