Overclock.net › Forums › AMD › AMD - General › AMD Zosma 960T/1600T/1605T CPU Club
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

AMD Zosma 960T/1600T/1605T CPU Club - Page 56

post #551 of 2790
The ironic thing about this chip is: it needs nowhere near 1.275v to run 3.0ghz. AMD overvolts the hell out of the processor. They do the same for the IMC as well. I'm starting to wonder...but...I'll get back to it.

The real 3.0 voltage is around 1.075, lol, yeah that low. .2v lower than stock. That explains why most get so much @ stock because it's so high to begin with. The real IMC voltage is actually about 1.1V, it's only slightly overvolted.

I'm actually testing a completely different methodology, and I'll get back once I have some results.

Fact is AMD processors love to run cool -- there have been some extreme tests that show with phase cooling and such that the 960t can hit like 4.3-4.4 on stock voltage.
Edited by ozzy983 - 2/18/12 at 2:05am
Primary
(11 items)
 
  
Reply
Primary
(11 items)
 
  
Reply
post #552 of 2790
Quote:
Originally Posted by ozzy983 View Post

The ironic thing about this chip is: it needs nowhere near 1.275v to run 3.0ghz. AMD overvolts the hell out of the processor. They do the same for the IMC as well. I'm starting to wonder...but...I'll get back to it.
The real 3.0 voltage is around 1.075, lol, yeah that low. .2v lower than stock. That explains why most get so much @ stock because it's so high to begin with. The real IMC voltage is actually about 1.1V, it's only slightly overvolted.
I'm actually testing a completely different methodology, and I'll get back once I have some results.
Fact is AMD processors love to run cool -- there have been some extreme tests that show with phase cooling and such that the 960t can hit like 4.3-4.4 on stock voltage.

So where would I get the most performance gain (assuming I use the right voltage)? Upping the multiplier, HTLink, core clock, dram timings, or a combination of them?

I'm currently downloading 3DMark 11, Vantage, 06, PassMark PC Mark and PCMark 7 to compare the different settings I have (see sig). Any suggestions to more tests?
Edited by BadRobot - 2/18/12 at 4:18am
post #553 of 2790
Quote:
Originally Posted by BadRobot View Post

So where would I get the most performance gain (assuming I use the right voltage)? Upping the multiplier, HTLink, core clock, dram timings, or a combination of them?
I'm currently downloading 3DMark 11, Vantage, 06, PassMark PC Mark and PCMark 7 to compare the different settings I have (see sig). Any suggestions to more tests?

The jury is still out on that one to be honest.

Some swear that upping the HTT and running a lower multiplier not only increases system performance, but might free up some headroom requiring less voltage to get same clock.

I haven't tested it enough to make an accurate assessment, but...

I have a feeling the additional voltages needed on other parts by increasing the HTT might make up for voltages needed elsewhere. That's just my hunch.

From my own very limited testing, overclocking via the HTT causing weird issues. In small amounts it's ok, but once you start pushing 250+, things happen that shouldn't.

If you overclock just through multipliers (CPU, NB, HTL), you get the best of all worlds, it seems.

I'm working on a nice spreadsheet for this thread with different settings...and their impact on performance and voltages.
Primary
(11 items)
 
  
Reply
Primary
(11 items)
 
  
Reply
post #554 of 2790
so as of now, my 24/7 clocks are as follows.
unlock 6 core 1605T 3837.8 MHz (255.9 x 15) 1.392v
NB 2559 1.25v
HT stock
i dont know what my "core temps" are, due to the monitors i use not recognizing them-anyone know what will?
but my cpu temp is at 48c after prime.
i have been running this 24/7 for 2 weeks so as of now this is what i will keep.
i have just set the bios to default and see what i can get on a quad core. since it is all at default (i did turn off c&q and such) i can read the core temps-18c right now and the fans on my rad are at 1/2 speed
ambient temp is 63f.


