BeepBeep2

http://www.hwbot.org/hardware/processor/athlon_ii_x2_210e/ It is a socket AM3 CPU, not AM2+, thanks!

Whooooo!

Nice.

For the clocks it doesn't seem to be too far off.

Hmm...I was thinking that the board was slow, am I just slow?

@Calathea These new 2012 chips are different, my 965 too does 6.8 32M but only validates about 6.9. I don't know why...

Yeah, I get what you mean. It is better to get a run in at all than to waste all your time completely...

What mattered to me the most was CAS Write latency though, default is 8 I think but 6/7 are just so much faster, can improve time by 3-4 seconds even. When I get back from vacation in mid July I'll have more time to test, but having only 30L on hand at a time is a little inconvenient, goes fast when things aren't going as planned.

Yeah, that is interesting. I was 1 second faster than you in the last loop. As far as TRC, I always thought it was most efficient to run CL + TRAS, chew* told me that TRC = 11 was slower but could allow higher clocks with some DDR3. I'm not sure what is up with TRC = 15, must be faster? Not sure. I know on K8 + NF590, I found that TRC = between 13-15 was fastest no matter what primary timings you used.

I had huge issues on LN2 with FX...6.95 was the CPU-Z limit for all of my cores, still can't figure out what happened. These chips are weird sometimes. Why the low CPU-NB and DRAM frequency?

lmfao

I usually only bench those AMD things where you just pour more and more LN2 into a black hole until you realize the CPU sucks and couldn't Bulldoze a grain of sand. I wish I had the benefit of benching one of those new-fangled intel creeping woody plant things. I have only benched the fine-ground silica type. I pulled my faildozer out of the socket twice now, stuck to the pot. Smashed a Phenom II X4 with a hammer after it died for no reason at stock settings on LN2.

Max CPU-NB possible, I tried to run 6.78/4.6/915 6-6-6-18 with CWL = 6 (2sec faster, but needs much higher vdimm) but this run was with CWL = 7. Infra, the runs after this had me on my toes because I had you beat, but the rig didn't want to have it.

Slow board is slow.

I'm 10 seconds off of where I should be efficiency wise so mine is bad too

Ananerbe's 1209 was great for CPU-Z so I'd imagine that one will do well too. Maybe my 1210 will be good. I saw a difference in serial number with my two 955s, and I think the batch letters are useless now.

I wanted to note that I'm a little confused by Ananerbe's 1209 PGT 955 though...it does 7.15 CPU-Z, that would lead me to believe it would do over 7 GHz 32M if it works like our chips.

It is kind of a shame...normally a 6.7 GHz 32M CPU will do about 7 GHz CPU-Z validations.

1st core froze when I bumped up freq to 6.6, 3 froze at 6.5. 4 was okay up to 6.7 (just sitting) but it froze shortly after. The second core is the strongest on this one. 1210 PGT X4 965 still here, about 10-12L LN2 left. Gonna bin cores on air this time around to save LN2, and see how the CPU-NB is, maybe it will be better than this latest 955.

1212 PGT, same as the other one I had. Max valid is going to be less than 6.8...1M only passed at 6725. Works on all 4 cores, but 4.3 is max CPU-NB @ 1.68v

Have you noticed that these new CPUs have a very small gap between 32M and instability? The old ones having 300+...while I can pull off 32M @ 6.68, 1M only up to 6.73.

I love the IHS!

This is a new one right? I saw your 1209 955, very strong CPUs!

Nice. I spent 3 hours last night doing a socket mod to OC my little 1500+ on a value board with skinny wire D:

http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/K7/AMD-Athlon%20XP%20SFF%201500+%20-%20AXLD1500DQT3C.html 1.333 GHz, 133 * 10, 1.45v Thanks!