AMD's New Venice Core for Overclockers - S939

[quad master]

The AMDS new Venice core overclocks like hell.
Shown in E3

The 3200+ overclocked from 2Ghz to 2.8Ghz at 1.4v

New things in Venice core
- SSE3 instructions
- Support for command rate 1t when all 4 ram slots are populated
earlier it used to be compulsarily 2t.

Overclocking Pics
Before


After


RAM Timings



Full Info:- http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=127

[AlienTech]

The 3000+ overclocks to well 3000MHZ @ 1.7V but that is not as important as the new memory controller which seems much more stable when using mixed memory modules.

Enhanced Integrated Memory Controller
Every time a new Athlon 64 processor core come out AMD engineers continue tuning up their integrated memory controller. Note that this is done not only for the sake of increasing the processor performance, but mostly in order to extend the compatibility of this memory controller with the different DIMM modules and their configurations. The previous 90nm Athlon 64 processor core aka Winchester had certain performance limitations when four DDR400 SDRAM modules were used. If there were four single-side DDR400 SDRAM DIMMs installed in a system with a Winchester based Athlon 64 CPU, they could only work with the 2T timing, which caused a few percent drop below the usual performance level. If there were four double-side memory modules installed, DDR400 SDRAM would not work at all and its working frequency would automatically drop down to 333MHz.

AMD engineers promised to eliminate this problem in the new Venice core and they did keep their word. Athlon 64 processors based on Venice can work with four single-side DDR400 SDRAM modules without any limitations, and if there are double-side DDR400 SDRAM DIMMs installed, they can work at 400MHz with 2T timing.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu...-venice_3.html

The changes in the Venice core don't help much in our synthetic memory bandwidth tests. In fact, its bandwidth numbers are slightly lower than the Newcastle-based 3800+.
http://techreport.com/reviews/2005q2...e/index.x?pg=3

But the venice also runs @ 1.35V instead of 1.4V or 1.5V...

So much for that better memory controller, the Winchester posts the first definite win in these tests. The Winchester beat the Venice by over 200 MB/sec. I ran these test over a dozen times to make sure what I was getting was real.

http://www.devhardware.com/c/a/Compu.../AMD-Venice/3/

[darklord]

The AMDS new Venice core overclocks like hell.
Shown in E3

Hmmm...
Quad, you dont want me to start do you ?

Anyways,
NOT ALL VENICE ARE GOOD OVERCLOCKERS.

Mine is a prime example.

[AlienTech]

Using 1.35V instead of 1.4V or 1.5V, The Venice 3800+ practically sips power compared to the rest of the group. The Venice-based test rig consumes 38W less power under load than the same system with a Newcastle 3800+ installed. and almost half of Intel chips.

http://techreport.com/reviews/2005q2.../index.x?pg=14

Hey for some people heat and power and such are more important than raw speed :>

[quad master]

If you feel 1.35 is the lowest.
Then here is a surpice.

A Venice also runs at 1.1V
Check Here:- http://www.dfi-street.com/forum/showthread.php?t=16575

Some people have managed to run it even at 1.05V with the help of a DFI Lanparty Motherboard.

The lower the voltage the less heat it generates.
Hence increasing the life of a processor.

A Winchester also lacks SSE3 Instruction Set.
Which helps in Video Encoding.

Venice works better with Tight Ram Timmings
Winchester works better with more clock speed Ram.

Darky i dont want you to start as i know i will loose to you in that discussion.
Not all Venice overclock better than Winchester.
Darkies 3200+ Winne does more than 2.7 while his Venice is stuck at 2.65
he did manage 2.77 MAx on his Venice but he had to do a lot of work to
make it reach 2.77

[funkymonkey]

Hey quad should i post my results of E3??
BTW yes i was able to run it at 2.5Ghz at 1.3V thats .05v undervolting and 700Mhz over the stock speeds.
Nice and cool.
Mat was 2.92 on A8N SLI Dlx. Stupid mobo has only 1.55v Vcore. grrrrrr

[quad master]

If it wouldnt have been for 1.55Vcore limitation , i know u would have reached 3 easily.

[darklord]

Originally Posted by quad master

If it wouldnt have been for 1.55Vcore limitation , i know u would have reached 3 easily.

That goes without saying

[AlienTech]

Hell stick 12V into that sucker and watch it fry... Watch it smoke @ 10 GHZ!

[AlienTech]

This guy got 3223MHZ @ 1.7V...




http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.c...id=1815&page=2