Overclock.net banner

1 - 15 of 15 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
28 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I recently downgraded from a Phenom II 965 to an Athlon X4 640. I needed the 965 for a gaming machine I was selling and didn't want to loose the sale. Therefore I swapped the two CPU's temporarily (or so I thought) until I got in another 965.

However, I read online that the 640 is a great OCer so I thought I'd give it a go. With the bus increased to 240 I get 3.6Ghz with 1.5V, memory @ 1600Ghz 8-8-8-24-41, HT link @ 1920. It's very stable in Windows 7 64-bit. No crashes or restarts whatsoever when running STABtest or several rounds of 3Dmarkvantage. I also have my GTX 460 OCed to 800. Starcraft II runs as well as it did before, better actually since I OCed the 460, and I get the same numbers for the WEI (although the WEI is sort of a crock). I also get better scores on 3Dmarkvantage. And I saved about $70, am running cooler despite the OC and using less power.

Anyway, my question is, sometimes when I start up I get an error message that the overclock has failed. I'm using an ASUS M4A785TD-V EVO. Any thoughts on this? How can everything be stable in the OS but I get an "overclock failed" message prompting me to go into BIOS to fix it (in which case I usually just exit without saving and it works fine)? This happens about one in every ten startups. It's very rare since I usually put my system to sleep rather than shutting it off but it's still a bit buggy.
 

·
OG AMD
Joined
·
8,879 Posts
Mine and others do the same thing.Something with Asus boards-kind of like the fail detecter is too sensitive.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,189 Posts
Sounds like the fail detector failed itself...I wouldn't worry about it. If you're getting stable performance in the OS I think you should trust that over a BIOS message any day.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
14,981 Posts
My board also says that randomly, just hit F1 and it keeps being as stable as it was.

When you say "3DMVantage scores increased" you mean in a direct comparison with both processors/cards at the same speeds or you made a boost from the 965 to the 640?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
28 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
Quote:

Originally Posted by Artikbot View Post
My board also says that randomly, just hit F1 and it keeps being as stable as it was.

When you say "3DMVantage scores increased" you mean in a direct comparison with both processors/cards at the same speeds or you made a boost from the 965 to the 640?
Good question. I should have made that more clear. I did two tests, one just for the CPU and one with all tests combined. The CPU was a bit higher with my Athlon II @ 3.6Ghz than the Phenom II at it's stock 3.4Ghz. The overall was also higher but the initial was without the 460 overclock so it's not really comparable.

Still, I'm suprised to see a higher score for the OC'ed Athlon II. Granted, this is just one benchmark and it's just that: and benchmark. I'm sure the stock Phenom is equal or faster in some applications. But the fact that I'm meeting it or exceeding it is enough for me.

Thanks for the other info. I'll just ignore the message or possibly find someway of turning it off in BIOS. I know you can turn off some of the error messages such as keyboard or CPU fan errors. Not sure if the OC one can be turned off. Not a big deal.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,233 Posts
It looks like u have confirmed what I wanted to know. Been thinking about upgrading my Athlon II X4 620 to a Phenom II but it looks like I going to have to go Thuban to get a big boost out of my rig before I go Bulldozer or switch to DDR3. These are just some kick butt quad-cores.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
9,168 Posts
My 965 clocks to 4.1GHz before my cooling becomes inadequate, I can get it over 4.2Ghz on the night air.

Exactly how is your Athlon II a better OC'er than a Phenom II?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
28 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
Quote:

Originally Posted by BallaTheFeared View Post

Exactly how is your Athlon II a better OC'er than a Phenom II?
Tell me where in my post I said the Athlon was a better OC'er than the Phenom and I'll answer your question.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
28 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
Why not? There's value in knowing that an OCed $100 CPU is equivilant to a $170 CPU. That's what this boards all about isn't it? To get more for your money than running a more expensive component. If everyone had a ton of $$$ then we'd all run I7 975's with 4X SLI'ed 480's. But we don't so we buy less expensive stuff and OC it.

My Phenom 965 wasn't overclocked. It was fast enough without OCing that I never really felt the need for more speed. Then I had to downgrade to that Athlon X4 and noticed a significant hit in performance. But then found with an OC that it was at the same level as my stock Phenom, which was fast enough to start with = Savings of $70

Sure, you can OC the Phenom and it will be that much faster, but I didn't have that speed to start with. Now that I've seen the Athlon OC by 20% I'm tempted to go back to the Phenom and do the same thing though.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
9,168 Posts
$170?

You can buy a Phenom II x4 945 for $135. 640's are $104.

You could spend $30 more and get a chip that will clock higher and has L3.

AMD's performance is low enough without going to lower grade chips in my opinion.

I don't think there is anything wrong with the Athlon II's, it's just if you have performance in mind, downgrading an AMD chip is a bad idea since their performance even at the highest level isn't very good compared to Intels chips.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
28 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
Quote:


Originally Posted by BallaTheFeared
View Post

$170?

