Help w/ EVGA 730a & AMD 7750 BE "KUMA"

[Humpy Bogart]

Hey guys, I'm new around here and am need of a little help. Before I get started though, I'll list some of my hardware (what I believe to be relevant):

Motherboard: EVGA nForce 730a (113-M2-e113)
Processor: AMD Athlon 64 X2 7750 Kuma 2.7GHz Black Edition
Memory: (2) OCZ DDR2 PC2-6400 2gb; (1) Wintec AmpX 1GB DDR2-800 PC2-6400

So anyways, like i said, i'm pretty new to all of this and ive been going through several tutorials, focusing mainly on the "Offical" Overclocking Guide - AMD Socket AM2 by durch in another forum. Right now, I'm at the point where I'm perusing through the bios trying to identify all of the necessary and relevant settings that pertain to OCing (section 2 in durch's tutorial). However, I can't seem to find the setting(s) for either of the multipliers: HT or CPU. I've dug through every menu and submenu, but still nothing. I even tried flashing my bios with the newest version from EVGA's website, thinking that this might give me some more options within the bios. This notion was based on this from EVGA's updated driver page:
"The following was updated in release Z13 (my bios update):
Adds support for Phenom II CPU's
Improved support for CPU Multiplier adjustments."
Unfortunately, I still could't find this setting in my bios following the flash. My bios is Phoenix - AwardBios CMOS Setup utility, if that means anything to anybody. Right now, the processor is running at 2700 with 13.5 multiplier (stock). This I know from the boot up screen. But how the hell do i got about changing this???
Also, if anyone has any advice on a good place to start for overclocking to something reasonable and fairly conservative--say, 3000 mhz or so--it would be really appreciated!

Also, I've got some screen shots; maybe that'll help:
*Note: this is all stock right now, except for turning cool n' quiet off..











<edit>

CPU Feature


DRAM Configuration

 

[QuietIce]

to OCF!


We also have an AM2 OC'ing Guide but it doesn't cover this subject, either. You do have CPU multiplier and voltage control, it's just set up for an AMD tech instead of the general public. On the CPU Feature screen you'll notice the line "CPU FID"? That 'F' is for Frequency and the value shown there, "0B", is a hexadecimal number that is plugged into an equation to get the CPU multiplier. The equation is:
CPU multiplier = CPU FID + 10h / 2 (the 'h' in '10h' means it's a hexadecimal number).
0Bh = 11 (hexadecimal extends decimal above ten by using A=10, B=11, C=12, as so on) and 10h = 16 so 11+16 = 27 then divide by 2 gives us 13.5X. In short, increasing the CPU FID to '0C' will give you 14X, '0D' will be 14.5X, etc.

The voltage, CPU VID, uses a table but, essentially, every increase you make to the CPU VID increases the voltage by 0.025v. Your current setting, '12', shows the voltage being 1.250v so setting this to '13' would be 1.275, '14' = 1.300v, etc. This also applied to the CPU NB VID.

The information I found on the CPU NB FID didn't seem to agree at all with the value I'm seeing in your BIOS so I'm not sure what to say about that one. You could try a couple of different values and maybe you can figure out what eVGA's BIOS writers were doing.


In case you're interested you may want to check our AM2 Guide out as well. There's a cheat sheet in post #26 that many people find helpful as a reference tool.
http://www.overclockers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=555058

Whichever guide you use I wish you luck in your OC. You're already a big step ahead of most people - you're reading and trying to learn!


PS
Your HT Link speed is labeled K8 <-> NB Speed and is located on the "Frequency/Voltage Control" screen.
The HT Link width, right below the speed, is usually kept on [Auto] but can be set to 16X if you prefer, since most modern video cards are 16X.

 

[theflyingrat]

Quick note : get rid of the single 1GB memory module that you have. It'll force your motherboard into single-channel mode, sapping performance.

On a side note, someone at EVGA needs to be punished for both the hexidecimal multiplier control, as well as them suddenly just stopping BIOS updates for it.

 

[QuietIce]

Quick note : get rid of the single 1GB memory module that you have. It'll force your motherboard into single-channel mode, sapping performance.

