• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

Venice won't work with NF3/4 boards??!!

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.

Dinzy

Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2002
Location
Urbana IL @UIUC Physics Dept
According to this news at the inquirer
Code:
[url]http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=21780[/url]

Some of us may be SOL in trying to upgrade s939 systems to new chips. WTF! I just bought a system with the intentions of upgrading for some time to come. I hope my LanParty rig can be fixed w/ a new BIOS but what happens if it can't? If this is true what the hell is AMD thinking!!!
 
Dinzy said:
According to this news at the inquirer
Code:
[url]http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=21780[/url]

Some of us may be SOL in trying to upgrade s939 systems to new chips. WTF! I just bought a system with the intentions of upgrading for some time to come. I hope my LanParty rig can be fixed w/ a new BIOS but what happens if it can't? If this is true what the hell is AMD thinking!!!


*Sigh*

Relax..... Don't panic everytime you see the Inquirer post something.

The Revision E cores should work just fine, but most current motherboards will require a bios flash to ensure 100% functionality.

deception``
 
This is why you never buy first generation CPU/MB's...plus I dont hold the inquirer in too high of regards...
 
deception`` said:
*Sigh*

Relax..... Don't panic everytime you see the Inquirer post something.

The Revision E cores should work just fine, but most current motherboards will require a bios flash to ensure 100% functionality.

deception``
Yea no different that it was on Winchester or from what Im dealing with on the AS8
 
Wow! Thanks for that. They're still gathering info on that it appears, but if true, this is going to kill initial Venice sales, not to mention mobo sales.

BIOS fix would not have been a problem, but:
"In order to solve these problems, new motherboards might be necessary and there doesn't appear to be an instant fix..."


If there is a mobo that can handle this and others can't, that brand is going to be selling out in the coming weeks for sure...
 
That's exactly what I've heard...

They should all work just fine on any s939 board, even the dual-core Toledo should have little problems except for the fact that some boards may have inadequate supply of current for two cores.

A BIOS upgrade may be (read: is) necessary just as it was for some boards when the Winchester came, but otherwise the transition should be quite painless.

EDIT: a tad too slow...
 
The INQ said:
We are told that AMD changed its thermal regulation protection and that's what makes it incompatible with at least some of the Nforce 3 and Nforce 4 boards out there.
Anyone make sense of this statement? are the die temps lower or are they including some form of EIST?
 
Sentential said:
Anyone make sense of this statement? are the die temps lower or are they including some form of EIST?

To me, this seems no different than when AMD released the Sempron. In many cases, these socket A/s754 chips worked just fine in current motherboards, but they simply required a bios update. I suspect that the Venice will be no different. Shame on The Inquirer for once again causing a frenzy, and for others buying into this hysteria. :mad:

deception``
 
Another thing to ponder. I know the TDP is higher on the E0s...could we be seeing a repeat of earlier prescott C0 mobo issues? I think its quite possible that the increased TDP could be the cause. I know alot of S939 mobos are cheap as hell. Perhaps the FETs cant hack the extra stress and then blow ala Prescott
 
Sentential said:
Anyone make sense of this statement? are the die temps lower or are they including some form of EIST?

Well, that statement is very broad, but if AMD is doing something to their thermal protection, one would assume they are improving it.

I wouldn't doubt it if they are doing something similar to Intel's EIST and have unused parts of the CPU shut down, as well as underclocking via multiplier and or FSB (or whatever AMD calls it now), as well as undervolting.

That is what I assume, I however, do not know for sure.
 
Yeah man, don't worry... AMD wouldn't be stupid enough to release a processor not capable of running on the latest s939 mobos. The way I see it, AMD is working hard in these Venice/Diego CPUs, so their motherboard manufacturers need to work alittle aswell (IE. Upgrade their BIOS).

Plus, I wouldn't read into The Inquierer too much, they have been known to make false statements, and they have even admitted it. It's just a cheap website with people who think they know everything about computers. :cool:

Your motherboard will be fine, i'm sure of it.
 
glock19owner said:
This is why you never buy first generation CPU/MB's...plus I dont hold the inquirer in too high of regards...

Winchester is not a first generation cpu nor is the nf4 chipset a first gen chipset for s939. Sure the mobos are 1st gen for the chipset and the chip is 1st gen for it's fabrication size but that is no excuse if this is true. Furthermore having to wait for second gen mobos on each chipset seriously limits the time when you can actually build a machine. Was I supposed to wait 3 months for the nF4 boards only to see that the next VIA chipset is doing better in some benchmarks but won't be out for another 2 months. C'mon you buy when you need to buy and upgrade as need be. Waiting just means you have to spend more time with your old POS rig.
 
Dinzy said:
Winchester is not a first generation cpu nor is the nf4 chipset a first gen chipset for s939.

Actually the Winchester is seen as a first generation processor, as it is the first s939 chip using the 90nm process.

deception``
 
Sentential said:
Another thing to ponder. I know the TDP is higher on the E0s...could we be seeing a repeat of earlier prescott C0 mobo issues? I think its quite possible that the increased TDP could be the cause. I know alot of S939 mobos are cheap as hell. Perhaps the FETs cant hack the extra stress and then blow ala Prescott

True, but the TDP is not that much higher. Also another thing to keep in mind is that most Socket 939 motherboards are also compatible with 939 Clawhamers and Newcastles. The maxTDP for that particular line was I beleive, 89 watts.
 
This is like when the bartons came out and the old 266 MB's...everyone said that the new bartons would not run on the old 266 MB's...low and behold...BIOS flash and the bartons where able to run on the 266's...when I got my first 2500 barton...my 8KHA+ gave the no cpu warning...looked around...found a BIOS that was released a few days earlier...flashed to that BIOS...installed the 2500...booted up...

If I remember correctly...the inquirer also reported that the new bartons would not run on the older 266 MB's and that their was no cure excpet to by a new MB back then...
 
glock19owner said:
If I remember correctly...the inquirer also reported that the new bartons would not run on the older 266 MB's and that their was no cure excpet to by a new MB back then...
I would pioneer this, but ive already got my fare share of beta testing with my N0 Prescott. Ill leave somone else to do this. :-/
 
deception`` said:
Actually the Winchester is seen as a first generation processor, as it is the first s939 chip using the 90nm process.

deception``

Whatever it really doesn't matter because it is the chip I want to upgrade away from and all AMD boards that I have had have been able to handle the new cores on the same socket unless they were much much faster than the board specs. A first gen chip should always have an upgrade path available.

Also I am pretty sure there will be a work around but if there isn't people should keep this in mind when deciding what to buy.
 
glock19owner said:
This is like when the bartons came out and the old 266 MB's...everyone said that the new bartons would not run on the old 266 MB's...low and behold...BIOS flash and the bartons where able to run on the 266's...when I got my first 2500 barton...my 8KHA+ gave the no cpu warning...looked around...found a BIOS that was released a few days earlier...flashed to that BIOS...installed the 2500...booted up...

If I remember correctly...the inquirer also reported that the new bartons would not run on the older 266 MB's and that their was no cure excpet to by a new MB back then...

Very true, and I would not doubt it if a BIOS flash will make the NF3/4 motherboards compatible with the E0's.

I am sure they had this in mind before while designing the motherboards.

Also, thermal protection would be something controlled via the BIOS. All the necessary parts of the board and chipset to make thermalprotection, no matter what kind, work, are already existant.

If I had to bet something on it, I would probably bet a BIOS flash would solve this compatibility issue.
 
Back