Results 1 to 13 of 13
  1. #1
    Joined
    May 2001
    Location
    Spain
    Posts
    108

    overclocking with duron 950 in asus a7v133

    just look in this website:

    http://www.amdmb.com/article-display.php?ArticleID=89

    they say that a duron 950 can be overclocked to 1.3 ghz is this possible? i cannot believe it, i have never seen a duron going more than 1.1 Ghz , i actually have my duron 800@950

  2. #2
    Joined
    May 2000
    Location
    Aylesbury, Bucks,ENGLAND
    Posts
    38

    Talking It looks good to me!

    Hey, the article is cool huh? Just read it myself.

    First things first, every cpu is different and we all treat them differently. Secondly, some chips are genuinely a different core to the label on the outside.

    Example: You run yours at a moderate overclock, and fair play to ya. I also have a moderate chip, an Classic Athlon 550@650, and it won't go much higher without serious voltage, not my idea of safe

    But other people who own 550 chips open em up to find they are 650 or even 700 jobbies on the inside, and that is without even pushing 'em with a good heatsink/fan etc

    So maybe your cpu is maxed, but the newest ones are definately not, they are of a much newer batch, better tolerances in production etc.

    Get one and tyry it, they are hardly a lot of dosh..........I need a new mobo and cpu combo soon, and that Duron is beckoning!
    A little crazy, but safe enough!

  3. #3
    Joined
    May 2001
    Location
    Spain
    Posts
    108

    Re: It looks good to me!

    i actually have not try to go higher than that with my duron i actually have it at 1.65 volts and at 950 MHZ maybe if i put the vcore at 1.80 i can get more than 1GHz with my duron but i do not want to push it to high, i mean i cnnot wait when the new duron palomino appear it will be a great overclocking device

  4. #4
    Joined
    May 2001
    Location
    Spain
    Posts
    108

    Re: It looks good to me!

    i have read more reviews of the duron 950 in all of them they cnnot get further than 1.1 GHz so there must be a mistake in the asusmb.com article i do not think is possible to get 1.3 GHz in a duron 950, when the appearence of the duron 4 we will see durons at 1.3 and higher


  5. #5
    Joined
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Vvardenfell
    Age
    58
    Posts
    10,891

    Cool

    Zak33

    That business about cores only applies to classic (slot) Athlons. With any socket CPU what you see is what you get.

    As to that speed, Durons have always been better for overclocking. No one really knows why, but the assumtion has always been that it is something to do with the L2 cache, which is smaller and simpler on the Duron. Even I managed to get my old 600 stable at 1016 with only air cooling.

    M

  6. #6
    Joined
    May 2000
    Location
    Aylesbury, Bucks,ENGLAND
    Posts
    38

    Unhappy Meridian, I worded it badly!

    When Athlon Classics came out, Mr and Mrs Retail customer would only see the outside of the case,if even that, so that's where the Retail Info was printed, the core was for you and me to "discover".....and we did!

    Now we are onto "uncased" cpu's with on die cache, the numbers on the cpu are the same as those on the outside of old Classic Athlon....ie rubbish in the main.

    When a big Manu such as AMD makes 10,000 chips you can't tell me they only make 700's until the technology gets good enough to make 750's, and then they only make those, and then a few months later, when they perfect it a bit better, they move up to 800's and never make a 750 ever again!

    OK that was a bit harsh, sorry, but you get my drift..........the core is capable of being somewhere in a big batch.........maybe between 700 and 900..............if you get one of those running at 850 on the label, then you only got another 50 available safely.

    But you buy one of the ones made in that recent batch, but that they "locked" at 650 and sold for "ultra budget" and you get a meaty value for money cpu.

    You know that already , but the point is that the number on these chips is not always the truth, and to that point its only for marketing....just like older "plastic case" jobbies.

    I see no reason why a 900 ish chip won't go all the way, cos it's gonna be recent, which means it was made on the same process as the new 1.2 gig and above..........and those go high.

    I also concur with you on the smaller cache size....that's what stops my Athlon going higher, not the core, I am sure of it!


    Luck good people, looking into this for me soon, jealous as possible of those of you with the dosh now!
    A little crazy, but safe enough!

  7. #7
    Joined
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Vvardenfell
    Age
    58
    Posts
    10,891

    Cool

    Zak

    What you are saying is largely true. All Athlons are made to together on the same wafers. They are then speed tested, and rated accordingly. Now a lot of the improvement in speed is due to better yields as the fab improves. There was no way on earth that AMD would have ben able to produce a 1.3 or 1.4 at the beginning as the process wasn't good enough. HOWEVER, as you say, at any given time there were chips that would work at higher speeds that were down-rated because they couldn't be sold at the higher speed as they'd be too expensive. It's obviously the same thing that caused the rebadging of classic Athlons, but here there is not a question of "a 1.3 core remarked as a 1gig" in the true meaning of that phrase.

    M

  8. #8
    Joined
    May 2000
    Location
    Aylesbury, Bucks,ENGLAND
    Posts
    38

    Smile GOOD DEBATE........enjoying it!

