Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: a question for you Vincent

Author: Aaron Gordon

Date: 01:16:24 07/03/03

Go up one level in this thread


On July 02, 2003 at 20:55:52, Keith Evans wrote:

>On July 02, 2003 at 20:18:25, Sune Fischer wrote:
>
>>On July 02, 2003 at 19:37:46, Aaron Gordon wrote:
>>>You can test how close they are to the limit. Please read:
>>>http://www.talkchess.com/forums/1/message.html?304354
>>
>>You make it sound like you can state things with 100% certainty :)
>>What you are doing is not exact science, it's more of an ad hoc, "oh seems to be
>>working fine" experiment, IMO.
>>
>>This may be sufficient in many cases, I can't say it ever worked for me 100%
>>though.
>>
>
>He does not know the worst case path through the chip, and hopes that it is
>being exercised. The guys who wrote the BurnK7 program state that it is not a
>sufficient test. Basically if you run that and you have problems - then you know
>that you have problems. But if you run that and you don't have noticible
>problems, then you may or may not have problems.
>
>For example let's say that a certain ALU operation has a long delay due to the
>number of combinatorial gates in the path. Maybe this is what determines the
>maximum chip operating frequency. Well if you don't test this one operation you
>may think that the chip is fine because all of the other operations will work.
>Now you raise the temperature or frequency and the other operations start
>failing. So you think "wow I was close to the edge", but in reality you were
>over the edge and you just didn't know it.

You can figure out how on-edge you are by doing the tests. Then as I stated in
my previous post you can kick the voltage up, drop the cpu temp to 'average'
levels, and clock back and get a 100% stable CPU. There are some production cpus
that can't run more than 5% over stock speed without producing the same
instability as one of the pretested chips I have running on-edge. I however back
off a good 10-15%, Intel (some P4-3.06s for example) only backs off about 5%.
This is too close for me. At least with my chips I know they're 100% stable. :)

>I was hoping that the link provided would be some data from a production tester
>showing that all chips are yielding at a certain speed, and just being marked
>differently. This is possible, but has not been demonstrated. I have gotten this
>type of data from DRAM developers in the past when I was developing a graphics
>chip. (I forget what we did with that data.) It's obviously not something that
>manufacturers give out to just anybody, especially if it would cause them to
>lose money if it were widely known.



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.