| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Malakin
Veteran
Joined: 14 Apr 2002
Posts: 1692
Location: Victoria BC Canada
|
 Posted: Thu Nov 06, 2003 3:10 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Quote: | | I think I need to re-seat the heatsink, or maybe I just have too much heat production in there. When I first got the chip it wasn't that hot, even with the amd stock heatsink. |
I push the cooler firmly against the cpu and twist it back and forth a bit before putting it on to visualy check that there's a rectangular cpu imprint of compound on the heatsink/cpu that looks fairly even, sometimes I spread a thin even layer of compound on both the cpu and the heatsink.
So there's no fan on the heatsink? I know the Zalman flower coolers don't require one but you can get fans for them, there's one shown on the page here and you can order them separately.
http://www.zalman.co.kr/english/product/cnps6000Cu.htm
According to their site the all copper cooler supports XP Palomino's up to 2100 without a fan. (it says ALL and the highest Palomino is a 2100 I think) So in theory you shouldn't need a fan but it sounds like your place gets pretty hot. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
kwiqsilver
Guru
Joined: 19 Mar 2003
Posts: 360
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 06, 2003 5:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
The zalman comes with a fan. It connects to the card slot screw holes on the case, and sits millimeters from the heatsink.
I did a kernel compile on my Celeron, which had been running for days, then rebooted, and checked the temp: 95F after 20 minutes of 95%+ CPU (I did two "time make clean dep bzImage modules", for a benchmark): not bad for a machine I can't hear.
I'll try the Athlon tonight or tomorrow. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Malakin
Veteran
Joined: 14 Apr 2002
Posts: 1692
Location: Victoria BC Canada
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 06, 2003 9:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | The zalman comes with a fan. It connects to the card slot screw holes on the case, and sits millimeters from the heatsink. |
Ok not all of them came with fans so I wasn't sure if yours did. Looks to me like with the fan it should do a decent cooling job.
To compare cpu temps you'd have to use identical coolers, put a thermal probe on the cpu (or maybe base of heatsink) and make sure ambient temp was the same both times. At the very minimum you'd have to attach a thermal probe to the chips/heatsinks yourself (using the same probe both times).
In this case you're probably comparing an old Athlon XP Palomino to a Celeron Northwood, it would be more fair to compare a current Athlon XP Tbred-b to a Celeron Northwood. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hamking
n00b
Joined: 05 Jul 2002
Posts: 67
Location: MN
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 16, 2003 6:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
All your base are belong to AMD Athlon64 FX-51
OmGeRd!
Somebody has set up us the system:
Processor: AMD Athlon64 FX-51 (Stock @ 2.2Ghz)
Motherboard: Asus SK8N Pro 150 (bios v.1003 release)
Memory: Corsair TwinX 3200RE 1GIG kit x2 (2GIGs total)
Videocard: Nvidia Geforce FX 5950 Ultra 256MB (Oc'd core 500Mhz/mem 1000Mhz. Most recent detonator drivers)
Harddrives: Dual Maxtor 120GIG SATA w/ 8MB Cache (Not raid)
OS: Windows XP Pro SP1
Case: Thermaltake Xaser III (Japan Steel ver.)
!STOCK COOLING!
NO Overclocking with the exception of the videocard.
Teh Stats:
[img:429f0d17c5]http://home.comcast.net/~hamking1/sis01.jpg[/img:429f0d17c5]
Keep in mind the P4 875P is using DDR 4000 
3D-Mark SE 2001: 28857
3D-Mark 2003: 6945
AAAhhhhhh..... yeah. 
Gentoo RTCW live cd*:
1600x1200, 4x AA, 4x Filtering... almost constantly around 80-90fps (90 being the games FPS cap... doesn't anyone know how to disable that btw???). Only rarely would it dip down to 40fps(aaaalllllloooootta stuff happening on screen), but no matter what we did, we could not get it to dip lower.
In ALL other resolutions it would not dip below 90FPS. (i.e. Liquiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiid  )
*Geforce 5950Ultra was not overclocked in linux.
... we downloaded the UT2003 demo... but we got pretty tired... I'll be posting more stuff later,
but long story short, w/e you got, it aint what we got...
PWNT 
_________________
--Hamking |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NicholasDWolfwood
Apprentice
Joined: 19 Jan 2003
Posts: 235
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 16, 2003 4:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Hamking wrote: | All your base are belong to AMD Athlon64 FX-51
OmGeRd!
Somebody has set up us the system:
Processor: AMD Athlon64 FX-51 (Stock @ 2.2Ghz)
Motherboard: Asus SK8N Pro 150 (bios v.1003 release)
Memory: Corsair TwinX 3200RE 1GIG kit x2 (2GIGs total)
Videocard: Nvidia Geforce FX 5950 Ultra 256MB (Oc'd core 500Mhz/mem 1000Mhz. Most recent detonator drivers)
Harddrives: Dual Maxtor 120GIG SATA w/ 8MB Cache (Not raid)
OS: Windows XP Pro SP1
Case: Thermaltake Xaser III (Japan Steel ver.)