I've always thought so, too, but I've seen a couple of rigs now - and one that a guy tested for me - where that isn't the case. He was running 3x2 Gb, which CPU-Z showed to be dual channel, so I asked him to test using Everest and the 2-stick scores were nearly the same as the 3-stick scores. The single-stick scores were significantly lower. Quite a surprise to me!

Of course, three sticks still may cause instability. On his system it didn't but on another system it did, three sticks wouldn't run 1600CL7 but two sticks would.

 

[Humpy Bogart]

Quick note : get rid of the single 1GB memory module that you have. It'll force your motherboard into single-channel mode, sapping performance.

Would the performance gains from doing this be worth the gig of ram mhz that i'd be losing? and should I look into finding a 2gb stick to replace it? I'm making the assumption btw that single channel=1gb and double channel=2gb; and that the system defaults to the lowest common denominator, therefore single channel. Is that about right?

On a side note, someone at EVGA needs to be punished for both the hexidecimal multiplier control, as well as them suddenly just stopping BIOS updates for it.

haha, tell me about it. its certainly made my quest for understanding quite a bit more confusing. But, I think I'm starting to wrap my head around it. I actually found a site that's got some convenient diagrams for decoding the hexadecimal system: no math required

@QuietIce: just wanted to thank you heartily for your clear, understandable response. I've been somewhat frustrated with other forums that I've posted where I've received technical jargon, acronyms and ambiguity riddled responses. None of them have been anywhere near as clear as your response just now. Indeed, I'm a huuge newb, so I definitely appreciate a response that I can actually understand!

Originally Posted by theflyingrat
Quick note : get rid of the single 1GB memory module that you have. It'll force your motherboard into single-channel mode, sapping performance.

I've always that so, too, but I've seen a couple of rigs now - and one that a guy tested for me - where that isn't the case.

So what do you think then, should I chuck the 1gig?

Also, thank you very much for the guide that you linked me to. I'll spend some time going through that a little later on when I've got some time, but just from a precursory peek, it looks like its got a lot to offer me.

P.s. here's some memory-related CPU-Z screenshots to expound on the memory question that I had.

P.P.s. I'll definitely be updating this thread with my progress as I go. Thanks again!

 

[QuietIce]

So what do you think then, should I chuck the 1gig?

For now I'd remove the extra stick (slot #2) until you've found the top end of your CPU. At that point there are some quick tests (benchmarks) you can run. After that you can go back and add the extra stick to see what adjustments you have to make and what kind of benchmark scores you get. Since each system is different there's no way to know without testing how much of an impact the extra stick well have.

 

[Humpy Bogart]

according to cpu-z my memory is running in dual channel. So maybe my board wasn't forced in single channel after all? I'm still going to try pulling out the 1 gig, but i just want to be certain it'll actually show an improvement in performance. Speaking of which, is there a decent benchmark program that I can use just for ram performance. That way I can have definitive proof of pulling vs. leaving the ram.

 

[QuietIce]

according to cpu-z my memory is running in dual channel. So maybe my board wasn't forced in single channel after all? I'm still going to try pulling out the 1 gig, but i just want to be certain it'll actually show an improvement in performance. Speaking of which, is there a decent benchmark program that I can use just for ram performance. That way I can have definitive proof of pulling vs. leaving the ram.

It used to be three sticks of RAM would force single-channel mode but that no longer applies so the third stick has very little impact on RAM performance - and if you weren't overclocking then I'd say "Leave it in". However, the third stick can introduce instability into an overclock, resulting in lower overall system performance.

There are two ways this instability can show itself. One, the CPU and/or cpuNB will become unstable at a lower speed/voltage. That effect can often be avoided by loosening the RAM timings or lowering RAM speed, which is the second possible way the instability will show itself. If you have to run looser timings or lower RAM speed then, obviously, RAM performance will be directly effected. Since no one can predict how a given system will react to the extra stick the best thing to do is remove it until your CPU and cpuNB have been maxed out, then add it back to the system to see how it effects that highest overclock. In all but one of the cases I've seen with triple sticks the RAM speed had to be lowered (from it's 2-stick setting) to keep the system stable.


