Last message on previous page:
Bottom line is, no one in this thread truely knows or understands what is going on.

SPECULATION is not fact.

Best to wait for the dust to clear. Then the truth will be known.

e

I love the line "Cold Hard Fact" on unreleased products. 2 weeks before the phenom was initially released the same thing happened in AMDs favor : "The phenom is going to blow the doors of Intel, Cold Hard Fact"

Cold Hard ASSumption

We don't know that as they may run into thermal issues on their 45nm. On thig is for sure they wont have HK/MG for their first 45nm stepping and is probably going to be SOI thus the thermal issues they may run into.

Intel already has 32nm SRAM chips working and will have the 32nm shrink of Nehalem released in November of 2009 codenamed Westmere. AMD wont have 32nm probably until 2010 since thats when IBM plans on having it and thats where AMD gets most of their process technology from.

I always love how this is brought up every time. I always find it funny how in a two year period (2004-2006) AMD gained quite a bit of market share especially considering the manufacturing capabilities. But still AMD has had their faults too same with IBM and every other company as there is no perfect company. Just some hide it better than others.

ragemonkey I am sorry that both of your BE's turned out flakey. But what are you going to do when they have a horrible QA department? Well maybe the B3's will get better but whos to say they wont have the same problems?

Well if you go by Ragemonkeys success rate that would mean every 9600BE has a flakey 3rd core..... Which would be statistically impossible, well mostly because of the fact that mine doesn't. When I read his luck rate, to me it's pointing to other issues, with his setup. When it comes to that I'd have to pretty much know exactly what he's using. And I don't think anyone has that bad of luck to get multiple dud processors in a row.

AOD doesn't really work properly unless you're using a version higher than 2.10, since prior to that it doesn't detect the 9600be properly. The problem with that, is that it no longer works on none AMD chipsets. Like I said I've been all the way up to 2.7 easily on mine, 12hours prime 95 blend, and 12hours small ffts, as well as gaming and benchmarking stable. Currently running without an OC due to trying to eliminate all possible factors for figuring out whether my 3870 card was a dud. Thankfully Newegg is letting me RMA the card for refund without restocking fee. Not goign to bother getting another until after I get a better PSU, to eliminate that from the equation too. And like I said, the only BSOD I've seen recently were Machine check errors while having the 3870 installed.

What it comes down to though, is I don't care if you consider yourself a professional or knowledgeable OCer, you can still do something wrong with a bios setting or other setting and not realize it. Also with a none AMD based chipset it makes it more difficult for say me to diagnose whats going on, since I'm running on a 790fx board. And going by the quality of the THG Phenom BE article it's pretty clear that not everyone fully comprehends how to OC this processor. It's no longer just a matter of upping the HT Ref, or changing to multiplier on the core. You have to monkey with the cores plane states for VID stability as well. And sadly not a lot of mainboard manufacturers offer that even on 700 series boards.

mathos, ragemonkey is using a Gigabyte GA-MA790X-DS4 Socket AM2+ motherboard. So its the same chipset as yours minus the "F". So in reletivity its the same chipset and you think it might be his setup when the BSoD is clearly stating a CPU problem?

It is possible to get bad parts more than once. Or it could just be that there are more bad Phenoms out there than you would think.

I think its just that Phenom wasn't really focused on and they are having more problems than they want to admit thus why they publisized the errata to cover up their QA messups.

The main reason why I think there has to be flaky cores is the fact that they're coming out with B2 triple cores. There's no reason to disable a core for a market that wouldn't exist if they weren't offering the product.

Can't wait to see the B3's. If there are no triple core B3's then it's a B2 QA issue. If there are, then the Phenom's a small risk until 45nm. The Q6600 isn't perfect either, I've read that people got the "wrong" core at Newegg, though whether there are errata issues with thermals, or whether it's an overclocking issue is something that I don't know.

