Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Only a 5% overclock on the T-Bred?

Last response: in CPUs
Share
June 10, 2002 2:04:43 AM

Even I was expecting more than that. Take a look <A HREF="http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/02q2/020610/thoroughbre..." target="_new">here</A>. Send any flames to those who wrote the article. I am merely the messenger. ;) 

-Raystonn


= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my employer. =

More about : overclock bred

June 10, 2002 2:10:20 AM

Hehe, good to see you back here too Raystonn. There's nothing to flame about, it's merely a fact. The Barton is near anyway. My P4 is on the way! :smile:

:wink: <b><i>"A penny saved is a penny earned!"</i></b> :wink:
June 10, 2002 2:14:57 AM

You folks were expecting this? Whatever happened to the claims that AMD's shrink to 0.13 micron would enable overclocks similar to those seen with the Northwood Pentium 4?

-Raystonn


= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my employer. =
Related resources
June 10, 2002 2:25:02 AM

No, I don't really care. I had decided on a P4 a long time ago.

:wink: <b><i>"A penny saved is a penny earned!"</i></b> :wink:
June 10, 2002 2:27:10 AM

I'm finally looking at upgrading my main system yet again. Tired with PC1066 RDRAM and a 50% overclock, I am looking at the available options that might work at PC1200. The P4T533-C looks promising but I will have to investigate further.

-Raystonn


= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my employer. =
June 10, 2002 2:29:49 AM

Mat were are cutie je me payer ta tete.

T-bred will rock NW it barely beat Palamino and it allready using higher voltage (if i remember well it to keep mobo compatibility)

LOL my predict still hold the true
<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by juin on 06/09/02 11:07 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
June 10, 2002 2:31:25 AM

I know never to expect anything........even if they do demo a working air cooled sample at +2ghz.....How many times did I hear that brought up in arguments?

I sold my sig for $50.
June 10, 2002 2:32:44 AM

Really the AMD results are somewhat embarassing. The Northwood to me is clearly superior in most things and cheaper if you overclock. Maybe the Barton can even it up somewhat, by then Intel will be pushing 3000 mhz. Right now I firmly believe Intel has the performance and overclocking crown. Price wise I really don't see that much advantage using AMD at the moment. If I was going to build a system right now it would have to be an Intel system flat out. Well I have 3-6 months before I will do that, hopefully things will change for the better :smile: .
June 10, 2002 2:37:48 AM

Quote:
Not sure about this normalie toms will show T-bred in about 4 to 6 hour so we will see if that true

This is the article that will be placed on their main page in a few hours. I have simply posted a link to the article earlier than they had intended to make the article public. It is not going to change in the next few hours. ;) 

-Raystonn


= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my employer. =
June 10, 2002 2:48:15 AM

melty-
you forgot to use all caps in the title.

[insert philosophical statement here]
June 10, 2002 2:49:11 AM

Excuse me?

-Raystonn


= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my employer. =
June 10, 2002 3:03:30 AM

My 2.75 ghz P4 is running on a P4T533-C. It would crash whenever I tried to OC even by two mhz....

Then I changed the ram multiplier to 4x instead of auto. Doesn't really matter cuz I'm using Pc1066 kingston rdram anyways.

Anyways, I've gotten my 2.53 all the way up to 2.95 ghz 100% stable with no voltage increases or special cpu coolers (just the intel one).

Running it now at 2.75 though because I don't want to stress the other components too much.

3dmark at 2.75 ghz 13,300 (ti4600). 2.95 ghz = 13,700.
At default 2.53 it was 12,600

Oh yeah my leadtek GF4 crashes at 320mhz/700...so those benchmarks were run at 315/690, where it's completely stable.

Not sure how this pertains to what you were talking about, but I just saw P4T533-C.

<font color=blue> There's no such thing as hell, but you can make it if you try.</font color=blue>
June 10, 2002 3:12:01 AM

I have click on the link after have reply anyway i have edit my post,still all rumor say 10 juin i wonder if toms got a spécial permision

cheap, cheap. Think cheap, and you'll always be cheap.AMD version of semi conducteur industrie
June 10, 2002 3:14:08 AM

ahahhahaha

I knew u couldn't wait to post this...

INTEL fans all over the globe are in glee and happy....

i will be fed my share of crow on a few forums from the INTEL FAITHFUL
June 10, 2002 3:20:28 AM

Thanks for the informative post.

