Overclock.net › Forums › AMD › AMD CPUs › Compared 3 different Bulldozer FX-8120's. Want to know the difference?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Compared 3 different Bulldozer FX-8120's. Want to know the difference? - Page 2

Poll Results: Why some much difference in OC ability and stability with same BD chips?

This is a multiple choice poll
  • 20% (3)
    The Stock Voltage are a direct result of this.
  • 13% (2)
    The Stock Voltages have nothing to do with this.
  • 40% (6)
    The Stock Voltage may have some effect on this.
  • 0% (0)
    There is NO considerable difference between BD chips.
  • 26% (4)
    2 out of 3 of the chips I received were bad.
15 Total Votes  
post #11 of 33
Thread Starter 
That makes a lot of sense then. I think its kind of crappy that they would send me two out of three chips that would not be able to be stable at 4.8GHz. With BD, everyone should be able to hit 4.8Ghz and be stable with decent cooling. Also, my first chip, the one with VID at 1.325v, cannot get stable at 5.02Ghz. I have tried everything to get it stable but it wont. While I hear other people able to overclock to 5.2GHz. I dont like that there can be major differences in the same chip. I think that is kind of cheap that they would make their flagship chip like that. It makes me kind of question the quality of the BD's.

What about you guys? What do you think about this? Do you think this is kind of low quality for AMD to just let out BD's that can vary greatly between each chip. I understand that no chip is the same but come one. There is only so far you can take that. I mean, if you just happen to receive an 8-core chip that has very low VID and your buddy gets a 4-core with average VID, while you pay an extra $100 he can probably get more performance out of his and it will last longer. I think this is very non-professional for AMD to do.

Please let me know your thoughts on this. All feedback and input is appreciated.

Thanks
FUSION
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardRAMHard Drive
AMD Llano A8-3870k ASUS F1A75-M Pro FM1 uATX Corsair Vengeance Corsair Force 3 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Hitachi ASUS DVD Burner Cooler Master Hyper TX3 Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
ASUS VE247H 24" 1080p Razer Lycosa Corsair CX500 Fractal Define Design R3 ATX 
Mouse
Razer DeathAdder 
  hide details  
Reply
FUSION
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardRAMHard Drive
AMD Llano A8-3870k ASUS F1A75-M Pro FM1 uATX Corsair Vengeance Corsair Force 3 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Hitachi ASUS DVD Burner Cooler Master Hyper TX3 Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
ASUS VE247H 24" 1080p Razer Lycosa Corsair CX500 Fractal Define Design R3 ATX 
Mouse
Razer DeathAdder 
  hide details  
Reply
post #12 of 33
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Obakemono View Post

Where do you see what your chip's VID is? Coretemp shows mine right now at 1.4125v. thinking.gif

Coretemp does show your VID. You have to set all settings in bios to stock (auto) and then coretemp will show stock VID.
FUSION
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardRAMHard Drive
AMD Llano A8-3870k ASUS F1A75-M Pro FM1 uATX Corsair Vengeance Corsair Force 3 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Hitachi ASUS DVD Burner Cooler Master Hyper TX3 Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
ASUS VE247H 24" 1080p Razer Lycosa Corsair CX500 Fractal Define Design R3 ATX 
Mouse
Razer DeathAdder 
  hide details  
Reply
FUSION
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardRAMHard Drive
AMD Llano A8-3870k ASUS F1A75-M Pro FM1 uATX Corsair Vengeance Corsair Force 3 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Hitachi ASUS DVD Burner Cooler Master Hyper TX3 Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
ASUS VE247H 24" 1080p Razer Lycosa Corsair CX500 Fractal Define Design R3 ATX 
Mouse
Razer DeathAdder 
  hide details  
Reply
post #13 of 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by Obakemono View Post

If this is true then client chips are the same as server chips? (outside different packaging and programming)

Server chips like Evil Penguin said are supposed to be held to a higher standard.