As is, dual core on the desktop is a mature tech, but quad core seems to have some issues. Can't wait till it gets settled with both companies.

True, but there are a lot of reasons why one core could be broken.
It may come from the outside of the wafer. A bit of dust may have landed on that spot. There may be a slight imperfection in the wafer itself. Damage can occur in cleaning, masking or heating.
If they are selling 3X as many barcelonas and phenom quads, as they are tri or dual core phenoms, everything is fine.
We will have to wait and see.

For thousands of them? In a multi-million dollar facility? Quad cores only?

Please elaborate on exactly what to type into the search engine to get all these results of many people having this problem? The ones that I find link back to here, and to extremesystems. And like I said, give me exact settings that you're using, as far as bios goes. I've seen a few people talking exclusively about Windows Vista 64bit problems, and a few about Vista 32bit, which could likely be a chipset driver issue.

Hey my Machine check specifically points out CPU, Mainboard, Power supply, Memory, but it didn't start happening until after installing the the HD3870, so obviously it couldn't be the video card.

It'll definitely explain the 3 core Phenom if the same core has been disabled on all of them.

Mathos, you bring up some very valid points. However, i will point out that my success rate has not been 0%, except for the 9600 Black Editions specifically. For work I have purchased 9600s and 9500s that have worked fine, save for one which was returned for a working replacement which has been fine. Although one of my systems at work has begun to randomly BSoD... and I am attempting to isolate why.. it could end up being the proc, yet it very well could not. I simply do not know yet. As for what I've seen online recently, the amount of posts regarding this issue have not grown significantly since I created this post. Also, other new posts I have seen simply refer back to this one, which calls credibility into question as it creates the "circular reference" problem that wiki tends to suffer from hence why it is no longer considered a valid academic source.

To adequately confirm failure rate I would need to conduct some actual valid reseach purchasing 9500s, 9600s, and 9600BEs from multiple vendors and test them under identical conditions to find out from a statistical standpoint if it is a particular model has a problem, or whether all of them have a problem. Personally, I don't have the money nor the time to conduct such an experiment. That is why I created this thread in an attempt to get THG's attention... or somebody else's that may endeavor onto such a task. I take no credit for these findings, I have simply confimed some other people's findings with my own personal experience. That, in no way, suggests a statistical liklihood that *all* phenoms are busted. I do not have the means, or the time, to come to such an encompassing conclusion.

As for my personal failure rate, it could be for several reasons. My primary suspicion is that since the first was purchased from Newegg, and the second one an RMA within two weeks from the same place (obviously)... it is possible I got a chip from the same potentially bad batch of chips. Bad luck... thats all.

As for my current configuration, I am happily running a Phenom 9500 at 2.62 ghz. It will not run Vista x64 stable at 2.62ghz, but will at 2.5ghz. Vista 32 runs completely stable at 2.62ghz and I have run the AOD stability test for 4 hours twice at this speed. I haven't yet seen a BSoD at 2.62 in Vista 32 running this 9500.

CPU Reference Clock set at 238
CPU Multiplier at 11
Memory Controller Multi set at 8
HTT locked at 1.8 ghz
Memory divider set at DDR2-667, final memory speed of 792mhz ddr
Stock memory voltage
Northbridge Voltage +.05v
CPU Voltage at 1.40v
C & Q Disabled
TLB Erratum fix disabled

The CPU is cooled via a Zalman CPS9700 running at full steam
Idle temp is 27C, consistent 100% load is 38C

As for other stuff:

Gigabyte GA-MA790X-DS4 motherboard running F3 BIOS update
Phenom 9500 running at 2.62 ghz
4GB (4x1) Gskill 5-5-5-15 DDR2-800 running in ganged mode
2x150GB WD Raptor in RAID 0 -- OS and program volume
1x500GB Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 PMR -- Storage and Encoding volume
eVGA 8800GTS 320MB
Sound Blaster Audigy 2 ZS Platinum
Antec Neopower 550w PSU

