6 reasons to use a real AM3+ Mobo & Why Bios upgrade isn't

teletran8 said:
I think it looks like a good board, and I think Crosshairs are overpriced. You can disagree IDC. :)
Click to expand...

Yeah, I think so too, but not when you get them for $130 ;)

But seriously, in order to better test overclocking capabilities of that board, they should have tested how high they can get the FSB, since that is what matters with non-BE processors. With BE processors, as long as the vrms don't blow up, the overclocks will be the similar from board to board with slight (less than 10% difference) variations, unless you happen to get a crap board.
 
Tsumi said:
Yeah, I think so too, but not when you get them for $130 ;)

But seriously, in order to better test overclocking capabilities of that board, they should have tested how high they can get the FSB, since that is what matters with non-BE processors. With BE processors, as long as the vrms don't blow up, the overclocks will be the similar from board to board with slight (less than 10% difference) variations, unless you happen to get a crap board.
Click to expand...

They also didn't do a pure multiplier OC test so how high you can get with a BE is unknown and how high you can get with a non-BE is unknown
 
seronx said:
They also didn't do a pure multiplier OC test so how high you can get with a BE is unknown and how high you can get with a non-BE is unknown
Click to expand...

Pure multiplier overclock is never necessary. The multipliers on BE chips go up to 50 or more, which is much higher than these chips will ever reach. 50 * 200 = 10 ghz. It is the FSB that is important for non-BE, and it is semi-important for BE chips in getting the last few mhz that cannot be reached by the multiplier.
 
Tsumi said:
Pure multiplier overclock is never necessary. The multipliers on BE chips go up to 50 or more, which is much higher than these chips will ever reach. 50 * 200 = 10 ghz. It is the FSB that is important for non-BE, and it is semi-important for BE chips in getting the last few mhz that cannot be reached by the multiplier.
Click to expand...

Well it would be nice to know the highest multiplier for a BE then use the maximum FSB to lower the multiplier but to keep around the same frequency

Regardless there will be be no non-BE AM3+ cpus for this year
 
seronx said:
Well it would be nice to know the highest multiplier for a BE then use the maximum FSB to lower the multiplier but to keep around the same frequency

Regardless there will be be no non-BE AM3+ cpus for this year
Click to expand...

The highest multiplier that could be used to reach that overclock is the nearest 100 mhz rounded down overclock that was obtained divided by 200. For 4.56 ghz, that would be 4.5 ghz, giving a multiplier of 22.5. Besides, the overclock is highly dependent on the CPU itself, not the motherboard (which is what was being discussed here).

And how do you know there will be no non-BE chips? Actually, it would be fairly stupid of AMD to have only BE chips released. Having non-BE chips for the mainstream market is very important for AMD's financial success.
 
Tsumi said:
The highest multiplier that could be used to reach that overclock is the nearest 100 mhz rounded down overclock that was obtained divided by 200. For 4.56 ghz, that would be 4.5 ghz, giving a multiplier of 22.5. Besides, the overclock is highly dependent on the CPU itself, not the motherboard (which is what was being discussed here).

And how do you know there will be no non-BE chips? Actually, it would be fairly stupid of AMD to have only BE chips released. Having non-BE chips for the mainstream market is very important for AMD's financial success.
Click to expand...

Code: 
FX = High-Performance/Enthusiast

A = Performance/Mainstream/Gamer

E = Power+Efficency/Office
(there is an E-Llano(aka E2-3250) coming to FM1)

C = Tablets/Netbooks

FX aka Bulldozer for this year is enthusiast, so you are buying something you can overclock thus no non-be
and FX will continue to be no non-be(BECAUSE IT IS ENTHUSIAST )

Everything I am saying now is off-topic LOL

I looked up why there was that 10GHz multiplier well AMD back in 2003 actually planned to make 10GHz/Multi-core CPUs right around now
 
Last edited:
Not all Bulldozer would be FX models. There will be some models released that are locked multiplier models, which will of course cost less. Every processor launch has been accompanied by both high-end and low-end models. Even LGA1366 had it's high-end and low-end models (i7 920 and i7 965 EE). To say Bulldozer will launch as high-end only is pure BS, and if it really is what AMD is planning, then a really poor financial decision on their part. There is no way you can say for certain what AMD will do unless you work at AMD and know all their plans, which I highly doubt, seeing your knowledge (or lack thereof) of AMD processors.
 
Tsumi said:
Not all Bulldozer would be FX models. There will be some models released that are locked multiplier models, which will of course cost less. Every processor launch has been accompanied by both high-end and low-end models. Even LGA1366 had it's high-end and low-end models (i7 920 and i7 965 EE). To say Bulldozer will launch as high-end only is pure BS.
Click to expand...