Reason being is that server chips are generally more expensive for pretty much the same performance. Where it differs really is that they can supposedly take more heat and are supposed to be more stable because people spending money on a server are almost paying for insurance that the chip will run mission critical servers/applications with 99.99% uptime 24/7 and that those chips aren't going to burn out until they go for a component refresh/upgrade.
GISX-R
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 920 D0 ASUS P6TD Deluxe XFX HD6870 1GB Corsair 6GB DDR3-1600 (9-9-9-24) 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSKeyboard
Crucial M4 64GB LG 24X SATA DVD-RW Windows 7 Ultimate Logitech G15 
PowerCaseMouse
620W Antec High Current Gamer Lian Li K58W MS OEM 
  hide details  
Reply
GISX-R
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 920 D0 ASUS P6TD Deluxe XFX HD6870 1GB Corsair 6GB DDR3-1600 (9-9-9-24) 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSKeyboard
Crucial M4 64GB LG 24X SATA DVD-RW Windows 7 Ultimate Logitech G15 
PowerCaseMouse
620W Antec High Current Gamer Lian Li K58W MS OEM 
  hide details  
Reply
post #14 of 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikezachlowe2004 View Post

Coretemp does show your VID. You have to set all settings in bios to stock (auto) and then coretemp will show stock VID.

I've been running this thing at stock settings so that VID is what I have then.
BULLDOZER!!!
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
8120FX Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD7 2ea MSI r9-270x 16gb G-Skill Snipers 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
WD 3x1tb greens, 1x1tb black Adata S599 120gb LG DVDR/RW, LG Blueray CM V8 Win7 64bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
LG2762D Microsoft Antec TPN-750 CM HAF 932 
MouseMouse Pad
Microsoft X5 Generic 
  hide details  
Reply
BULLDOZER!!!
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
8120FX Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD7 2ea MSI r9-270x 16gb G-Skill Snipers 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
WD 3x1tb greens, 1x1tb black Adata S599 120gb LG DVDR/RW, LG Blueray CM V8 Win7 64bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
LG2762D Microsoft Antec TPN-750 CM HAF 932 
MouseMouse Pad
Microsoft X5 Generic 
  hide details  
Reply
post #15 of 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikezachlowe2004 View Post

That makes a lot of sense then. I think its kind of crappy that they would send me two out of three chips that would not be able to be stable at 4.8GHz. With BD, everyone should be able to hit 4.8Ghz and be stable with decent cooling. Also, my first chip, the one with VID at 1.325v, cannot get stable at 5.02Ghz. I have tried everything to get it stable but it wont. While I hear other people able to overclock to 5.2GHz. I dont like that there can be major differences in the same chip. I think that is kind of cheap that they would make their flagship chip like that. It makes me kind of question the quality of the BD's.
What about you guys? What do you think about this? Do you think this is kind of low quality for AMD to just let out BD's that can vary greatly between each chip. I understand that no chip is the same but come one. There is only so far you can take that. I mean, if you just happen to receive an 8-core chip that has very low VID and your buddy gets a 4-core with average VID, while you pay an extra $100 he can probably get more performance out of his and it will last longer. I think this is very non-professional for AMD to do.
Please let me know your thoughts on this. All feedback and input is appreciated.
Thanks

Its perfectly fair,
Server chips are always the top of the ones coming out of the line, They then clock them even lower so that instead of there being a error every 1000hours its more like they only make a error every million hours. Which is important for servers since you dont want to have your banks website blue screening every few days.

Then the next binning is the 8150, Which I suspect most its chips are getting re-binned to server chips so they are hard to get ahold of. Then the ones that fail the 8150 tests go into 8120's which is what most of us have. They are in quite high demand so they proably have a lot less strick tests to pass and they only have to run at 3.1ghz so 4.8ghz is a major increase in speed for a low binned chip.

