Read my article:
http://www.overclockers.com/index.p...the-phenom-ii&catid=57:processors&Itemid=4263
Talks about it at a mid-level view. If you want to learn more just ask
I've just read through this. Three things I need to ask you for the Geekbench tests >
- What was your RAM setup?
- 32b or 64b OS?
- Did you check how the NB+RAM combo is performing in Everest for each setting?
Not speaking on the article but, majorities are making the same mistakes with Deneb as they did with Agena. Clocking NB high and thinking that means better performance - it doesn't. MRL comes into play nearly exactly like this:
http://anandtech.com/mb/showdoc.aspx?i=3671&p=6
As Archer said on TR, "it's a zen thing". Meaning, efficiency is the key. It's easily possible to beat a high clocked NB with a lower clocked one. We're talking about daily setups here.
You can't keep the NB delay fixed as that will stop the NB clocks going higher but you can keep it's overall latency below stock and even decreasing (and hence getting faster) in nanoseconds by thinking about what you're doing instead of just slamming the gas at every go i.e.,
2.0GHz NB -> 51 NB Clks -> 25.5ns
2.2GHz NB -> 53 NB Clks -> 24.1ns
2.4GHz NB -> 55 NB Clks -> 22.9ns
2.6GHz NB -> 58 NB Clks -> 22.3ns
2.8GHz NB -> 60 NB Clks -> 21.4ns
3.0GHz NB -> 62 NB Clks -> 20.7ns
Instead of what we >95% commonly see ->
2.0GHz NB -> 51 NB Clks -> 25.5ns
2.2GHz NB -> 55 NB Clks -> 25.0ns
2.4GHz NB -> 58 NB Clks -> 24.1ns
2.6GHz NB -> 65 NB Clks -> 25.0ns
2.8GHz NB -> 70 NB Clks -> 25.0ns
3.0GHz NB -> 75 NB Clks -> 25.0ns
And the poster proclaims:
"ZOMG NB clock gives no performance increase!!! In fact it goes down as you clock higher!!! So this is my theory..."
Well, what do you expect when your 2.8GHz NB is so loose that it's performing like a 2.2GHz NB?
That's synonymous to running RAM at 1066 7-7-7 and expecting it to be faster than RAM at 900 4-4-4. You have to fnd the right balance per your setup (heavily BIOS dependent).