That is a nice <b><font color=green>Garbage Can</font color=green></b> you have there!
June 10, 2002 4:16:31 AM

get a load of the clamp for the hsf, you'll need a f'n crow bar to get that sucker on LOL! is AMD listening to their customers?

"<b>AMD/VIA!</b>...you are <i>still</i> the weakest link, good bye!"
June 10, 2002 4:19:38 AM

Quote:
melty-
you forgot to use all caps in the title.

you're mixed up, dude.

"<b>AMD/VIA!</b>...you are <i>still</i> the weakest link, good bye!"
June 10, 2002 4:21:13 AM

Somewhat surprising and I guess disappointing for the AMD performance freaks.

However, I am at the budget end of the scale and I am quite happy to upgrade my Celeron 433 to an Athlon XP 1700+ which will give me roughly a 400% performance boost and leave me with more money to spend on my internet connection ;-)

What I still find hard to believe is that 1Ghz+ cpus are now budget?!?!

Many years ago I worked at a place that purchased a cutting edge 286 @ 4.7Mhz for USD 10,000.

<font color=blue> The Opteration was a success... I'm now a full-wit</font color=blue> :eek: 
June 10, 2002 5:13:11 AM

Quite disapointing, but I've stopped caring since I found out my A7A266 doesn't have the proper PCB revision to support the AXPs (figures). Now I'm stuck, unless the board goes bad in the next month (then the warranty expires), with only T-birds. Not that it matters much. I figure I'll sit and wait until the Hammer comes out to make my decision about my next upgrade. Not that my CPU is a bottleneck in any way, which is the reason for the Ti4400 coming FedEx tomorrow. Too bad for AMD... boo hoo... who the hell cares (cept those who made boasts about the T-bred). AMD decided 18 or more months ago that the Hammer would be the new flagship and right now they are just trying to keep the performance close, though they failed miserably at that with the 2200+.

On the topic of overclocking, I have yet to see any sites drop the multiplier down so that a 166MHz FSB would still be at the stock speed of the 2200+. Those are benches I'd like to see. Might allow them to win more than 2 out of 32 benches, eh?

That's, I think, where AMD failed. The 166MHz rumor might still hold for the Barton, but that's only heresay at this point.

Mat (and the others on the 25-50% OC bandwagon), you're all going to be eating a lot of crow in the coming days. I hope you brought a fork and salt. The fact that a 2100+ T-Bred can't even OC to the level of the Palomino 2100+ is horrible! Something to do with the core rearraingement?

-SammyBoy
June 10, 2002 6:20:09 AM

Quote:
On the topic of overclocking, I have yet to see any sites drop the multiplier down so that a 166MHz FSB would still be at the stock speed of the 2200+.


I'd like to see that too. We already know both Palomino and T-bred can handle the FSB...

Quote:
The fact that a 2100+ T-Bred can't even OC to the level of the Palomino 2100+ is horrible! Something to do with the core rearraingement?


No, probably more to do with the reviewers (Frank & Bert this time) not really trying. Ace's got 1900-2000MHz out of the thing with just a cheap GlobalWin HSF, better than they got with the Pally and better than THG got with watercooling. There's a Danish site claiming to get 2GHz on the stock HSF, but all they showed was a POST screen.

While overclocking isn't what we'd hoped, and performance is clearly behind the fastest Northwood, it's worth noting that the PR rating still holds true, even with 533FSB Northwoods.

<pre>We now <b>return</b>(<font color=blue>-1</font color=blue>) to an irregular program scheduler.</pre><p><P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by kelledin on 06/10/02 01:26 AM.</EM></FONT></P>
June 10, 2002 8:38:15 AM

Hey good to see you back.

Here is one of my <A HREF="http://fugger.netfirms.com/3122.jpg" target="_new">current ss</A>, I was trying more vcore, motherboard topped out at 170's FSB.

Playing with IT7 with XMS 3200 now, legacy free is very nice if you do not use LPT and com ports.

5% is pretty bad with "high quality" water cooling.

You are limited to what your mind can perceive.
June 10, 2002 9:13:44 AM

Quote:
5% is pretty bad with "high quality" water cooling.

you are right fugger 5% is ridiculous... makes u wander if they made a mistake?
also they were clocking the fsb so maybe the problem was with another component? ram or graphics card maybe? i would be more interested if they clocked using the multiplier. if the problem is with the tbred itself then amd obviously still have problems with the shrink.