    OK, so you have some good points there, but mine is this.......I do not believe that AMD make Durons to be deliberately slower that Athlons....I know the caches are smaller etc, I mean the clock speed..........just the clock speed.

    So, unless they made this new batch of 900's about 6 months ago while making 900 and 1 gig Athlons, and kept them in a dark cupboard under the stairs in Malaysia (or Germany for that matter ), which is unlikely, it is more than likely that in fact they have been made on the same process as the 1.2 gig Athlons that are also in the shops now. They don't want it to be so close to the effectiveness of a T Bird, so they mark 'em down to more realistic clock speeds for the "budget market"

    Did I word that better?.......these new 950's are new to the market in comaparison to the traditional 700-850 speed jobbies that everyone has had earlier this year...........they must be from the same process as the new T Birds that fly at 1.2 1.33 etc Therefore they probably ARE 1.2 cores........but there is no way to cover them over cos you get the die on display, so they etch THAT with the lowered speed, rather than a plastic case!

    Hey, while I am here I must apologise to Isanvicente, whose thread we have blown apart!

    I like this forum board already, cheers for reading the ramblings of a fool!

    A little crazy, but safe enough!

  9. #9
    Joined
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Vvardenfell
    Age
    58
    Posts
    10,891

    Cool

    I stand ready to be corrected, but aren't Duron and Athlon cores different architecture? I mean, apart from the caches (I think L1 is bigger in the Athlon as well), doesn't the Athlon have more pipelines? Etc?

    M

  10. #10
    Joined
    May 2000
    Location
    Aylesbury, Bucks,ENGLAND
    Posts
    38

    Smile Yeah T Bird rules........

    but Durons production uses same tolerances.
    OK T Bird cooks cos of its cache levels, but its so much more money, and its not like Celeron was to Pentium2/3.......not even a Pentium 3 comes close to a good Duron in games now!......I mean Pound note for Pound note obviously! But even if you multiply the Duron price by TWO you still aren't really there!

    Sad but true...in fact, not sad, but GOOD!

    So while the Athlon/T Bird, and soon the Palomino is the main contender for real power, the Duron it would seem is a good friend for us all.....as they are so cheap!

    But production principles are the same! So , getting back to the original question, I am sure that it is safe to assume that this Forums own test resulted in a Duron 950 going at 1.3 !!!!

    That was fun......NEXT PLEASE!

    Cheers Meridian, for not just slamming me and letting me, a Junior here, to have a word!

    Of course, it's all theory, cos my Petium 100 with 16mb still cooks on gas in games like Duke Nukem 3D! And my new graphics card has 4 mb on board...it's called a Voodoo 3D Accelrator and you run it with a Pass Through cable from my normal s3 Virge 2mb beast!

    I RULE !!!!!!!

    and I think I should go get some coffee, the beers gone to my head!

    Night good people, nice debate!
    Last edited by Zak33; 06-07-2001 at 05:51 PM.
    A little crazy, but safe enough!

  11. #11
    Joined
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Vvardenfell
    Age
    58
    Posts
    10,891

    Cool

    Duke Nuken 3D. D*mmit, that brings back some memories: "It time to kick *ss and chew bubblegum. And I'm right out of bubblegum...."

    M

  12. #12
    Joined
    Jan 2001
    Posts
    27
    From my understanding the production process goes like this (I am by no means an expert BTW)

    They produce the CPU, they then speed test it. You will get Chips that perform 30% better than others however they dont test them to their max they simply test them to a standard say 700 Mghz for example. They will have some that pass and others that fail. Failed chips are dumped (assuming 700 is the base spead they areaiming for), passed chips are sold as 700's

    As the production process rolls on and they perfect things in manufacture they will generally get a greater percentage of chips that will pass the 700 test and even a large portion that will pass the 800 mghz test. Those that pass the 800 are sold as 800's those that dont are sold as 700's.

    It is likely that alot of chips labbeled as 700's will pass even the 900 test. But why sell a chip that is rated at 900 when you could sell it rated at 700 and then release a "faster" chip later and have people pay to upgrade.

    I know of duron 600's that overclocked higher than my duron 800 does.

    This is due to the fact that they have the same architecture and although the 800 is made later it is not neccesarily better.

    Sure on average the later produced chips are better, but not all.

    Also there is such things are price market differentiation, in which the company maximises it's producer surplus by selling the same product into different markets at different prices. But that is a story for a different day

    Nazgul.

    Correct me if I am wrong...




  13. #13
    Joined
    Jan 2001
    Age
    42
    Posts
    7,987
    If i remember right the Duron 600-800 has the same core/architecture. I have a Duron 600, 700, and 800. The 600 will do 900mhz, the 700 will do 950mhz, and the 800 will do a 1gig on my systems. If I had a better OC board I am sure I could get it higher.

    From what I heard the Duron 850 had a slightly different architecture with speed improvments because the 600-800 where getting real close to maxing out. The 850-950's chips should go higher than 1gig. I think it is the same design from 850-950mhz chips.

    Al theory of course. I love my Durons. My Duron 800@1gig has almost the same benchmarks as the T-Bird 1gig!!!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •