• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

*** Official Opteron 170 Ocing Thread ***

You should NEVER use Prime to test for memory instability. Prime is for testing CPU stability alone. Memory cannot calculate square numbers, period!

Fast fourier transform (fft) is used by the CPU to calculate the square of very large numbers and hence find Prime numbers. Small fft's are automatically created to to a ffT size range which will fit into the L2 cache of your CPU. As a result, the small FFT test is the one which accesses your main memory the least but it still puts some memory to use so instable memory will also show up on small fft's albeit only the section of memory being accessed. This is THE BEST stability test for CPU if thats all you want to test(the CPU). Large FFT's are too big for the L2Cache and therefore have to be held in the system memory which on all but the AMD 64bit CPU's would mean the on board memory -> northbridge->CPU link but as we know a64's/optys have on board memory controllers so the northbridge is cut out of the equation and the memory controller in its place. The 'In place' Large FFt's only test a specific section of memory whre as Blend tests a lot more memory over a wider area.

There is no 'best way' to test for stability nor is there one test for all that will stress your CPU more than another, hesky is right in that each individual test tests a certain part of the PC. Prime is for CPU (which includes cache and memory controller in our case). Saying that the Large FFt stress your CPU more is untrue, it stresses both the CPU an on die memory controller which will raise temps higher than small fft's which just tests the L2cache and processor. So to sum up to test for CPU stability, small fft is the test you want to run, if it passes that and fails large fft's then your memory controller is unable to cope either through heat or frequency NOT the cpu.

Hope this helps.
 
Well explained w3bbo, that was basically what I was trying to say.
If your failin large in place ffts, but passing small in place ffts you have ram issues most likely, be it the on die mem controller or the dimm sticks themselves. Usually I have my ram sitting happy on a divider so if I’m failin small ffts I know for sure its my cpu, like w3bbo says small ffts tests the cpu and also its ob cache so it’s the test to run if you know you memory is pucka.
 
Scoobie Dave said:
Anyone?

Im guessing 1.5v perhaps?


Just go by the temps. Ive seen people putting 1.55v through on air. Im testing a new chip at 1.456v and load temps are 46. 50 is my limit for dual core and 45 for single core but thats just me. With good water 1.5v should be ok.
 
Well im running my 170 at 2.7 on 1.5v with water and it stays below 40c under load with my fans turned up and only 41c with them running silent (however i think the 2 7800's contribute most of that heat).

Running prime or super pi it only gets upto 35c under full load (37c with the fans on silent)

So i would imagine you could go above 1.5v easilly with decent water (and i would if my motherboard let me :()
 
w3bbo said:
Testing 2.9 not stable though...reckon its ram tbh.

Hmmm.. Whats you max stable clock with a naked 170 Webbo?

I'm still trying to "find my feet" with this naked opty. I think I need to take it from 2750 and go from there...

Agent.
 
Agent WD40 said:
Hmmm.. Whats you max stable clock with a naked 170 Webbo?

I'm still trying to "find my feet" with this naked opty. I think I need to take it from 2750 and go from there...

Agent.

Depends what your defination of 'stable' is, so far:

If were talking P95 then 2.85 @1.45
3d 06 is 'stable' @ 2.9
and 1mb SuperPI @ 3 gig

Personally I only believe in 12hr passes of P95 so 2.85 is my 'stable' overclock although I've changed a bit of hardware around so that may not exactly run true - that was with the spec in my sig. My sig is all wrong now and needs updating coz the A8n32 is no longer with me nor is the corsair 3500LL. Finding my feet with the DFI-Ultra d and 2GB of G.Skill HZ so all my old settings are in the bin and starting from scratch.
 
Scoobie Dave said:
28hrPrimeStableOpty2008test.jpg


28 hour prime session. Stable enough I think! :D
Nice :)
 
Scoobie Dave said:
Gonna try for more a bit later on. Seems to need more than 1.36v once it goes above 2.82 though. . . still plenty of headroom I guess.

I'm going to try the same trick at your Scoobie. Hopefully my DFI can do about 340HTT and then I could possible get 3ghz. ATM i'm struggling to get any where with this ISH-less chip tbh...

But still, damned good work there.

Agent.
 
well iu'm priming at 280x10 with 1.375v so far and i've been going for 3 hours now and we are all good.

I'm going to go down to 312*9 with 1.35v and go from there...

Agent.
 
Right, i dropped it down to 312*9 @ 1.35v and failed from so I went up to 1.3*1.048% (1.3624) and it seems to be ok now, I'm going to prime over night tonight and get some results for you all.

I'm idling at about 30 - 32C and load creeps upto 41C. Not bad for air cooling imo...

Agent.
 
I'm not sure of different multis. I'm experimenting.

I remember reading some where that it has different effects but I can't remember where or what it was about. So a bit of person investigation.

ATM i'm priming at 2.83ghz (315*9) at 1.39v.

Lets see how well it does. But its pretty warm today so its probably failed...

Agent.
 
w3bbo said:
Why run on a lower multi? Whats the advantage apart from higher Memory bandwidth? :confused:


It makes it slightly faster but on the 939 it basically all comes down to clock speed. To be honest running 315 instead of 280 will make no difference but running 280 instead of 200 would make a tiny bit
 
Back
Top Bottom