I'm out of my mind, but feel free to leave a message.
June 10, 2002 10:00:44 AM

im a big amd fan but i have to admit intel are starting to look better...
anandtech got a similar review to toms except they gave oc results for diferent speed grades of tbred. by increasing the voltage to 1.85 they all got to about 1.8GHz. kinda suggests thats the limit of the core dont it?

I'm out of my mind, but feel free to leave a message.
June 10, 2002 10:40:10 AM

What a comeback post ;-).


Did anyone else notice the tbred they used in the test had RED PACKAGING, amd switched the green several months ago, this clearly indicates that tom is using an OLD chip, take this test with a grain of salt.

There is a marked difference between the green and red(brown) overclocking, I think the red chips are the stock which had the timing issues, only green chips should be accepted as examples of the cores performance.

:wink: The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark :wink:
<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Matisaro on 06/10/02 04:29 AM.</EM></FONT></P>
June 10, 2002 10:44:00 AM

Quote:
No, probably more to do with the reviewers (Frank & Bert this time) not really trying. Ace's got 1900-2000MHz out of the thing with just a cheap GlobalWin HSF, better than they got with the Pally and better than THG got with watercooling. There's a Danish site claiming to get 2GHz on the stock HSF, but all they showed was a POST screen.

While overclocking isn't what we'd hoped, and performance is clearly behind the fastest Northwood, it's worth noting that the PR rating still holds true, even with 533FSB Northwoods.


Sites all over are showing 2ghz+ overclocks with air cooling, furthermore this chip is red!

Vokkel and his friends are using a 2 month old engineering chip to demonstrate the overclocking potential of the new core, does anyone else think its strange that the 1800+ tbred has a heatoutput lower than the palomino signifigantly, then magically the 2200+ shoots up to palomino levels?

:wink: The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark :wink:
June 10, 2002 10:56:41 AM

ugh.

im just SICK of the benchmarks of non-existant overclocked processors.


at least the topic of crap coolers and proper thermal protection was covered.

nice to see amd laying down the law at last.


<font color=blue>Pants Down! Turn Around! Bend Over! You're about to Experience Telstra broadband! :lol: 
June 10, 2002 11:01:43 AM

I agree, except for the arrogant way vokkel made it look like his "video" was the cause for amd thermal protection, dumb bastard dosent realize still that amds specification was not followed by siemens, not amds spec was wrong.

:wink: The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark :wink:
June 10, 2002 11:26:13 AM

still think amd should have forced thermal protection from the start of the XP.

lost a few mobo maker brownie points maybe... but better for the customer.

<font color=blue>Pants Down! Turn Around! Bend Over! You're about to Experience Telstra broadband! :lol: 
June 10, 2002 11:28:27 AM

are anandtech using "old" engineering samples too? there chips have red packaging as well. so does ace hardware. and overclockers.com.....
are ALL the review sites really using "old" samples? i doubt it. sorry mat but it looks like the poor old athlon just cant rev any faster. :(  maybe when the line matures you will be proved right but as things stand now it looks like the athlon is at its design limit. where are you hammer? AMD needs you!

I'm out of my mind, but feel free to leave a message.
June 10, 2002 11:34:02 AM

Yes, they are all using old samples, how do you explain the fact amd started using all green packaging 2 months ago and the tbreds are all red, their OLD packaging, you think amd went back to red this this week only?

The fact is the first chips out were mostly red, this was to get rid of the first cores made, MONTHS AGO, the proof is in the color!!!

Months ago we know the tbred line had an issue, they repaired the issue, they made lots of tbred chips with this issue, and apparently the way to distinguish them is the fact they are packaged in RED, whats so hard to understand>?

:wink: The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark :wink:
June 10, 2002 11:38:14 AM

All new amd chips since ~2 months ago, came with green packaging, there are no exceptions I am aware of, the fact these chips are red tells me ONE thing, they are more than 2 months old.

Whatever the reason, the chips anand, thg and others are using to test are 2 months old at least.


If the amd line did have an issue with the first stepping of tbred(and this is what we have heard) those chips would have come off the line several months ago, and have been packaged in red, then amd revamped the line, and the new chips are packaged in green, amd cant just throw away the red chips, they work at stock speeds, they just dont scale well, therefore they are sold, amd is not supposed to guarente an overclock, they are doing nothing wrong.


However, the fact the green cores are overclocking much better than the red from all reports, and the fact the cores themselves are red and not green, AND the rumor we heard about a bad origional stepping, leads me to believe the red cores are [-peep-] overclockers, and the true potential of the line will be shown on green cores.

:wink: The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark :wink:
June 10, 2002 11:59:07 AM

Yes, I also notice the heat issue. But I thought it was related to the voltage increase + the lower area to transmit heat.

Anyway, going from 1.75 to 1.5 for the lower Tbred seems good to me, as the reduction in heat produced. But the gap goes narrower as frecuency increase AND voltage goes up. My question is, ¿what is the heatoutput of a Tbred 1700+ at 1,75v? ¿Can anyone give a formula to calculate it aprox or, at least, that give and idea of the diference in %? ¿Can also speculate the heat produced by a Tbred 2200+ at 1,5v?

I hope they are just tunning the 0.13 process so in the near future we have a 2200+ at 1.5v and, why not, an increase in the surface area for a better heat transmition.

DIY: read, buy, test, learn, reward yourself!
June 10, 2002 12:05:50 PM

that sounds like a reasonable assumption. i was kind of wandering what amd had done with all those "bad" chips. i know amd frown on overclocking but they KNOW that review sites are going to do it anyway to try and get some idea of how far it can go. surely it would make more sense for amd to send good ones that can oc well to these review sites! at the moment the fact that they only have "bad" chips makes the whole lot look bad. these reviews are what people are going to base their opinions on when it comes to rcomending/upgrading. i think amd have made a big mistake here.....

I'm out of my mind, but feel free to leave a message.
June 10, 2002 1:43:45 PM

AMD will probably react to this article soon, and resend the real hand-picked chips like Intel does.

--
Meow
June 10, 2002 1:44:24 PM

Say Ray where have you been these days?

Oh and how were you able to find an article that had not shown up yet?

--
Meow
June 10, 2002 1:49:55 PM

Mat I was thinking this ALL this time I read the article. First thing that popped into my mind is: Hmm I thought the new AMD chips were green?

Then upon looking at the results, I can only deduce, that behind logic, something is wrong. Come on people how can you not realize! It's obvious there is something wrong in the chip. I am with Mat, it probably is an old chip with the bad timing, otherwise under logic, under a lower power consumption, it SHOULD not be a worse OCer at all. If it was this way, how in the world do they expect to get the Barton out on this process, if the headroom with 512K L2 would be even more reduced, as if it wasn't this bad now!

There is this, and the odd chip Gigabyte claims of having at 2.6GHZ.

So personally, I won't beleive this chip's OCing on this website, nor Anand's until AMD or someone professional in these chips confirms it.

However I'd agree this was a rather informative article, without the benches. THG has always had good informing guides, while their benches have huge flaws. Not only was it long this time, (32!) but they kept doing errors! I mean look at the SPEC tests, one of them says lower is better, yeah well how can you explain that a 850 Athlon beats the rest? AND, if it was just an error and that the higher the better, it makes no sense an XP1500+ beats a 2.8GHZ P4 with an insane FSB. Nope there is no logic there bub, Intel should have won this round too unless?

--
Meow
June 10, 2002 1:56:36 PM

"However, the fact the green cores are overclocking much better than the red from all reports"

Where your links to back it up?

It fun watching you squirm lol

Jeff
June 10, 2002 2:58:28 PM

<A HREF="http://www.amdmb.com/article-display.php?ArticleID=187&..." target="_new">-click-</A>

amdmb.com seems to be the only one with a green AthlonXP; everyone else (Ace's, Tom's, AnandTech) got one with either bright red or dull brown packaging. It also seems that amdmb.com has the only one that overclocks well. Coincidence?.... :tongue:

<pre>We now <b>return</b>(<font color=blue>-1</font color=blue>) to an irregular program scheduler.</pre><p>
June 10, 2002 2:58:49 PM

Quote:
but they KNOW that review sites are going to do it anyway to try and get some idea of how far it can go. surely it would make more sense for amd to send good ones that can oc well to these review sites! at the moment the fact that they only have "bad" chips makes the whole lot look bad


AMD locked the hammer to prevent people from overclocking it and giving people expectations that they are not prepared to uphold(ie releasing the hammer well below the current chips topspeed)

Now, try this on for size.
Possibilities.
A: the hardware sites got chips through normal channels not from amd. The majority of chips RIGHT NOW are red.
B: The review sites nda's have finally been lifted and they have had these samples for months but could not review them till now
C: amd sent them red chips knowing that at the moment most tbreds are red, and to give reviewers green chips would artificially inflate the expected results of the entire line which RIGHT NOW, consists mainly of red core chips.

