4400+ x2 wattage??

]MadBoy[ · 26 Jan 2006 at 15:06

i was unaware there was x2 wattages for this chip? ones 89w and 110w, the 110w p/no begins ada. 89w begins with ADV, any differences between this badboys? As in applications, games etc..?

]MadBoy[ · 26 Jan 2006 at 15:08

all the other cpus as in above that speeds ie fx-60, x2 4600, x2 4800 all have 110w. If you have the 89w will it under perform? Also the max temp for 89w is higher at 71 degrees, the 110w is lower 60ish

Defcon5 · 26 Jan 2006 at 17:02

Surley the max temp for the lower watttage chip will be lower?

It wont underperformat all, but one of the higher wattage ones may be an fx60 chip (for example) that was made into a 4400

Havana_UK · 26 Jan 2006 at 17:09

I think this is to do with chip characterisation.

The 89W chips are less overclockable if I'm not mistaken.

Hav

smids · 26 Jan 2006 at 17:51

I am not sure about this. I used to think there was only one type, the 110W. Having just checked AMD, there are indeed two. I would agree with Hav's statement though. @Defcon5 - those are indeed the specs, which is surprising really. Don't understand the temperature/W thing there.

juno_first · 26 Jan 2006 at 18:00

How do you find what wattage each CPU is using ?
If 1 core was fx60 would you be better off booting up on that core and clocking to eg. 3Ghz ?

]MadBoy[ · 26 Jan 2006 at 20:06

boya!! just found my receipt from OCuk and ive got an ADA=110w

happy bunny, even happier when the gfx card gets here!, bought it all b4 chrimbo, still not turned it on!

U cant choose which core to boot on tho can you?

juno_first · 26 Jan 2006 at 21:30

I know you can boot up in 1 core, guess that prob core 0
How do you find ADA=110w ?

]MadBoy[ · 26 Jan 2006 at 21:38

had it on the product code on the receipt from ocuk

juno_first · 26 Jan 2006 at 21:42

Right, got my 4400 receipt & stock ID is:
CP-127-AM
What does that mean ?

Defcon5 · 26 Jan 2006 at 21:48

Isnt that the store reference to the product (like a sku number)

Its the codes on the chip you want to take notice of

juno_first · 26 Jan 2006 at 21:49

The receipt tells no more inormation, so I need to look at the chip itself for product markings ?

Jokester · 26 Jan 2006 at 21:58

Havana_UK said:
I think this is to do with chip characterisation.

The 89W chips are less overclockable if I'm not mistaken.

Hav

Yep, I believe my first one was a 89W which does 2.5GHz, my new one is definitely a 110W version and does 2.7GHz (interestingly the core is also bronze instead of the regular silver). At the same clock/voltage the 110W runs cooler, which also ties in with the lower max temp for the 110W version.

Jokester

Defcon5 · 26 Jan 2006 at 22:15

juno_first said:
The receipt tells no more inormation, so I need to look at the chip itself for product markings ?

Yeah, like on mine it says LBBLE0517.

And you must have heard the opty lovers going on about cabje and what not.

It refers to the particular run or something

juno_first · 27 Jan 2006 at 01:13

my 4400 has the following printed on it:

ADA4400DAA6CD
CCBWE 0532MPM
4406888I51278

Can anyone translate this, as in what the cores are & what they could do ?

Havana_UK · 27 Jan 2006 at 08:05

It's an AMD64 X2 4400+ 110W Toledo Core
Stepping CCBWE, manufacture date week commencing 8/8/05

At 2.75GHz you've probably peaked tbh. Mine's basically the same chip, and I can get 2.7 on air, but not stably. 2.6 is stable for me on air.

Cheers,
Hav

juno_first · 27 Jan 2006 at 10:23

ahh, thats why it wont clock >2.75
ta

mattio1980 · 28 Jan 2006 at 00:57

juno_first said:
ahh, thats why it wont clock >2.75
ta

at last iv found someone with the same stepping as mine what knda volts u putting though your to get 2.75???????

ada4400daa6cd

ccbwe 0532 mpm

4406888i150143**

i cant find much info on this stepping atall (was hoping it was goner be one of those realy rare one's) but one post i have read is 2.9 as max clock but i dont want to put more that 1.6 through mine

ByteJuggler · 28 Jan 2006 at 01:58

Interesting. I would've thought that lower wattage = less energy output = less heat output = cooler running/easier to cool down = more overclockable (all else being equal)... But if all else isn't equal (ie if maybe the 89W cores are not such high quality yet [compared to the 110W cores], eg maybe using a newer process that's not yielding quite as well yet say), well then all bets are off... This of course is just OTTOMH pure speculation/thinking out loud so take it FWIW!! <shrug>

juno_first · 28 Jan 2006 at 02:02

the max my mobo will do 1.50, wish could run higher voltage as only 48c under heavy load