But, Bulldozer is only releasing for FX this year (2011)

Only till next year will there be a Bulldozer for the Llano spec which will be then called Trinity

FX = Bulldozer forever
A = 2011 Llano(Stars)->2012 Trinity(Bulldozer)

and I didn't say Bulldozer I SAID FX!

Intel =/= AMD
 
And how can you say this for certain? You can't. There are 2-module (4-core), 3-module (6-core), and 4-module (8-core) scheduled to be released for AM3+ (supposedly). Almost everyone here will tell you with 99% certainty that there will be locked and unlocked models. Names mean nearly absolutely nothing, the FX designation is just a moniker to say they're powerful chips. It doesn't necessarily mean that all FX models will have unlocked multipliers. It can also be that there are bulldozer chips for AM3+ that carry the FX moniker, and those that don't, differentiating between the models that have and don't have unlocked multipliers. There also is the psychology factor, as people associate FX with high-end, so they would be more inclined to buy the processor if they see FX in the name. It really isn't a true indicator of performance.

Once again, unless you're at AMD and you really know what they're planning, you know next to NOTHING about what they will actually do.
 
Tsumi said:
And how can you say this for certain? You can't. There are 2-module (4-core), 3-module (6-core), and 4-module (8-core) scheduled to be released for AM3+ (supposedly). Almost everyone here will tell you with 99% certainty that there will be locked and unlocked models. Names mean nearly absolutely nothing, the FX designation is just a moniker to say they're powerful chips. It doesn't necessarily mean that all FX models will have unlocked multipliers. It can also be that there are bulldozer chips for AM3+ that carry the FX moniker, and those that don't, differentiating between the models that have and don't have unlocked multipliers. There also is the psychology factor, as people associate FX with high-end, so they would be more inclined to buy the processor if they see FX in the name. It really isn't a true indicator of performance.

Once again, unless you're at AMD and you really know what they're planning, you know next to NOTHING about what they will actually do.
Click to expand...

I can tell you with 100% certainty that they will be unlocked and will continue to be unlocked

Unlike most people here who only have 99% certainty 1% doubt

Just ask me how I know, I will answer ;)
 
Okay. Either let's let JF-AMD or another AMD guru weigh in and confirm/deny things for us, or let's see what happens comes launch day. Either way, I believe you are going to be proven completely wrong. Since you are so firmly entrenched in your belief, it is no longer worth my time arguing with you, since you will never change your mind unless proven wrong.
 
Tsumi said:
Okay. Either let's let JF-AMD or another AMD guru weigh in and confirm/deny things for us, or let's see what happens comes launch day. Either way, I believe you are going to be proven completely wrong. Since you are so firmly entrenched in your belief, it is no longer worth my time arguing with you, since you will never change your mind unless proven wrong.
Click to expand...

Phenom I http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...2Agena.22_.28B2.2FB3.2C_65_nm.2C_Quad-core.29

Announced to have unlocked BE and locked versions
Phenom II http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...2Deneb.22_.28C2.2FC3.2C_45_nm.2C_Quad-core.29

Announced to have unlocked BE and locked versions
FX http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulldozer_(processor)#Processors
Announced only to have unlocked versions thus BE becoming Marketing BS for FX since all FX will have BE abilities

Proving the intent that ALL FXs will have an unlocked multiplier and an unlocked turbo core for enthusiasts as FXs are for gaming enthusiasts who want to play on ultra quality @ super-high frequencies

Final post(for this thread) till proven wrong where I will apologize for being so arrogant and stubborn
 
Last edited:
Tsumi said:
Okay. Either let's let JF-AMD or another AMD guru weigh in and confirm/deny things for us, or let's see what happens comes launch day. Either way, I believe you are going to be proven completely wrong. Since you are so firmly entrenched in your belief, it is no longer worth my time arguing with you, since you will never change your mind unless proven wrong.
Click to expand...

In the same way he confirmed Bulldozer won't run on am3+ ? :)
He is just another part of PR machine

BTW with all chips being BE does that mean classic overclocking through fsb/ht is impossible like in Sandy Bridge
 
Tsumi said:
Yeah, I think so too, but not when you get them for $130 ;)

But seriously, in order to better test overclocking capabilities of that board, they should have tested how high they can get the FSB, since that is what matters with non-BE processors. With BE processors, as long as the vrms don't blow up, the overclocks will be the similar from board to board with slight (less than 10% difference) variations, unless you happen to get a crap board.
Click to expand...