5ghz out of a fx 4100 will still proform less then 4.5ghz out of a 8120 well except in single threaded stuff, But if you really want to be that picky disable some modules on your so its only a fx 4100, I bet youd get higher speeds out of yours since you can choose the best quality modules.
Bulldozer Rig
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX-8120 @ 5GHZ - 1.488v (http://valid.canardpc.... 990FXA-UD3 HD6850 8GB 
CoolingOSPower
Antec 620 Windows 7-SP1 64bit Antec neo eco 620W 
  hide details  
Reply
Bulldozer Rig
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX-8120 @ 5GHZ - 1.488v (http://valid.canardpc.... 990FXA-UD3 HD6850 8GB 
CoolingOSPower
Antec 620 Windows 7-SP1 64bit Antec neo eco 620W 
  hide details  
Reply
post #16 of 33
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by majinsoftware View Post

Its perfectly fair,
Server chips are always the top of the ones coming out of the line, They then clock them even lower so that instead of there being a error every 1000hours its more like they only make a error every million hours. Which is important for servers since you dont want to have your banks website blue screening every few days.
Then the next binning is the 8150, Which I suspect most its chips are getting re-binned to server chips so they are hard to get ahold of. Then the ones that fail the 8150 tests go into 8120's which is what most of us have. They are in quite high demand so they proably have a lot less strick tests to pass and they only have to run at 3.1ghz so 4.8ghz is a major increase in speed for a low binned chip.
5ghz out of a fx 4100 will still proform less then 4.5ghz out of a 8120 well except in single threaded stuff, But if you really want to be that picky disable some modules on your so its only a fx 4100, I bet youd get higher speeds out of yours since you can choose the best quality modules.

How would i go about doing this? In the bios I have the option to **** down cores 3&4 or 5&6 or 7&8. How do I know what cores are in what modules? I heard about that software that sets the scheduling before entering windows but I dont know what it is. Something about setting 55 which would enable only one core in one module. I dont know any other way to do this other than disabling cores in bios and it would seem that 3&4 or 5&6 or 7&8 would be two cores in the same module. I could be wrong about this. What cores are assigned to what modules? Do you know? Is there another way to pick and choose what single core to disable and what module they are in? Thank you for your help. I didn't realize that the server chips are the same as desktop chips. Did I understand you correctly? I thought the server chips a different size completely. Do if an 8150 is good then it goes to server chip and if bad then goes to 8120, right? do they just change the IHS? I think you have confused me a little.

I was under the impression that the 8120 and 8150 are only the same chip and that if 8150 didn't meet certain specs then would go to 8120 testing and if didn't pass certain specs, disable cores for 6100 then if didnt pass certain specs disable two more cores for 4100 and meet certain specs. I would think that the 8120 or 8150 would have to pass certain specs to be considered one of these chips but these specs seem that they very widely.

They rundown of how I look at how it should be, tell me if I am close. 8150 test overclock and voltage if reaches 5.5Ghz and is stable for 24/7 "pass: if not then move to 8120 test overclock and voltage if reaches 5.0Ghz and is stable for 24/7 "pass" if not then move to 6100 and so on. This is how I kind of look at it. So am I close or way off?

I just think that from the 3 8120 chips I have received, the performance difference varies too widely. I think if you cant at least achieve stable overclock at 4.8Ghz then it should not be 8120. There is too much of the idea of "the luck of the draw" without some kind more specific guidline to go buy. Some people are getting ripped off, like me with the second and third chips I got.

Do you not agree?


As for the guy with VID 1.4125...Then you should be stable at 5.2Ghz easily or at least 5Ghz. This is what Im talking about. His can probably easily do 5Ghz but the second 8120 I got could barely do 4.4Ghz. This difference is way to big especially for a company that designs microprocessors. Its kind of like brain surgery. Basically like letting anyone go into a hospital and do brain surgery even though they're not qualified. Ordering processor shouldn't be like McDonald's service where it is like a 50/50 chance that they will get your order right.

When you spend $200 on something you want it to work either better or almost just as good as someone elses, not way worse.

Does anyone agree with what I am saying here?