Hmmm, do you still have spread spectrum enabled in bios, or is it disabled? That may allow you more stability, I know it does me. Phenom BE seems to be extremely sensitive to the frequency spikes that spread spectrum can cause. The interesting part being the places where I've seen people take screenies of the freq spike happening, show it hitting on a certain mentioned core . So it would be interesting to see exactly where the TLB is located on the die in relation to the rest of the processor. I know hsf cooler performance seems to have an effect on how well it OCs and how stable it runs too, as well as power dissipation. I'm running a ZT Nirvana for example. It also has an effect on what voltages you can use to OC. Which I think also seems to back up Reynods theory of a hotspot on the die.


Oh, I'd watch out OCing too far on the 790X boards. Some of them can't handle wattage over 95w. I know for sure the k9a2 CF can't run the 125w tdp processors, people have burned out the sockets on them doing so.

Thats kinda why I enjoy my k9a2 Platinum though, all the bios's up to 1.2 have a custom p states menu, instead of just multiplier selections. Takes a bit to figure out how to use, but once you figure it out, it's good for OCing controls. Well, take that back, the multiplier settings could of been done easier, but the VID and divider settings are what makes it possible.

For example, when I run at 2.7Ghz it's at 1.2625v VID, 1.248v actual. Thats with the NB/IMC running at 2.0ghz at 1.1v VID ~1.09v Actual. Thought that was the most impressive part though, considering stock volts for the NB/IMC is 1.25v. Now, at 1.25v I've got the nb/IMC up to 2.4ghz stable while running at 2.6ghz core, I think I could do 2.6nb at 1.25 as well, but didn't get a chance to try before having to figure out what was going wrong after installing the hd3870. Right now I'm back on the old standby 2600XT.

Part of my problems revolve around the Raidmax RX700SS PSU I'm using though. I think it was also partially responsible for my video card problem.

Everybody seems to be getting their undies in a bunch about the 3-core Phenoms being "broken." Disabling a portion of a CPU die has been done for many years for various reasons and is currently being done by BOTH Intel and AMD on no small number of CPUs. I'll bring up a few notable examples:

1. For the older ones among us, the Intel 486SX was a 80486DX with a disabled FPU.
2. Many chips have some L2 cache disabled- Celerons, most Semprons, some Athlon 64s, Turions and X2s (such as every 2x512 KB Windsor), Core 2 Duos (such as every B-stepping E6300/6400 and T5500/5600), every Pentium Dual Core chip manufactured and every Celeron Dual Core chip manufactured.
3. Some chips even have a core disabled. There were a few 939 Athlon 64 3200s and 3500s made from X2 Manchester and Toledo dies with a core disabled. Many mobile Celerons are Core Duos or Core 2 Duos with a core disabled. If you want proof, look at the package specifications in the Celeron and Core/Core 2 data sheets. Note the physical dimensions of the processor's die surface- it is the same between the two.

I haven't heard anybody complaining about any of the chips above being "broken" so I don't understand why AMD is taking heat over the 3-core Phenoms other than some people haven't taken a close enough look at how CPUs are actually made and sold before hitting the "Reply" button.

^Good pint. But the fact is those Cores were DISABLED so we had no access to it in the 1st place. The point OP is making is that AMD is shipping CPUs that are DEFECTIVE, WITHOUT disabling the Core.

Got proof?
So far, all I've seen is a few noobs who cant figure out how to make the chip work.
If it were true, Intel would have thier private tech sites all over it.
People having problems? Sure, just like 8400 buyers. Does that mean it's the chip's fault? No.
Quit being such an IIIO, and stop spreading FUD.
( All phenom users are noobs, the chip isn't old enough to have any veterans)

Only thousands? They have already made milions of quads. New masking, masive die on a relatively new node, a milion or two would be acceptable yields.

damn that sucks and man my B3 Q6600 can go up to 3.6 GHz and phenoms cant?? damn