Sign in to follow this  
balilu

OC an AMD 64

Recommended Posts

balilu    0
perhaps your friend is lying to you

im sure because is set up his pc and so the options altough i ve never tried them out. but i ve found others on different forums and my manual said i could choose up to 20x.

im still confused and i know that its top locked but since i set up my friends pc im still searching on how he could increase his multiplier ( altough i or him never tried ) :?:?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
balilu    0
is your bios updated?

well im still using the 1.4 and the latest bios is 1.5 but those that i have seen on another forum still were using an older bios than mine which was a beta aswell.

btw what is the difference between CO Revision and CG Revision??? :?

and the cpu was a 'Clawhammer' and mine is a 'NewCastle'. does this make a difference??

edit i foun the difference

754-pin Athlon 64 processors with the 'Clawhammer'-core (Model 4) can be either C0 or CG-revision parts while 754-pin Athlon 64 processors with the 'Newcastle'-core (Model C) are ALL CG-revision parts.

The difference between older C0-rev parts vs. newer CG-rev parts is that CG-rev parts can run more than two sticks of memory at PC3200/DDR400 speeds and they also have a slightly improved Cool'n'Quiet feature (slightly higher clockspeed while consuming even less power at minimum P-state, i.e. when CPU-load is low).

Apart from a couple of bugfixes, that's about it.

Example regarding improved C'n'Q:

With Cool'n'Quiet enabled, an Athlon 64 3400+ Clawhammer (C0-rev) will run at 800MHz with a 1.30V Vcore at its minimum P-state.

In contrast, an Athlon 64 3400+ Clawhammer (CG-rev) will run at 1000MHz with a 1.10V Vcore at its minimum P-state.

At their maximum P-state, both parts will run at 2.2GHz with a 1.50V Vcore, however.

Bottom line: A CG-rev part will run slightly cooler and consume less power than a C0-rev part when it is idle.

CO -vs- CG:

CO is the first generation on-die memory controller and is much more picky about what memory modules can be utilized with the CPU. First generation ClawHammer's all were CO stepping and utilized the older memory controller. CO ClawHammer's don't overclock real well.

CG is the second generation on-die memory controller and is much more compatible with different memory types. First debuted on the Newcastle CPU's, the CG revision on-die memory controller has found its' way into the ClawHammer cores. All A64 3700's are CG-revision. CG ClawHammer's & NewCastle's overclock quite well.

ClawHammer:

Come in CO & CG steppings

1 MB L2 Cache.

Socket 754 only.

Available in: 3200, 3400 & 3700+ speed ratings (2.0, 2.2 & 2.4 GHz)

Being phased out & replaced by Newcastle core.

NewCastle Core:

Come in CG steppings only

512 KB L2 Cache

Socket 754 & Socket 939 CPU's

Available In 754: 2800, 3000 & 3200 (1.8, 2.0 & 2.2 GHz)

Available In 939: 3500, 3800 (2.2 GHz, 2.4 GHz)

1 MB of cache approximately equals the 200 MHz raw speed deficit between the ClawHammer & NewCastle CPU's. In mathematically-intensive applications (scientific research, SuperPi, 3DMark, etc.), at idential speeds, the ClawHammer performs faster than the NewCastle core's.

In gaming, the ClawHammer CPU's are ahead of the NewCastle CPU's at the same clock speed.

Overclocking wise, NewCastle CPU's overclock to higher raw MHz speed than comparable ClawHammer's (except if you get a CG Claw).

btw according to cpu-z mine is a NewCastle and obviously a CG revision :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr. Miyagi    2

Yeah, I would recomend using the 1.52 or the 1.55 bios. These are my favorite. I tried the new ones out but I didn't like how some of the options were different (i.e. CPU volts and some hidden settings that are now part of the options).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ID    0

Most good overclocks involve decreasing the multiplier....

I too own a NewCastle (3500+), and with a 9.6 muliplier x 280 HTT, I now have an OC of 460Mhz (2200Mhz stock, 2660 current).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
VoongKoong    0

It's been a while since CPU manufactuers started locking the multipliers. The first CPUs with locked multipliers were unlocked with the "pencil trick," which is done by "penciling" the L1 bridge. But now CPU manufactuers "super locked" their CPUs, meaning no more penciling bridges.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
merovingian    0
Most good overclocks involve decreasing the multiplier....

I too own a NewCastle (3500+), and with a 9.6 muliplier x 280 HTT, I now have an OC of 460Mhz (2200Mhz stock, 2660 current).

You need to test that under pie and prime95 to make sure that it isn't unstable at that clcok.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ID    0
Most good overclocks involve decreasing the multiplier....

I too own a NewCastle (3500+), and with a 9.6 muliplier x 280 HTT, I now have an OC of 460Mhz (2200Mhz stock, 2660 current).

You need to test that under pie and prime95 to make sure that it isn't unstable at that clcok.

Done. But thanks for the suggestion! :twisted:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
balilu    0
Yeah, I would recomend using the 1.52 or the 1.55 bios. These are my favorite. I tried the new ones out but I didn't like how some of the options were different (i.e. CPU volts and some hidden settings that are now part of the options).

10x i will try them out and see what happens :D

edit: there is nothing in that link :?

edit2: ok finally i found a way into that website. gonna try them out

edit3: is there anything written on what the different from version to version????

lol @ all the edits :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
merovingian    0
Most good overclocks involve decreasing the multiplier....

I too own a NewCastle (3500+), and with a 9.6 muliplier x 280 HTT, I now have an OC of 460Mhz (2200Mhz stock, 2660 current).

You need to test that under pie and prime95 to make sure that it isn't unstable at that clcok.

Done. But thanks for the suggestion! :twisted:

:shock: Really?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this