If not let me know what you think and it might help me not be upset about this.
FUSION
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardRAMHard Drive
AMD Llano A8-3870k ASUS F1A75-M Pro FM1 uATX Corsair Vengeance Corsair Force 3 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Hitachi ASUS DVD Burner Cooler Master Hyper TX3 Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
ASUS VE247H 24" 1080p Razer Lycosa Corsair CX500 Fractal Define Design R3 ATX 
Mouse
Razer DeathAdder 
  hide details  
Reply
FUSION
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardRAMHard Drive
AMD Llano A8-3870k ASUS F1A75-M Pro FM1 uATX Corsair Vengeance Corsair Force 3 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Hitachi ASUS DVD Burner Cooler Master Hyper TX3 Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
ASUS VE247H 24" 1080p Razer Lycosa Corsair CX500 Fractal Define Design R3 ATX 
Mouse
Razer DeathAdder 
  hide details  
Reply
post #17 of 33
They only test for stability at the model rated speed, they do not guarantee overclocks. The only thing about overclocks was mentioned to review sites, and I believe 4.6 was stated as the approximate limit on air, 4.8 was on water, and 7-8 on ln2 or lHe-4. I assume 5.0+ would only be attainable with sub ambient cooling such as phase change/cascade(with all modules active).

They do mention 5+Ghz if all but one module is disabled.
Hax Box
(14 items)
 
Serv Box
(16 items)
 
Computer #2
(7 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX-4100 AsRock 970 Extreme 3 HD 2900 Pro G.Skill 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Whatever is available Scythe Katana 2 Windows 7 Pro X64 Acer AL2016W 
MonitorPowerCaseMouse
LG 42PQ30 Rosewill 1200w SilverStone Logitech MX-500 
AudioOther
Onboard Pioneer VSX-D514 
CPUCPUMotherboardGraphics
Xeon Prestonia (Northwood) LV 2.4 Xeon Prestonia (Northwood) LV 2.4 Tyan Tiger I7501 Rage XL Integrated 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
2GB DDR 2100 ECC Seagate Barracuda 1TB Seagate Barracuda 1TB Seagate 120GB 
Optical DriveCoolingOSPower
CD/DVD R/RW 2x CoolerMaster aluminum socket 604 coolers Windows 2000 Profesional ThermalTake Pure Power 430W 
OtherOtherOtherOther
4 Port USB 2 Controller Silicon Image 3512 - 2 Port SATA Raid Controller Debian 6 MineCraft Server X2 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Phenom II X2 550 GA-880GM-UD2H R7 240 Corsair XMS 1333 2x2Gb 
OSPowerCase
Windows 7 X64 600w Dell mATX tower 
  hide details  
Reply
Hax Box
(14 items)
 
Serv Box
(16 items)
 
Computer #2
(7 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX-4100 AsRock 970 Extreme 3 HD 2900 Pro G.Skill 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Whatever is available Scythe Katana 2 Windows 7 Pro X64 Acer AL2016W 
MonitorPowerCaseMouse
LG 42PQ30 Rosewill 1200w SilverStone Logitech MX-500 
AudioOther
Onboard Pioneer VSX-D514 
CPUCPUMotherboardGraphics
Xeon Prestonia (Northwood) LV 2.4 Xeon Prestonia (Northwood) LV 2.4 Tyan Tiger I7501 Rage XL Integrated 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
2GB DDR 2100 ECC Seagate Barracuda 1TB Seagate Barracuda 1TB Seagate 120GB 
Optical DriveCoolingOSPower
CD/DVD R/RW 2x CoolerMaster aluminum socket 604 coolers Windows 2000 Profesional ThermalTake Pure Power 430W 
OtherOtherOtherOther
4 Port USB 2 Controller Silicon Image 3512 - 2 Port SATA Raid Controller Debian 6 MineCraft Server X2 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Phenom II X2 550 GA-880GM-UD2H R7 240 Corsair XMS 1333 2x2Gb 
OSPowerCase
Windows 7 X64 600w Dell mATX tower 
  hide details  
Reply
post #18 of 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by majinsoftware View Post