You can buy a Phenom II x4 945 for $135. 640's are $104.

You could spend $30 more and get a chip that will clock higher and has L3.

AMD's performance is low enough without going to lower grade chips in my opinion.

I don't think there is anything wrong with the Athlon II's, it's just if you have performance in mind, downgrading an AMD chip is a bad idea since their performance even at the highest level isn't very good compared to Intels chips.

I had a 965 though, not a 945. That's good advice though and I'll probably go that route when I upgrade. And yes, Intel has the upper hand on AMD for speed as we all know but I don't run games or applications powerful enough to notice a difference.

About three months back I picked up a 930 Bloomfield and a ASUS P6X58D-E on Newegg on an open box special for $219 and $168 respectively. I popped them in my system and (after a reactivation of Windows due to hardware changes) was well on my way to 8 effective cores and thought I'd be in gaming nirvana. But guess what? Never noticed a difference.

Windows startup time was the same. That's more dependant on the HD anyway so a better proc wasn't helping me there. I run SC2, Civ3, 4 player Diablo over LAN, a Freelancer server and an AMIGA emulator. Running those games on an i7 was like having a Ferrari for my daily driver. Unnecessary. After a week I ripped it all out, stuck it in an Antec Three Hundred with a 5850 and sold it to a very happy engineering student who did 3D modeling and video rendering. Stuff my system will never have to do.

I replaced my 5770 with a GTX 460 and noticed a significant difference in SC2. But the proc never made a difference. And this Athlon X4 runs it exactly the same as well.

I know this board is all about finding the sweet spot in hardware and tweaking to get the most performance but I think sometimes people get hardware they don't need. I'm constantly selling 965 Phenom and i7 930 systems to people who do nothing more than browse the web and play the occasional online game. People are free to do what they want with their money but for me; I want the minimum hardware I can get away with to run everything flawlessly. I guess it all depends on your purpose and wants. I have a lot of other things to spend money on. I'm not as concerned about the psycology about what's under the hood as long as it does what i need it to.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
11,050 Posts
Quote:

Originally Posted by Losiglow View Post
I had a 965 though, not a 945. That's good advice though and I'll probably go that route when I upgrade. And yes, Intel has the upper hand on AMD for speed as we all know but I don't run games or applications powerful enough to notice a difference.

About three months back I picked up a 930 Bloomfield and a ASUS P6X58D-E on Newegg on an open box special for $219 and $168 respectively. I popped them in my system and (after a reactivation of Windows due to hardware changes) was well on my way to 8 effective cores and thought I'd be in gaming nirvana. But guess what? Never noticed a difference.

Windows startup time was the same. That's more dependant on the HD anyway so a better proc wasn't helping me there. I run SC2, Civ3, 4 player Diablo over LAN, a Freelancer server and an AMIGA emulator. Running those games on an i7 was like having a Ferrari for my daily driver. Unnecessary. After a week I ripped it all out, stuck it in an Antec Three Hundred with a 5850 and sold it to a very happy engineering student who did 3D modeling and video rendering. Stuff my system will never have to do.

I replaced my 5770 with a GTX 460 and noticed a significant difference in SC2. But the proc never made a difference. And this Athlon X4 runs it exactly the same as well.

I know this board is all about finding the sweet spot in hardware and tweaking to get the most performance but I think sometimes people get hardware they don't need. I'm constantly selling 965 Phenom and i7 930 systems to people who do nothing more than browse the web and play the occasional online game. People are free to do what they want with their money but for me; I want the minimum hardware I can get away with to run everything flawlessly. I guess it all depends on your purpose and wants. I have a lot of other things to spend money on. I'm not as concerned about the psycology about what's under the hood as long as it does what i need it to.
This post is like... excellent. Nicely done.

I was having a hard time deciding between spending the extra money on a Phenom or cut costs and get an Athlon. Pretty sure when it was time to purchase, I decided that the Phenom was overkill for what I do.

If I remember from my research, pretty much the only big difference you'll see between an Athlon and a Phenom of same speeds, are in apps that will actually utilize the 3rd cache memory. In all other tests, there were so close to each other that it wasn't worth the $30 extra.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,233 Posts
Using Ripbot264 I see 65fps on my 1st pass and 15-17ish on 2nd pass on a H.264 file. The 965 gets 72/22. Back when it was 199.00 i saved a 100 dollars and with a mild OC get 90+% of the benefits of a Phenom II. Think AMD was smoking something when they release this chip because the performance to cost ratio is insane.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,591 Posts
You guys have brought up one of the oldest arguments that mankind faces!

Needs vs Wants

Food, Water, and Shelter are needs! The rest are luxuries!
 
1 - 15 of 15 Posts
Top