Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

What did I get? 1045t marked as 1040t and higher TDP

Tags:
Last response: in CPUs
Share
August 25, 2012 9:00:33 AM

I bought a 1045t off ebay (only the cpu, no box no fan). It works fine even under stress, benchmarks are fine, and the id numbers on the cpu are correct. But cpu-z calls it a 1040t (Processor -> Name) and the tdp is over a hundred when all 1045t are 95W. Here is a screenshot:



I tried googling for 1040t and searching here for 1040t but got no answer. All cpu-z screenshots of a 1045t Ive found have 1045t under both Name and Specification and lower tdp.

My motherboard has cpu unlocking set off, it is possible that this is an unlocked cpu transformed into a 1045t? Everything Ive read says that to unlock cores in a cpu you need the bios and I dont think it is posible to do it directly on the cpu, is it? Another option Im thinking is that it could be a cpu from early AMD testings and thats why it has a higher tdp and the 1040t name? I really have no idea.

Both the cpu benchmarks and temperature is fine, I have not managed to get it over 45ºC even when its summer hot here and it has a cheap 20euros cooler (no oc). I can not test power consumption, but voltage seems fine. Still, I would like to know what did I get, why the higher tdp and the 1040t name (which I can not find any valid reference on google or anywhere).
a c 328 à CPUs
August 27, 2012 1:23:29 AM

What speed does it run at when it's not idling?
m
0
l
August 27, 2012 8:13:01 AM

clutchc said:
What speed does it run at when it's not idling?


It gets to 2.7GHz with the six cores up and when in Turbo mode it goes up to 3.2Ghz disabling some cores (in reality slightly higher than both 2.7 and something and 3.2Ghz and something, can not check right now), everything as expected. As I said, the benchmarks were on point (even slightly higher than what I saw on the internet) and I have submitted it to stress with good results. Only thing I have not been able to test is consumption (but voltages look fine). Still, I would like to be sure what Im running and appreciate every input.
m
0
l
Related resources
Can't find your answer ? Ask !
a c 109 à CPUs
August 27, 2012 8:19:45 AM

What is the model number on the actual chip?
m
0
l
August 27, 2012 12:35:21 PM

jay_nar2012 said:
What is the model number on the actual chip?


Its HDT45TWFK6DGR.

The AMD stepping code is CCBBE CB 1031EPMW

Which does not appear listed here: http://www.cpu-world.com/step_codes/C/CCBBE%20CB.html , but that is ok since that is only a list of what the users have submitted and could be lacking. Also, there are three 1045T models listed there and the code on my chip (1031EPMW) seems to be "older" (if Im guessing right, I dont really know how the codes work) than 1028APMW and 1030EPMW and "younger" than 1101CPM (the codes in the three 1045T listed). I just realized this and its reasuring, Im still wondering about the Name 1040T and why there is no reference on the Internet.

There is another number in the cpu but I think that one is irrelevant here.
m
0
l
a c 109 à CPUs
August 27, 2012 1:10:50 PM

You,ve got a 95W 1045T.
m
0
l
a c 328 à CPUs
August 27, 2012 2:27:39 PM

What does the BIOS report the chip is when you boot into setup?
m
0
l
a c 144 à CPUs
August 27, 2012 10:50:01 PM

perhaps you need a bios update and maybe see if theres a newer version of cpuid.
m
0
l
August 28, 2012 6:27:58 AM

clutchc said:
What does the BIOS report the chip is when you boot into setup?


It says 1045T.
m
0
l
August 28, 2012 6:29:37 AM

popatim said:
perhaps you need a bios update and maybe see if theres a newer version of cpuid.


The bios is updated to the last version. Im also using the lastest version of cpu-z and other programs (like this one: http://www.piriform.com/speccy) give the same results. Name has 1040T while Specification has 1045T.
m
0
l
August 28, 2012 6:31:37 AM

jay_nar2012 said:
You,ve got a 95W 1045T.


Yeah, the question is why does it say 1040T and I can find no refenrece from it on the Internet and why the TDP values are higher than anything Ive seen in the internet. Maybe its not a big deal, but I would like to know why just in case the ebay seller sold me something else.
m
0
l
a c 109 à CPUs
August 28, 2012 3:40:58 PM

He might of gotten mistaken or wanted you to be more happy by giving you a better (slightly better) chip...

m
0
l
August 28, 2012 4:48:23 PM

jay_nar2012 said:
He might of gotten mistaken or wanted you to be more happy by giving you a better (slightly better) chip...


How is a chip that runs at the same speed as advertised but consumes more electricity a better chip?

Btw, I think I might have found what is going one:



If you check http://globalsp.ts.fujitsu.com/dmsp/Publications/public... the power consumption of the 1045T is idle 48W and maximum 94W. Mine does idle 48W and maximum 109.2W (which matches the higher TDP).

But the key is that the voltages are also a bit higher than they should be. In this page http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/K10/AMD-Phenom%20II%20X6%... it says lower theoretical VCORE is 1.075V and in my case minimum is 1.150V, theoretical max VCORE is 1.375V (1.425 on turbo mode), mine is 1.410V (dont know if it went into turbo mode or not in the interval). So Ive been suggested that the motherboard might be giving a bit too much voltage raising consumption and confusing the programs that try to detect the cpu model. Im going to try when I have time to lower the voltage a bit and see what happens.
m
0
l
a c 109 à CPUs
August 28, 2012 4:59:54 PM

I attempted to find the 1040t, i only found there is a 1035t and 1045t on wiki, maybe the 1040t is a OEM CPU only?
m
0
l
a c 328 à CPUs
August 28, 2012 5:04:38 PM

Johnscoty said:
It says 1045T.

Then you obviously have a 1045T. 3rd party ID programs would be slightly less reliable than the BIOS program designed for the chip family.
m
0
l
August 28, 2012 9:53:36 PM

Quick update: I undervolted the cpu (and tested undervolting the nbcpu as well). I have tried -0.1V and it seems to be working fine. I have not tested enough time (I will do later), but the early tests shows that it does not change much the consumption idle (4W less) but under load it saves 20W. The funny part is that performance seems to be unaffected. Ive run benchmarks and they give similar results.

Im still wondering why I see 1040T but the consumption part at least is solved.
m
0
l
a c 175 à CPUs
August 29, 2012 7:33:58 PM

As said before as long as the bios read it right, a 3rd party program has its glitches and mis reads. My Phenom II X6 1055t runs perfectly in my system on my 125watt tdp motherboard but reads 133watts in cpu-z.

And there is a possibility that the core unlocker is why the program reads 1040t as usually thats wat the unlocked quad cores change to something similar, if not said b4 try to just turn off cpu unlocker or whatever its called with ur motherboard, not sure if thats it doesnt hurt to try.
m
0
l
August 30, 2012 4:24:26 PM

lazyboy947 said:
As said before as long as the bios read it right, a 3rd party program has its glitches and mis reads. My Phenom II X6 1055t runs perfectly in my system on my 125watt tdp motherboard but reads 133watts in cpu-z.

And there is a possibility that the core unlocker is why the program reads 1040t as usually thats wat the unlocked quad cores change to something similar, if not said b4 try to just turn off cpu unlocker or whatever its called with ur motherboard, not sure if thats it doesnt hurt to try.


As said before the core unlocker on the motherboard is off. Also, the chipset reference belongs to a 1045T. As far as I know, you can not unlock a chip without the motherboard, but I was asking to be sure.

Now that I have the consumption under control, Im happy with the chip.
m
0
l
!