Its perfectly fair,
Server chips are always the top of the ones coming out of the line, They then clock them even lower so that instead of there being a error every 1000hours its more like they only make a error every million hours. Which is important for servers since you dont want to have your banks website blue screening every few days.
Then the next binning is the 8150, Which I suspect most its chips are getting re-binned to server chips so they are hard to get ahold of. Then the ones that fail the 8150 tests go into 8120's which is what most of us have. They are in quite high demand so they proably have a lot less strick tests to pass and they only have to run at 3.1ghz so 4.8ghz is a major increase in speed for a low binned chip.
5ghz out of a fx 4100 will still proform less then 4.5ghz out of a 8120 well except in single threaded stuff, But if you really want to be that picky disable some modules on your so its only a fx 4100, I bet youd get higher speeds out of yours since you can choose the best quality modules.

I see what you're saying but from all the results I've seen the difference between an 8150 and 8120 is marginal at best. 8120s are more then capable of beating out lesser 8150s, suggesting there isn't really any aggressive binning between the two going on. I don't know why there's a shortage of 8150s because they seem to be 8120s with a stock overclock.
post #19 of 33
Since your post is long ill break it down a bit.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mikezachlowe2004 View Post

How would i go about doing this? In the bios I have the option to **** down cores 3&4 or 5&6 or 7&8. How do I know what cores are in what modules? I heard about that software that sets the scheduling before entering windows but I dont know what it is. Something about setting 55 which would enable only one core in one module. I dont know any other way to do this other than disabling cores in bios and it would seem that 3&4 or 5&6 or 7&8 would be two cores in the same module. I could be wrong about this. What cores are assigned to what modules? Do you know? Is there another way to pick and choose what single core to disable and what module they are in? Thank you for your help.

You would shut them off in the bios, My bios doesnt have the option visable unless I un-hide it with a bios editor. Havnt tried using it since I was proably hidden for a reason.
On my chip I know core 3 and core 8 are the weakest 2, So that would mean Id disable module 2 and 4. The bios just lables them Core 1-2, Core 3-4 and so on.
Dont think you can disable just a single core, But maybe some one will make a schedule editor that will let you do it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikezachlowe2004 
I didn't realize that the server chips are the same as desktop chips. Did I understand you correctly? I thought the server chips a different size completely. Do if an 8150 is good then it goes to server chip and if bad then goes to 8120, right? do they just change the IHS? I think you have confused me a little.

The chips are different but the die's are the same.
When they make the die they have a ruff estimate of which ones will be the best, Then they xray them also to check for quality and thats the first binning.
Best ones will get placed on a server Chip which has different pinning but runs the same die, This is also where they set the settings of the chip before they stick the IHS on it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikezachlowe2004 
I was under the impression that the 8120 and 8150 are only the same chip and that if 8150 didn't meet certain specs then would go to 8120 testing and if didn't pass certain specs, disable cores for 6100 then if didnt pass certain specs disable two more cores for 4100 and meet certain specs. I would think that the 8120 or 8150 would have to pass certain specs to be considered one of these chips but these specs seem that they very widely.
They rundown of how I look at how it should be, tell me if I am close. 8150 test overclock and voltage if reaches 5.5Ghz and is stable for 24/7 "pass: if not then move to 8120 test overclock and voltage if reaches 5.0Ghz and is stable for 24/7 "pass" if not then move to 6100 and so on. This is how I kind of look at it. So am I close or way off?
I just think that from the 3 8120 chips I have received, the performance difference varies too widely. I think if you cant at least achieve stable overclock at 4.8Ghz then it should not be 8120. There is too much of the idea of "the luck of the draw" without some kind more specific guidline to go buy. Some people are getting ripped off, like me with the second and third chips I got.
Do you not agree?