For testing RAM, Everest or SiSandra are the usual choices.

 

[Humpy Bogart]

Your response came just in time, QuietIce: I had just finished running two benchmarks on my system doing both stock settings with the 1gb stick and stock settings without the 1 gb stick. This was done using PCmarks Vantage and my results (following) were about to lead me to put the stick back in.
Here's what they were:

With the 1 gb RAM
PCMark: 3828
Gaming: 3869
TV & Movies: 2647
Music: 4124

Without the 1 gb stick
PCMark: 3566
Gaming: 3291
TV and Movies: 2503
Music: 4287

So, as you can see, I saw a decrease in performance in every category that I benchmarked, with the exception of Music--itself not seeing much of a difference. Based on just these numbers, it seemed like a no brainer that the stick-in was the way to go; which had I not decided to check this forum just now, I would have been on my way to doing. But I'll definitely take your advice and keep it out until much later when things have become a bit more maxed.
Quick question though, is it the fact that the sticks are of a different size, or is it the fact that there's 3 sticks that creates a potential problem?

Thanks again and also, your OCing an AM2 guide has been very helpful

 

[QuietIce]

Both create a problem. Unmatched sticks are never a good thing, which is why there are so many matched sets out there. Having three sticks also puts more stress on the cpuNB, which has the IMC (Integrated Memory Controller) on it. But we'll see how it effects your system, they're all a little different.

I prefer Everest because it gives you a simple read, write, and latency score.

 

[Humpy Bogart]

So, i realized after posting my BM results that the "without 1gb" was running on single channel due to the placement of the 2 remaining memory sticks on my mobo. After fixing this and seeing that my system was now in dual channel, i ran the BM again, and saw improvements over the "with 1 gb" results in every category except TV and movies.

So here's another question for ya: is it really possible that my vCore is at .976??



the funny thing is, speed fan is saying the same thing.

core temp on the other hand is reading 1.325 (which is what I've manually set my CPU VID to), but It's not showing any fluctuations between full loads and idle, so this leads me to believe that its not quite accurate either. And for the record, CPU-Z shows a fluctuation not up, but down during full load to .968. But this value goes back and forth to .976.

I believe that this might be related to another question that I've got. In my bios I have the settings for CPU VID and for CPU Voltage. I've currently got CPU VID set to 1.325--what I believe to be stock vCore--and CPU voltage set to AUTO. The thing is while I am able to set CPU VID to where my voltage should be around @ stock, the only options for CPU voltage are 1.55+ (in .025 increments), which is way too high for right now. So should I just leave CPU voltage on AUTO and only manipulate CPU VID, or what, and which of these settings truly pertains to true vCore?
Thanks!

 

[QuietIce]

The thing with CoreTemp is easy to explain, CoreTemp only reads the BIOS setting, not the actual voltage as CPU-Z does (at least, as it's supposed to). Some boards, and yours may or may not be one of them, have odd BIOS's that give out different values instead of the "standard" values. If eVGA has a monitoring program of their own I would suggest using it instead of after-market programs.

I've never really understood dual voltage controls (MSI uses them as well) so I don't know what to say about the last part. You could propbably get by with a quick test to see what happens. Running that high a vCore for just a few seconds shouldn't harm anything (many people run them all the time, which I think is a very bad idea). Try raising the CPU Voltage to it's minimum setting then Save & Exit but reboot back into BIOS and see what it shows for vCore. If it seems reasonable go ahead and boot into the OS but if it's off the chart just reboot into BIOS again and change it back. With MSI one of the voltage controls limits the upper end of the voltage allowed while the other is the actual vCore. I still suggest seeing if eVGA has a monitoring program - it could be you don't have a problem at all.

 

[Humpy Bogart]

So I haven't had very much luck finding an eVGA monitoring program. What I have found though, is that both CPU VID and CPU Voltage seem to have an effect on the vCore. The problem though is that I'm not sure how much of an effect each actually has respectively.