-dimwit-

lol, i just went to close everything to start my oc and i forgot prime was running, so the 18c was with prime running for 30 minutes-not bad, that is ambient temp
Edited by dimwit13 - 2/18/12 at 8:10am
New One
(17 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX-8350 SABERTOOTH 990FX MSI 7950 TF3 2x4GB GSkill 2133 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Crucial 256GB-OS/Steam 1.5TB WD Storage none-yup,none!!! XSPC Rasa 750 RS240 & EX280 (cpu & gpu) 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 8 64bit Crossover 27" Max Nighthawk X8 (Browns) SeaSonic X Series X-850 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Corsair 650D Razer DeathAdder Kitchen Table Xonar STX 
Other
HD 598's 
  hide details  
Reply
New One
(17 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX-8350 SABERTOOTH 990FX MSI 7950 TF3 2x4GB GSkill 2133 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Crucial 256GB-OS/Steam 1.5TB WD Storage none-yup,none!!! XSPC Rasa 750 RS240 & EX280 (cpu & gpu) 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 8 64bit Crossover 27" Max Nighthawk X8 (Browns) SeaSonic X Series X-850 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Corsair 650D Razer DeathAdder Kitchen Table Xonar STX 
Other
HD 598's 
  hide details  
Reply
post #555 of 2790
Quote:
Originally Posted by dimwit13 View Post

so as of now, my 24/7 clocks are as follows.
unlock 6 core 1605T 3837.8 MHz (255.9 x 15) 1.392v
NB 2559 1.25v
HT stock
i dont know what my "core temps" are, due to the monitors i use not recognizing them-anyone know what will?
but my cpu temp is at 48c after prime.
i have been running this 24/7 for 2 weeks so as of now this is what i will keep.
i have just set the bios to default and see what i can get on a quad core. since it is all at default (i did turn off c&q and such) i can read the core temps-18c right now and the fans on my rad are at 1/2 speed
ambient temp is 63f.
-dimwit-
lol, i just went to close everything to start my oc and i forgot prime was running, so the 18c was with prime running for 30 minutes-not bad, that is ambient temp

dim,

core temp readings become disabled on any amd chip that unlocks. i've experienced this with a sempron, 2 tri-cores and my current one. just go by the cpu temp. check the difference between the cpu and core temps when the extra cores are locked (stock and overclocked) - use those as your reference.

for me 50C max is safe for winter.
Second Intel Rig
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
2700 4.5/ 1.28 77 290 (2) 16 / 1866 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
1000 360/240 10 64 28 2160 
PowerCase
850 540 
  hide details  
Reply
Second Intel Rig
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
2700 4.5/ 1.28 77 290 (2) 16 / 1866 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
1000 360/240 10 64 28 2160 
PowerCase
850 540 
  hide details  
Reply
post #556 of 2790
Quote:
Originally Posted by rdr09 View Post

dim,
core temp readings become disabled on any amd chip that unlocks. i've experienced this with a sempron, 2 tri-cores and my current one. just go by the cpu temp. check the difference between the cpu and core temps when the extra cores are locked (stock and overclocked) - use those as your reference.
for me 50C max is safe for winter.

thanks, i was aware of the unlocked cores not showing, i was just curious to see if there was a monitor that could.

right now, my core temps are are at 15c and the cpu temp is 30c so this is either a 15c or half the temp difference.
i believe it is closer to the15c, but after i run prime, i will know better.
i wonder if this is true with the unlocked cores.



-dimwit-

off to oc, but had to make some breakfast first-MMMMMMMMMM BACON
and something good for the poo-lol

450


New One
(17 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX-8350 SABERTOOTH 990FX MSI 7950 TF3 2x4GB GSkill 2133 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Crucial 256GB-OS/Steam 1.5TB WD Storage none-yup,none!!! XSPC Rasa 750 RS240 & EX280 (cpu & gpu) 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 8 64bit Crossover 27" Max Nighthawk X8 (Browns) SeaSonic X Series X-850 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Corsair 650D Razer DeathAdder Kitchen Table Xonar STX 
Other
HD 598's 
  hide details  
Reply
New One
(17 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX-8350 SABERTOOTH 990FX MSI 7950 TF3 2x4GB GSkill 2133 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Crucial 256GB-OS/Steam 1.5TB WD Storage none-yup,none!!! XSPC Rasa 750 RS240 & EX280 (cpu & gpu) 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 8 64bit Crossover 27" Max Nighthawk X8 (Browns) SeaSonic X Series X-850 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Corsair 650D Razer DeathAdder Kitchen Table Xonar STX 
Other
HD 598's 
  hide details  
Reply
post #557 of 2790
Quote:
Originally Posted by dimwit13 View Post

off to oc, but had to make some breakfast first-MMMMMMMMMM BACON
and something good for the poo-lol
450

want D: looks so delicious!!

