Adventures in Upgrading and FX-6100 Overclocking - Page 40

The specs don't really matter I already know what the problem is. It's your MB. You're really going to not be able to get a high overclock on that motherboard. We already researched that for another poster. It's issues like this that are the primary reason I recommend to anyone who wants to get an FX (or even a hex core Phenom II) to buy a 990 chipset board or at the very least an earlier chipset board that's known to overclock well with higher TDP chips.

From: TECH.SUPPORT@AMD.COM
Sent: Tue 5/15/12 8:10 AM
To: xxxxxxxxxxxx@hotmail.com

Dear Stephen,

Your service request : SR #{ticketno:[8200488157]} has been reviewed and updated.

Response and Service Request History:

Sorry for the delayed response, I've been trying to narrow down what could be causing these issues. It would seem that it could come down to whatever Asus has done with the M5A97 board to potentially tweak the board's capabilities, only partially stemming from the TDP that the 970 chipset can afford. The 970 will only really be able to handle up to 13.6W, as such trying to get the multi up to or past 20 could be the limit that Asus set for that card. I've seen a few different instances of people with that board locking up once the 20x is set, at least on the M5A97. I don't know if asking Asus will help at all, but it looks like it happens in 6100, 8120, and any of the FX series on that board once the multi gets past 17 (seen a stable 16x with a 250HTT for the 8120, at least, through http://www.overclock.net/t/1152548/problems-with-overclocking-fx-8120-via-multiplier/10).

I know that this really doesn't help at all, and it doesn't really make sense for Asus to have multipliers that can't be used, but it seems to be the consensus based on what I've found so far, and on the information that we have here. I did see one who had the M5A97 and a 6100, with a 21x multi and setting the CPU to 1.3V. Obviously we don't support overclocking officially, but if I can get as much info out to you as possible, then you can hopefully be able to use it all to get things figured out. Has he tried to drop the voltage to see if a 20x multiplier can work with a lower voltage on the CPU? Again, this looks like it would be mostly 970/M5A97 restricted, but it should at least afford some decent troubleshooting options, keeping the voltage down once the multiplier gets up, not ideal but should at least afford some stability.

Don't hesitate to ask if anything else has come up, or if you have any other thoughts or concerns. We're here to help.

In order to update this service request, please respond, leaving the service request reference intact.

Best regards,

AMD Global Customer Care

_____________________________________________________________________________________________

This email is a direct result of your contact with AMD Global Customer Care and not part of a campaign. There is no need to unsubscribe to this email as you will only be contacted again if you directly request another service from AMD Global Customer Care.

The contents of this message are provided for informational purposes only. AMD makes no representation or warranties with respect to the accuracy of the contents of the information provided, and reserves the right to change such information at any time, with or without notice.

Don't feel bad. That's a mistake a lot of people are making and they immediately think they're brand new FX chip is a lemon. But that's why AMD recommended certain chipsets from the get go and yet the MB makers released bios updates to allow the FX to run on older platforms without telling people the trade-offs they would be making.

But in general that's something you always want to think about when overclocking. Just because the MB is compatible with a certain CPU does that mean it has the capability to keep up with it?
Edited by Bubba Hotepp - 5/30/12 at 4:37pm

Just because it's "6+2" phase over "4+2" phase doesn't necessarily mean it's going to deliver "more" power. Just cleaner and more stable power. There are alot of other factors on how much it can support. I think the Tech Support guy was trying to say that Asus made a tradeoff in making that board capable of running 140W TDP in that it limits the maximum power available to the CPU when compared to boards designed with the FX in mind. You have to remember that until FX the AM3 chips were topping out at 3.9 - 4.2 GHz. Now here comes along a new chip that needs more power and overclocks much higher than that.

Actually it's a bit more than that.

890FX = Four physical PCIe 2.0 x16 slots @ x8 electrical which can be combined to create two PCIe 2.0 x16 slots @ x16 electrical, one PCIe 2.0 x4 slot and two PCIe 2.0 x1 slots, the chipset provides a total of 38 PCIe 2.0 lanes and 4 PCIe 2.0 for A-Link Express III solely in the Northbridge. HyperTransport 3.0 and PCI Express 2.0. ATI CrossfireX, IOMMU, AMD Overdrive. 18W TDP.

990FX = Supports AM3+ and AM3 processors. HyperTransport 3.0 (3.1 with Bulldozer CPU). CrossFireX and SLI Ready. SATA 6 Gbit/s with Trim support. Up to 14 USB 2.0. IOMMU. 19.6W TDP. PCI Express 2.0 (2x16 or 4x8 configurations) w/ support for up to 4 graphics cards.

Not to mention that there's already info out that Piledriver will be using the extra pin in the AM3+ socket and won't be compatible with AM3 sockets.