See, setting the "CPU Voltage" to 1.6 results in a vCore of 1.4 in the BIOS, but Core Temp--the only monitoring program that I've found which doesn't give me a reading of .976--will continue to show 1.325 if I've left the CPU VID stock..
On the other hand, changing CPU VID impacts both vCore in the BIOS and in Core Temp readings. What's strange is that I get two different readings in BIOS and Core Temp, with core temp always being lower, but never a constant value lower. For instance, stock CPU VID will give a vCore of 1.36 in BIOS and 1.325 in CoreTemp (difference=0.035) and another CPU VID value will give a BIOS reading of 1.39 and CoreTemp of 1.3625 (difference=.0275)...

Also odd, is that CPU VID's values seem to have an inverse effect on vCore. CPU VID is in hexademical, so when I input lower hex values, I end up with higher vCores. With vCore, I can at least check the resulting values from changing CPU VID in my BIOS/Core Temp so I can see whether there's been a positive or negative effect. However, with NB VID, NB FID and CPU FID, which are all also in hexadecimal, I can't even see the resulting values from my manipulations. Therefore, I have no idea whether these other options are likewise inverse like CPU VID appears to be, or if they aren't. So, this leaves me with quite a bit of uncertainty.

Though I never found an eVGA monitoring program, I did find several threads regarding various users' frustrations with the current BIOS for my board: At this point, I can certainly see why.

 

[QuietIce]

As I posted earlier, CoreTemp will only show the BIOS setting for CPU VID, not the actual vCore. Usually the BIOS health screen will show the actual vCore, not the setting. That's where the difference is coming from. (Note that most motherboards have a slight variance between the setting and the actual value so this is not unusual.)

You're absolutely right about the VID - my bad. I looked up your current value and made a bad assumption without looking at the rest of the table. *redface* As the hex values go up the VID goes down in the AMD table. But it appears the eVGA isn't following the AMD table anyway, which really does complicate things. The AMD table doesn't have 0.0125v steps, which eVGA seems to be using. (You couldn't get a 1.3625v value without those smaller steps.)

As for the FID values, you may not be able to see them in BIOS but you'll be able to see them in CPU-Z by the speeds of the various components. The CPU multi is shown directly in CPU-Z. cpuNB speed is also shown in CPU-Z on the Memory tab (upper right). eVGA seems to be following the equation I posted earlier, CPU multiplier (in hex) = (CPU FID + 10h) / 2. (BTW - "Calculator" in Windows will do hex arithmetic. )

For the time being I would have to assume that NB VID follows the same pattern as CPU VID but you're right, there's no monitoring program that reads that as far as I know. You might look at nTune to see if that will work with your BIOS. It's the only program I can think of that might allow you to control the cpuNB voltage where you can see the actual values instead of some hex number.

 

[Humpy Bogart]

I just checked out the ntune application that you mentioned (downloaded v. 5.05.54.00 from the nvidia website) and, while it seems to be an awesome and efficient program for me, it unfortunately doesn't work properly; its read my FSB as 700 something and my multiplier at 4x. Riiiight.... I'm guessing its a board incompatibility issue. yay.

I looked up your current value ... in the AMD table.

what AMD table? would you be able to link me to this, please? it would definitely come in handy.

as far at the hex calculator in windows 7 goes, i must admit, i have no idea how to use this beyond changing the view to "programmer"; then i'm lost. could you either give me a brief explanation, or point me in the direction of a guide?

and..

CPU multiplier (in hex) = (CPU FID + 10h) / 2

what is this 'h' variable exactly?

thanks

 

[QuietIce]

Like I said, the table doesn't correspond to your values anyway - but if you're really interested it's on pg. 48-49 of this white paper. The values are shown in binary.

Sorry, I didn't know they had changed "Calculator" from WinXP. In XP you simply change the View to Scientific, where you have a button option at the top left to use Hex, Dec, Oct, or Bin. Too bad they changed it, that's one bad mark against Win7.

The 'h' isn't a variable - it's a notation showing the number is in hexadecimal, base 16, instead of in decimal, base 10. (As a side note, binary numbers, base 2, typically have a 'b' after them. ) 10h = 16 (decimal).