Author: Aaron Gordon
Date: 16:37:46 07/02/03
Go up one level in this thread
On July 02, 2003 at 19:03:21, Sune Fischer wrote: >On July 02, 2003 at 18:34:17, Aaron Gordon wrote: > >>Any chip that has any overclocking problems has failed extremely fast with >>BurnK7 and Prime95 from my experiences. I've had friends that played Quake, did >>other games & encoding.. I told them that is definitely NOT good stability >>testing. They swore up and down their PC was stable, soon one of my friends >>fired up BurnK7 the machine rebooted instantly. That is just how harsh it is. > >It may be a good test, but you seem to be under the impression it is foolproof. > >>These chips run BurnK7 flawless, and aren't clocked anywhere near the "edge" of >>stability. You can test how close they are to the limit. Please read: http://www.talkchess.com/forums/1/message.html?304354 >You don't know how close they are to the limit. >When you clock them that high they burn watts like crazy, and if the average >user doesn't have enough cooling... I test these processors with average cooling, and then slow the ran RPMs down to further heat up the processor to make sure everything is fine. I then clock the chip down AND increase the voltage a bit. Read about it above, I explain most everything and include formulas so you can do the calculations yourself. >>It's a pitty people don't understand AMD/Intel make all chips 1 speed and then >>mark them to whatever the market demands (be it 1700+ or 3200+). See my post >>here for more details on my testing methods: > >I know those speculations, I just don't know if they are true. >Have you ever heard an official statement backing it up? I use to do a little bit of work with AMD, during this time I talked to a few people (also AMD employees) that knew about what was going on in the fabs. Also a lot of it is common sense. Try taking one of the original 1700+ chips, some of the very first ones released. Now, compare one of those to the 1700+ handpicked chips I have. You'll get about 1GHz more out of one of my chips. :) This is due to AMD making the *best* cores 24/7. Also something interesting I found out (and suspected this before finding out from someone at AMD) is that all of the chips are blanks. Looking at an Athlon and knowing what the bridges do you can conclude the chips come blank, then are cut by lasers to whatever AMD wants. This means every single Athlon XP was an Athlon MP before the last L5 laser bridge was cut. This was verified by an AMD employee working in the Dresden fab after I asked him about it. Most people assume they go through some elaborate testing, verification, etc. They just quickly verify if the core 'works', and knowing the chips will do ~2.4GHz they mark them whatever they want. They do this after they send the individual cores to Malaysia though. This is where they put the silicon on the OPGAs and then cut the bridges to whatever they need, be it an Athlon MP 2800+ or an Athlon XP 1700+. They do have different lines for the different cache size chips, though. You're right in assuming all chips are different, they are. Lately however the chips have been extremely close clock speed wise, and extremely high yield (as in all working above 2.4GHz easily). >What I do know is that no two chips are identical, in spite of having the same >core. I think they may even be sorted at the assemblyline and the best are used >maybe in supercomputers. The chip makers probably have some high tech hardware >and software that can rigorously test the chips in no time. > >>If the chip is that "on edge" stability wise, to where there are potential >>problems running your every day applications BurnK7 will push it over the edge >>just from the heat increase alone (you can verify this via my formulas in the >>URL above), or at the very minimum make the system extremely unstable instead of >>rebooting/locking up. Once you find out what your chip can do then you can >>adjust the clock/voltage to run completely stable speeds. Most people are too >>fixated with, "overclocking == running on the complete edge of stability". >>Thats >>not whats going on here at all. > >Seti always rises my temp by 8 deg. but usually doesn't cause crashes. >If unstable it tends to hang while loading some game, in my experience, though >I've stopped overclocking. > >I know a guy that always runs his dual OC'ed. He gets about one crash a month, >but he assures me it is completely stable :) >I'll ask him to run BurnK7 and see if that can make it crash instantly, I think >chances are slim though, he runs simulations 24/7 (octtree codes). He has >massive coolers with thermostats, but still crashing once a month or so :) > >-S. Could be windows or program related, or maybe he's just overclocking "too much". Make sure he runs two copies of BurnK7, so both cpus are being used. Also if he passes an overnight run w/ two BurnK7's have him fire up two copies of Prime95 as well (not at the same time as BurnK7 though). He could have fault ram as well. I've seen this MANY times. People blame the cpu, board, etc. Have him also test his ram with memtest86 @ www.memtest86.com
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.