It will be exciting to see AM3+ Crosshairs from ASUS (not the price tag but they do seem to have the most features for a desktop build), and also what MSI will come up with along with Gigabyte's higher end lineup. I'm so excited for new motherboards and CPU's from AMD. :)

My 870 Extreme 3 from ASRock does 250 FSBx16.5 for 4.125 on stock cooling, and that is only half of what the board has available in bios options. It can go to 300 like you was saying some boards do. This is a 90.00 mobo lol. After thinking about it your board should be better and more stable since it costs more...but you would have to test both to know the facts now wouldn't you ;) hehe but yeah 130 is a steal for your board, great buy man.
 
Tempted to pick up one of those new Asrock boards; particularly since my board just burned out. Not sure about that 1 year warranty though.
 
Michaelius said:
In the same way he confirmed Bulldozer won't run on am3+ ? :)
He is just another part of PR machine

BTW with all chips being BE does that mean classic overclocking through fsb/ht is impossible like in Sandy Bridge
Click to expand...

JF actually said that Zambezi won't run on AM3...
Technically, he was right, Zambezi will not run on AM3 as intended on AM3+: Slower HT clock, probably reduced Turbo functionality, slightly inferior power management scheme.

Zambezi will not be validated to run on AM3, so chip RMAs may become an issue.
 
To me the biggest part is the power. I mean bulldozer appears to have thicker pins and on top of that a higher maximum current draw. I would expect that the AM3 support for bulldozer will limit what AM3+ processor you can use otherwise you will risk motherboard damage because it was not designed to handle that much current.
 
JMccovery said:
JF actually said that Zambezi won't run on AM3...
Technically, he was right, Zambezi will not run on AM3 as intended on AM3+: Slower HT clock, probably reduced Turbo functionality, slightly inferior power management scheme.

Zambezi will not be validated to run on AM3, so chip RMAs may become an issue.
Click to expand...

Yes that's why I said he is part of PR machine. He didn't lie he was telling us the part of truth that was convienient for his company. That's how marketing work :)
 
Quick question:

My LGA775 motherboard just died and instead of buying a new one I'm thinking of getting that Gigabyte AM3+ board and a cheap Athlon II dualcore to hold me over until Bulldozer is released. So I'm just curious if there is any reason not to do this. Is Bulldozer guaranteed to work on AM3+ boards without any kind of downgrading? Will there be a Bulldozer only socket board that would be better to wait for?
 
Will there be a Bulldozer only socket board that would be better to wait for?
Click to expand...

AM3+ is the bulldozer socket. There is no bulldozer only socket. I believe there will be new chipsets so the current AM3+ boards may lack some features that will be available on the new chipsets.
 
JMccovery said:
Because everything below the FX-4000 series will be filled by Llano on FM1. AM3+ chips will be in the upper Mid-range/Performance/"Enthusiast" category, whilst the A-series chips will take over the Value and Mainstream categories.

I wouldn't be surprised for AMD to EOL a lot of Phenom/Athlon IIs come Q3.
Click to expand...

which would be socket 939 to AM2 socket all over again......which made my socket 939 setup worth a lot more cash in the international used hardware market, which is where this Phenom II will be headed if that happens again :D
 
I Honestly would not but a am3+ board based on an 800 series chipset.. Your just paying a premium to half ass it.
 
the only reason and this one is a big one folks am3+ sockets have bigger pin holes than am3 sockets!

WHY cause bulldozer uses a thicker pin than the current am3 chips thus making bulldozer unable to fit into am3 boards... have a nice day and nice try motherboard makers trying to pull a fast one and got shut down
 
maxius said:
the only reason and this one is a big one folks am3+ sockets have bigger pin holes than am3 sockets!

WHY cause bulldozer uses a thicker pin than the current am3 chips thus making bulldozer unable to fit into am3 boards... have a nice day and nice try motherboard makers trying to pull a fast one and got shut down
Click to expand...

If the pin hole is whats holding us back I can guarantee that there will be an adapter plate within days of launch..
 
drescherjm said:
I am not sure the user can rip apart the socket without damaging it.
Click to expand...

who said anything about ripping it apart.. It would basically snap into the original socket & secure with the latch & then put the CPu directly above where it would normally be & use spacers of some sort for the cooler mount.
 
ScretHate said:
Quick question:

My LGA775 motherboard just died and instead of buying a new one I'm thinking of getting that Gigabyte AM3+ board and a cheap Athlon II dualcore to hold me over until Bulldozer is released. So I'm just curious if there is any reason not to do this. Is Bulldozer guaranteed to work on AM3+ boards without any kind of downgrading? Will there be a Bulldozer only socket board that would be better to wait for?
Click to expand...