---

I wish there was a way to force the use of more threads ^^ or that software allowed for more threads to be used if they were available.

side note: Do any of you use FancyCache beta? It's an amazing program that drastically increases an HDD/SSD's read speed. My ssd with the latest firmare did about 500 MB/s read and with 1Gb of RAM set as cache with block size of 128k it basically tripled that
524
Apparently, the 4K one is important for Windows when it starts up. HDD -> SSD is an incredible improvement and adding the cache to it drastically increases the speed at which I can move/copy/cut large and small files.
post #558 of 2790
Quote:
Originally Posted by BadRobot View Post

want D: looks so delicious!!
---
I wish there was a way to force the use of more threads ^^ or that software allowed for more threads to be used if they were available.
side note: Do any of you use FancyCache beta? It's an amazing program that drastically increases an HDD/SSD's read speed. My ssd with the latest firmare did about 500 MB/s read and with 1Gb of RAM set as cache with block size of 128k it basically tripled that
524
Apparently, the 4K one is important for Windows when it starts up. HDD -> SSD is an incredible improvement and adding the cache to it drastically increases the speed at which I can move/copy/cut large and small files.

That's because the block size is so much larger, the default is like 4 or 8k for NTFS. The problem with larger block sizes is wasted space. Every file smaller than 128K will take up 128K; over time, it starts to add up. Might not be as big an issue now-a-days, but it certainly was back in the day.

I might have read this backward, if so, then the opposite would apply. Setting the Block size smaller enables for faster access/reads to smaller files. It should, however, suffer from larger files sizes; This is the same as setting the stripe size for a raid array. Most recommend the stripe and block to be relatively the same size for best performance.

16K back in the day was always optimal.
Edited by ozzy983 - 2/18/12 at 11:06am
Primary
(11 items)
 
  
Reply
Primary
(11 items)
 
  
Reply
post #559 of 2790
I've done it! Finally hit 4.4ghz, stable.

375

The only problem is: I'm not exactly sure how I did it.

My notes show I've attempted 4.4ghz all the way up to 1.625V, and no luck.

I have a few ideas as to why it works, but I'm afraid to test them, it might not work again.

I'm thinking the HTL ABOVE 2600 might be necessary or the HTT overclocked (currently running 252). Those are the only 2 things that have changed.

I haven't done much testing with the HT over 2k to be honest; anything I've tried has netted 0 change, neither positive or negative.

Now, I gotta see how far this puppy can go! Back in the game!
Primary
(11 items)
 
  
Reply
Primary
(11 items)
 
  
Reply
post #560 of 2790
Quote:
Originally Posted by ozzy983 View Post

I've done it! Finally hit 4.4ghz, stable.
The only problem is: I'm not exactly sure how I did it.
My notes show I've attempted 4.4ghz all the way up to 1.625V, and no luck.
I have a few ideas as to why it works, but I'm afraid to test them, it might not work again.
I'm thinking the HTL ABOVE 2600 might be necessary or the HTT overclocked (currently running 252). Those are the only 2 things that have changed.
I haven't done much testing with the HT over 2k to be honest; anything I've tried has netted 0 change, neither positive or negative.
Now, I gotta see how far this puppy can go! Back in the game!

That's one damn high oc!! I wonder how it'll test in the benchmarks biggrin.gif Since my mobo isn't a greatly equipped for heat I won't push mine further than 4. I'm sticking to 3.7 for everyday use.

on the block size thing, I move around a lot of video files which usually are anywhere from 120MB to 2Gb so I believe 128k would be good. Though I see that after large files tend to slow down transfer speed after a while...of course, I have no idea about how it works lol XD

back to another topic, performance boost: so I've decided to test some bios settings and am currently running:
200x18.5 @1.44V, HTLink 2400, NB 3000, DRAM CL9-24-2T (compared to: )
200x20.0 @1.52V, HTLink 2000, NB 2000, DRAM CL11-28-2T
I'm trying to get some kind of increase in the benchmark but so far in 3DMark06 it drops from 13.1k to 12.9k and in PCMark 7 it goes up 4,115 to 4,132.

edit: 3DMark Vantage went up though from 8,166 to 8,385. This feels slightly disappointing lol =P
Edited by BadRobot - 2/18/12 at 1:31pm
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: AMD - General
Overclock.net › Forums › AMD › AMD - General › AMD Zosma 960T/1600T/1605T CPU Club