While the 8120 and 8150 are pritty much the same chips the internals of them will be of different quality, The xray will reveal this straight away.
This is the easyest test to figure out which ones need cores disabled because some cores will have defective/broke tracks and such in side them.
They dont test it by overclocking them, there main tests are xrays then finally they will bench test them.
Stick them in a special cpu testing machine which makes them crunch a very big number and it has to be correct and the stock speeds for so many hours. They allow for some erros with desktop cpus since what does it really matter if every 1000 hours it gave you 1.923523423421 instead of giving 1.923523423422. A end user would never notice this where in a server it could mean the difference between reaching mars in a space mission or over shooting it. Ages ago there was a cpu that failed this test every time cant remember if it was a Pentium 1 or a Pentium 2.
So it really does come down to luck of the draw, When they give a guide line like it should be good for 5ghz they are going off the architect should be good for that. Not that specifc chip.
The longer the memory pipe lines the higher frequency a chip will run at. The bulldozer has very long ones so thats why it can run at high frequency, But the draw back is it makes per clock processing slower.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mikezachlowe2004 
As for the guy with VID 1.4125...Then you should be stable at 5.2Ghz easily or at least 5Ghz. This is what Im talking about. His can probably easily do 5Ghz but the second 8120 I got could barely do 4.4Ghz. This difference is way to big especially for a company that designs microprocessors. Its kind of like brain surgery. Basically like letting anyone go into a hospital and do brain surgery even though they're not qualified. Ordering processor shouldn't be like McDonald's service where it is like a 50/50 chance that they will get your order right.
When you spend $200 on something you want it to work either better or almost just as good as someone elses, not way worse.
Does anyone agree with what I am saying here?
If not let me know what you think and it might help me not be upset about this.
[/quote]

You are only guaranteed the processor will work at its stock and turbo core speeds. Any overclocking you get is a bonus and normally means you can expect some CPUs to come out at higher speeds stock in the future. Bulldozer is still very new so they dont have the full speed chips out yet but I expect will see something like a 8170 which is 4ghz, 8180 at 4.2ghz and a 8190 at 4.4ghz (which would be the rarest and highest binned desktop chips they have.) I imagine if mine was re-binned it would come in at a 8180 since it can do 4.2ghz at 1.28v

The more demand there is for 8150's the lower the quality of the 8120's will be. If there was near 0 demain for a 8150 then they would be rebinning them to 8120's. Im guessing thats what they did with the first batch of chips since they seem to be of higher quality then the second batch and because you cant find many batch 1 8150's.

The overclocking margin will be all over the place since 32nm processing is still new to AMD, Over more revisions they will figure out what works best and how to produce the chips so each one in the batch is more alike.
Bulldozer Rig
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX-8120 @ 5GHZ - 1.488v (http://valid.canardpc.... 990FXA-UD3 HD6850 8GB 
CoolingOSPower
Antec 620 Windows 7-SP1 64bit Antec neo eco 620W 
  hide details  
Reply
Bulldozer Rig
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX-8120 @ 5GHZ - 1.488v (http://valid.canardpc.... 990FXA-UD3 HD6850 8GB 
CoolingOSPower
Antec 620 Windows 7-SP1 64bit Antec neo eco 620W 
  hide details  
Reply
post #20 of 33
I think can be directly correlated to how they bin their chips, they run them at the stock speed and figure out what voltage they need to run that without errors. In manufacturing the chips there are subtle differences in every chip, this is especially apparent in a new process, be it smaller, or a whole different architecture. So therefore, if a chip has slightly larger gates it would need more voltage to activate these larger than normal gates, but these gates would also be able to handle higher speeds and voltages because they are larger and can take more current.
I have no way to back up this theory beside the evidence given here, and my knowledge of how chips are work, made, and binned.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: AMD CPUs
  • Compared 3 different Bulldozer FX-8120's. Want to know the difference?
Overclock.net › Forums › AMD › AMD CPUs › Compared 3 different Bulldozer FX-8120's. Want to know the difference?