.09 Athlon 64: Value, Speed and Overclocking
by Wesley Fink on October 14, 2004 12:05 AM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
Overclocking Results and Heat
One of the most pressing questions that many are asking about the new 90nm processors is how they overclock. Will the die-shrink deliver the kind of headroom seen on the Intel Northwood chips when they were first introduced? Our first tests with the 90nm 3500+ were quite good, so we bought a 90nm 3000+ to see if results were comparable.| Front Side Bus Overclocking Testbed | ||
| 90nm A64 3500+ | 90nm A64 3000+ | |
| Processor: | 2.2GHz 512k L2 Cache |
1.8Hz 512k L2 Cache |
| CPU Voltage: | Default (1.4V) | +8.3% (1.52V) |
| Cooling: | Thermaltake Silent Boost K8 Heatsink/Fan | Thermaltake Silent Boost K8 Heatsink/Fan |
| Power Supply: | OCZ PowerStream 520 | OCZ PowerStream 520 |
| Memory Timings: | 2.5-4-4-10 1T | 2.5-4-4-10 1T |
| Memory Voltage: | 2.75V | 2.8V |
| Maximum OC: | 2610 (+18.6%) 290x9 |
2610MHz (+45%) 290x9 |
As you can see, the 3500+ and the 3000+ both topped out at about 2.6GHz (anticipated FX55 speed) with default or modestly increased CPU voltage and air cooling. This is a decent overclock of about 20% on the 3500+, but the 3000+ reached the same 2.6GHz overclock from a much lower stock speed of 1.8GHz. This means that the new 90nm 3000+ overclocked an outstanding 45% with modest increases in CPU voltage.
The only real difference in overclocking the 3500+ and 3000+ in our tests was that the 3000+ required a little more CPU voltage and memory voltage to reach the same overclocks achieved with the 3500+. This 45% overclock is exciting, and it gives us reason to expect even better headroom possibilities when AMD gets the 90nm process tweaked. Since these two 90nm parts came from different sources and were purchased from dealers, we feel comfortable that they are representative of the 90nm chips available in the market. Overclocking results are never guaranteed, but these first results with AMD 90nm processors are full of promise. If the 90nm 3000+ performs this well in larger samples, it will become the darling of the Enthusiast community.
All Performance benchmarks were repeated at the highest overclock that we could achieve - 290x9.
The Overclocked Performance results are included in the Performance Comparison charts to show the performance headroom found with the new 90nm chips. For better comparison, results are also included for the fastest processors currently available from AMD (FX53) and Intel (560 - 3.6GHz).
Thermal Performance
AMD claims that their 90nm process generates less heat than the 130nm process and requires lower wattages. Of course, the heat that is generated is concentrated in a much smaller area than the larger 130nm die. We will not likely know the true impact of the 90nm shrink on heat dissipation until AMD produces their fastest CPUs in 90nm, so we decided not to run comprehensive heat tests until the faster processors were available in 90nm.We did check reported temperatures in the BIOS to get an idea of the temperature trends with the new 90nm process. At the same stock speeds, the 90nm and 130nm chips were showing the same CPU temperatures. There was neither improvement from the 90nm nor any indication of running hotter. Overclocked to 290x9, the 90nm parts were 1 to 5 degrees Celsius cooler than a 130nm FX53 chip clocked to the same 290x9. These results are not the objective tests that we will run on high-speed 90nm parts, but they confirmed that the AMD 90nm process appears to run at least as cool as current 130nm processors.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
89 Comments
View All Comments
Live - Tuesday, October 19, 2004 - link
Great read!Good work Wesley Fink.
I looks like I am finally getting close to being able to upgrade my athlon xp setup without breaking the bank and get a real performance boost I feel the earlier A64 cpus and mobos lacked. To bad the PCIe problem is still around. I dont want an upgrade that requires a new motherboard with my next GPU purchase.
toNka64 - Tuesday, October 19, 2004 - link
I currently have an A64 3200 Clawhammer on a VIA K8T800, so OCing is a no go without a working AGP/PCI lock. I have a Coolmax Taurus 400w PSU and OCZ EL Platinum 1GB (2x512) memory (2-3-2-5).If I upgraded my mobo to the Neo2 and my CPU to the 300+, do you think i could hit 2.6GHz with my current memory and PSU?
Doormat - Saturday, October 16, 2004 - link
Yea, I'm beginning to think I should get a 3200, a conservative OC would be 2.5GHz at 10x250. And DDR500 isnt that hard to get a hold of. Plus it fits in nicely with a 1GHz hypertransport bus.BBoe - Saturday, October 16, 2004 - link
Is this FSB of 290 for reals? It really sounds like a big leap from the 250 or 261.PrinceGaz - Saturday, October 16, 2004 - link
People who want the best performance and value ought to get the 3200+ instead of the 3000+ as it not only stands a better chance of reaching something like 2610MHz than the 3000+, but it should do so at a slightly lower voltage.More importantly, the memory with the 3200+ could run 1:1 at 261x10 instead of the 290x9 required by the 3000+. Even though the 3200+ will be a little more expensive than the 3000+, theres a much better chance of finding reasonably priced memory which can run at DDR522 with good timings, than there is of memory that can manage DDR580. At least with the 3200+ you've got the choice of a 9x or 10x multiplier to get the best out of your memory.
rjm55 - Saturday, October 16, 2004 - link
I know you used OCZ with Samsung TCCD for this review, but you have said in past reviews that any TCCD will come close to these memory results. That means you can choose Samsung TCCD from Corsair, Mushkin, Kingston, OCZ, Geil, PQI, and probably others. Crucial Ballistix is another choice from your Athlon 64 memory tests. Those concerned about Value ought to shop all the TCCD brands and Crucial Ballistix, because some are cheaper than others.Wesley Fink - Friday, October 15, 2004 - link
#62 - The MSI K8N Neo2 can be set to Auto, 100, 133, 166, 200 (DDR200,266,333,400 or 1:2.2:3,5:6,1:1). With these ratios you could run 290 FSB with a 2:3 ratio (266) and memory would be at DDR387, at 5:6 (333) mem would be running at DDR482.ThePlagiarmaster - Friday, October 15, 2004 - link
Wesley:Could you answer my #43 post about memory ratios on the board you tested with?
Thanks
PrinceGaz - Friday, October 15, 2004 - link
#58- tha major selling point of nForce 4 will be PCIe support, if you don't want PCIe then get an nForce3 instead. The Inquirer claim to have a piccy of MSI's new nForce4 S939 board athttp://www.theinquirer.net/?article=19026
That is presumably the successor of the popular K8N Neo2 Platinum. Its a shame it only has two PCIe x1 sockets and still has four old PCI sockets, I'd have liked to see at least three PCIe x1 and just a couple of PCI for legacy support.
ciwell - Friday, October 15, 2004 - link
Can you address the RAM question posted above?