AMD's 3.2 GHz Phenom II X4 955 Dated

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.

gnesterenko

Distinguished
Dec 23, 2008
150
0
18,680
[citation][nom]ice98[/nom]@ A stonerwe are talking about quad cores here grandpa, that means that the 3.0 to 3.1 jump is a total increase of 400mhzand the 3.0 to 3.2 bump is an 800mhz (ALMOST an entire GHZ) bumpso stop smoking and use your fricken brain cells smart guy[/citation]

Ahem:

http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1P3-494892461.html

feel free to pay and read the whole actual article, but the intro few paragraphs pretty much sum it up.

Stop not smoking and use your fricken brain cells.

Its only a 400mhz jump IF you are using a piece of software that perfectly utilized ALL the cores. At the moment, that is doesn't encompass most games. Naturally video encoding and mass transfer of files will benefit. But most apps use one, at most 2 cores - hence going from 3.0-3.1 would actually only be 100-200mhz increase AT BEST. Most programs that DO utilize more then one core, don't scare linearly.

So please do some research before you make an idiot of your self.

Another stoner out.
 

gnesterenko

Distinguished
Dec 23, 2008
150
0
18,680
Heres a few more for you.

http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/118739350/abstract?CRETRY=1&SRETRY=0

and some more

http://www.drugpolicy.org/marijuana/factsmyths/

ehh the list goes on and on.


I will concede one point however - it has also been shown to increase the probability of testicular cancer in males....but only slightly. A risk, no doubt about it, but considering all the benefits, a risk we are all willing to take.
 

gnesterenko

Distinguished
Dec 23, 2008
150
0
18,680
[citation][nom]gnesterenko[/nom] Most programs that DO utilize more then one core, don't scare linearly.[/citation]

Should have been "don't SCALE linearly", not scare.
 

thelolinator

Distinguished
Apr 16, 2009
5
0
18,510
[citation][nom]inmytaxi[/nom]Sooo. Looking for it at NewEgg. Where is it?[/citation]
Ha ha, they were wrong. It's released the 23rd.
FAILBOAT
 

bk420

Distinguished
Apr 24, 2009
264
0
18,780
I just got a 955 and only one core is running at 1.6 GHZ, the rest are stuck at 801 mhz. Does anybody know how to resolve this? I am using AMD overdrive. I tried to set it at 3.2 through the BIOS but no post.


 

lukeledbrook

Distinguished
Apr 29, 2009
1
0
18,510
I have a AMD PHENOM2 X4 955 sAM3 BLACK with a GByte MA790FXT-UD5P AM3 MoBo, and I'm getting cores running at 800Mhz.

I'm trying a BIOS update tonight to see if this cures it

I've i find any solution I'll let you know
 

bk420

Distinguished
Apr 24, 2009
264
0
18,780
I've tried the same thing too. Updated BIOS on 2 different mobos. Set the clock at 3.2 Ghz manually and disabled all power saving features. It boots fine then once in windows XP or VISTA it shows only 800 MHz. AMD should really fix this problem.
 

bk420

Distinguished
Apr 24, 2009
264
0
18,780
I would like to add that the CPU voltage in Windows was .9550V. The other thing, NOT ONLY was it my Gigabyte which is supposed to support the CPU it was my a MSI Motherboard that was supposed to work also.

 

bk420

Distinguished
Apr 24, 2009
264
0
18,780
I updated the bios on the GigaByte to motherboard_bios_ga-ma790x-ud4p_f4.exe It works now at 3.2 GHz.

Good luck to the rest of you.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.