People would wonder why their new tbred wont do 2.3ghz like the reviewers samples.

All 3 of those theories are valid, and there is something fishy going on here.

The fact the core is red is a big deal, and I am feel that when green cored tbreds are more commonplace that we will see better clocking from them.


Either way, the hammer is coming soon, and amd demoed an aircooled 2800+ chip, the tbred will hold the line till the hammer and thats all amd cares about right now.

:wink: The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark :wink:
June 10, 2002 3:00:14 PM

Quote:
Say Ray where have you been these days?

Oh and how were you able to find an article that had not shown up yet?



Ray has been lurking waiting for a moment when intel is ahead to gloat, but we dont forget the questions he left unanswered and we are still waiting for his explinations for the debates he started and retreated from upon his loss.

:wink: The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark :wink:
June 10, 2002 3:01:41 PM

Yes please, if anyone has any good links I would love to see. I do use AMD and was extremely dissapointed with the poor heat results. I understand there is some speculation about 2 month old TB's, but AMD should have made the effort to get the new chips before these tests were done. Buyers trust the tech info they read on these sites, and to allow bad press at the launch of a new product in an already dissapointing AMD environment is a disaster! Barton better have some heat spreaders...

Life's a hole...dig it. - Joe Dirt
June 10, 2002 3:03:00 PM

Its fun watching me squirm?

Quote:
It fun watching you squirm lol


Who the hell are you? You dont know me, so why would it be fun watching me squirm, furthermore I am not squirming, as the results obtained are on the low end, but within the results I predicted.

As for my linkage, there is another thread right now called intel people hold your horses, and in that thread there are the links with which I base my oppinion, perhaps you should read them, so I can watch you squirm.

:wink: The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark :wink:
June 10, 2002 3:15:04 PM

Quote:
but AMD should have made the effort to get the new chips before these tests were done. Buyers trust the tech info they read on these sites, and to allow bad press at the launch of a new product in an already dissapointing AMD environment is a disaster! Barton better have some heat spreaders...


1: heatspreaders increase temprature, burger has some interesting links on that, they are to protect cores from damage, not to help with heat, why they are called heatspreaders is beyond me.
2: see my possible reasons why the review sites are using red cores, and why high overclocks may be DISADVANTAGEOUS to amd right now.

:wink: The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark :wink:
June 10, 2002 3:28:58 PM

Quote:
There is a marked difference between the green and red(brown) overclocking, I think the red chips are the stock which had the timing issues, only green chips should be accepted as examples of the cores performance.

You take the red chip, you wake up in your own bed, and you believe what you want to. You take the green chip, you stay in wonderland...

"<b>AMD/VIA!</b>...you are <i>still</i> the weakest link, good bye!"
June 10, 2002 3:29:20 PM

lol mat you fun to watch keep it going.

jeff
June 10, 2002 3:39:12 PM

The thing that shocked me most was the lack of an IHS on a 0.13 chip. Trying to pull that much heat away from that core without an IHS is silly. You can only pull so much heat away across that size contact area. Simple engineering. Easily calculated.

Obviously by using a high quality cooling solution with a great thermal compound you can move more heat off the core, but I'm not really into spending more money on a cooling solution then on the processor I'm attempting to cool.

I doubt an IHS would have added more then $1 or two to the price of the processor, and people could have used their existing cooling solutions, and probably overclocked much more easily.

When intel shrunk the PIII cores from 0.18 to 0.13 and added an IHS you could take the fans off your heatsinks, or go for a 30%+ overclock. When AMD does a die shrink you have to go out and buy some super extra special new cooling solution? Right...

I hope AMD wisens up before releasing the Barton cores.

- JW
June 10, 2002 4:56:04 PM

Read Mat's claim above about the IHS' not being what it means.

--
Meow
June 10, 2002 5:06:41 PM

im confused now....isnt the new TBred supposed to overclock like a champ?....
of the 3 websites ive read (this one, anand, and ace's)....the highest overclock from a TBred 2200+ (1.8ghz) was around 1900mhz...even the "old" P4 (willy core) can overclock higher than that...
it's kinda hard to believe that the cpu can overclock higher...but it'll be nice if anyone can post a link to this 2+ghz overclock.

:eek:  <b>Who fixed <font color=red>ATI</font color=red>'s leaky faucet??</b> :eek: 
!