Prices will drop soon on the older stuff (Phenom II) is the most likely circumstance, and better stuff is going to be released soon, you will be mad at yourself for not waiting because you will get less for what you spend with more upgrade-ability, I think.

The Gigabyte board you mentioned... I wouldn't get because it lacks core unlocking, plus the first row of SATA ports at the least become useless if you have a longer dual slot GPU, no CF or SLI support either, and it's price is 25.00 overpriced at the least IMO.

Wait for the competition to start later this month or in June. Never buy LGA 775 over AM3 though, that's just a crazy waste of money.

Also when the majority of AM3+ boards come out to the market with BD CPU's and compatibility with Phenom II AM3 CPU's, (which should be dropping in prices) that will lead to be the best Price to Performance systems ever released. ;) That's where the value will be.
 
bastage said:
If the pin hole is whats holding us back I can guarantee that there will be an adapter plate within days of launch..
Click to expand...

an adapter plate that will make all cooling solutions incompatible unlikely
 
teletran8 said:
The Gigabyte board you mentioned... I wouldn't get because it lacks core unlocking, plus the first row of SATA ports at the least become useless if you have a longer dual slot GPU, no CF or SLI support either, and it's price is 25.00 overpriced at the least IMO.

.
Click to expand...


I managed to snap this one up today:

http://gigabyte.com/products/product-page.aspx?pid=3789#na

Oddly enough, it was the same price as the standard version, which I think was a mistake. I'm surprised the store had it.

Figured I might as well take the plunge, since my board burned out. We'll see how it goes.

Edit: Also, I don't really do SLI or CF. So not too upset about that.
 
Last edited:
JMccovery said:
JF actually said that Zambezi won't run on AM3...
Technically, he was right, Zambezi will not run on AM3 as intended on AM3+: Slower HT clock, probably reduced Turbo functionality, slightly inferior power management scheme.

Zambezi will not be validated to run on AM3, so chip RMAs may become an issue.
Click to expand...

Michaelius said:
Yes that's why I said he is part of PR machine. He didn't lie he was telling us the part of truth that was convienient for his company. That's how marketing work :)
Click to expand...

Semantics. I call it misleading bullshit.
 
bastage said:
You failed to read the rest of the thread like where I talked about using spacers for the cooler..
Click to expand...

you fail to realize bulldozer is a completely new chip that has fatter pins to supply more voltage/amps to the cpu. No adapter plate will be made just suck it up and buy a new board.
 
maxius said:
you fail to realize bulldozer is a completely new chip that has fatter pins to supply more voltage/amps to the cpu. No adapter plate will be made just suck it up and buy a new board.
Click to expand...

You fail to realize that ASUS & MSI have both already said it will work with some of there current boards so it really must not have much fatter of pins or require much more voltage.. And if I am wrong since I am basing this off of the release form a multi million dollar company (or 2) then thats fine. I will accept that upon release when I am proven wrong right after I get off the phone with MSI & they send me a new board since I just got my 890gxm well after they have said it was compatible..

Also you still fail to read since my original comment was
bastage said:
If the pin hole is whats holding us back I can guarantee that there will be an adapter plate within days of launch..
Click to expand...
Thus I based that comment off it it being only the pin hole holding us back..
 
You fail to realize that ASUS & MSI have both already said it will work with some of there current boards so it really must not have much fatter of pins or require much more voltage
Click to expand...

I believe the BD support on these boards will be limited (perhaps no 8 core) somewhat to prevent power problems.
 
I really doubt the whole fatter pin thing. The only thing that fatter pins allow for is reduced resistance, but that is marginal at best. Resistance (and thus energy loss and heat buildup) increases with the length of the wire, but the pin is so short, any energy loss and heat created is just negligible at best, and practically non-existent. It's all pure marketing BS.

Bulldozer support may be limited, we'll have to see come launch day. However, that is completely up to the motherboard manufacturers. That is still not the same thing as no Bulldozer support, and still provides some of us with an upgrade path. I'll be happy to go to a 6-core Bulldozer if it's faster than my 1090T at single-threaded applications.
 
I like how the fan magically moves air inwards or outwards based on the cpu socket... that is special
 
Putz said:
I like how the fan magically moves air inwards or outwards based on the cpu socket... that is special
Click to expand...

That picture I did not get. I know they are trying to say by a less obstructed path around the base of the heatsink the temps can be lowered by 5.4C but the diagram does not make a lot of sense to me. The airflow should be the same direction regardless if the base is slightly obstructed. Besides that the direction arrows are wrong for both cases..
 
Last edited:
I haven't seen much information on how many cores the "Turbo Core" feature will use on the BD CPUs. We know that the x6 uses three cores. Is it safe to assume that the 12-core version will "Turbo" 6 cores?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top