!STOCK COOLING!
NO Overclocking with the exception of the videocard.
Teh Stats:
[img:eef1570137]http://home.comcast.net/~hamking1/sis01.jpg[/img:eef1570137]
Keep in mind the P4 875P is using DDR 4000
3D-Mark SE 2001: 28857
3D-Mark 2003: 6945
AAAhhhhhh..... yeah.
Gentoo RTCW live cd*:
1600x1200, 4x AA, 4x Filtering... almost constantly around 80-90fps (90 being the games FPS cap... doesn't anyone know how to disable that btw???). Only rarely would it dip down to 40fps(aaaalllllloooootta stuff happening on screen), but no matter what we did, we could not get it to dip lower.
In ALL other resolutions it would not dip below 90FPS. (i.e. Liquiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiid )
*Geforce 5950Ultra was not overclocked in linux.
... we downloaded the UT2003 demo... but we got pretty tired... I'll be posting more stuff later,
but long story short, w/e you got, it aint what we got...
PWNT |
The Geforce FX cards suck. If you're going to spend almost $600 on that card, spend $500 and get a 9800XT Radeon. Much better, and can be OC'd more due to the higher clock already.
_________________
AMD Athlon XP 1700+
Abit KG7-RAID
512MB PC2100 DDR266 Corsair/Kingston
40GB WD 7200RPM (37.1GB)
120GB WD 8MB 7200RPM (111GB)
160GB WD 8MB 7200RPM (149GB)
40GB WD 7200RPM (37.1GB)
Pioneer DVR-A06 4x DVD±RW
HP CD-RW 9500i (12x8x32x) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
krunk
Guru
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Posts: 316
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 16, 2003 6:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Unfortunately, there isn't much question in nvidia v. ati when it comes to linux.....nvidias driver support far outshines what ati provides. So if your looking for linux performance I would say go nvidia. I learned the hard way. My 9500 pro is slower than the geforce 4....I could have saved a good bit of money.
_________________
G4 1ghz iBook
PowerMac G3 (B&W) [Powered by Gentoo and Gentoo alone  ]
Dual G5
iPod 3rd generation |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jcmorris
Apprentice
Joined: 11 Jun 2003
Posts: 174
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 17, 2003 12:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Camoes wrote: | What i don't like about Athlon64 is the marketing. Everywhere you here Athlon64 is so fast cause it is using 64-Bit which is completly wrong.
Let me tell why
1) for ints 64-Bit is no use cause 32-Bit are enough for allmost every app
2) 64-Bit is usefull for floats cause it is much more exact, BUT allmost every actual CPU uses internal 64-Bits for floating-point operations so no change here.
The reason why the Athlon64 is faster is cause of the integrated memory controller, hypertransport etc.
The reason why 64-Bit is usefull is cause of the bigger adress-space. the 4GB RAM limit on 32-Bit CPUs is not enough for certain servers or big simulations etc, but at least now enough for normal desktops.
So don't let the marketing people fool you (for myself i will get a prescott cause i don't like to be fooled) |
Hmmm, if you don't mind, I'd like to debate your statements. You are saying that Hypertransport and the onboard memory controller are the only speed increases? I don't think this is right. AMD also doubled the number of registers (16 64-bit GPs instead of 8 32-bit GPs). They also doubled the number of x87 and SSE registers. That means that more data can be stored on-chip and allow for more register-to-register operations. This will increase speed a good amount for applications compiled for x86-64.
jcm
_________________
Desktop:
Athlon64 3000+ (Socket 939 Venice)
Asus A8N-SLI
1GB Dual-Channel DDR 3200
NVidia Geforce 6800 256MB
Laptop:
IBM R40
Pentium M 1.4 GHz
256 MB RAM |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
krunk
Guru
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Posts: 316
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 17, 2003 4:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
I know this has been quoted to death, but I remember a man openly wandering what we could ever do with more than 1 mb of ram......l
Of course simply the 64-bit won't mean much when running 32bit apps, but code optimized for 64-bit processing does show a marked difference.
_________________
G4 1ghz iBook
PowerMac G3 (B&W) [Powered by Gentoo and Gentoo alone ]
Dual G5
iPod 3rd generation |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gelfling
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 21 Jan 2003
Posts: 106
Location: Avenel, NJ
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 06, 2004 7:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
As far as my PC purchasing dollars are concerned, the Intel P4 wins hands down. I haven't seen anyone mention how much easier it is to configure the kernel for a P4 versus AMD. I still see a lot of requests for help with getting the nforce2 and KT400 drivers properly compiled and working in the Gentoo forums.
SATA support is much better with the P4 thanks to the ICH5R, alas SATA RAID0 still is a no go because of Intel's failure to release drivers. I've got my Seagete 80GB SATA HD running under Gentoo 1.4 without a single hiccup. On the AMD side there's the Silicon Image 3112A that works but only offers PIO mode, I've yet to find a way to implement DMA on the Silicon Image, I'm itching to run dual boot setup with my Raptors on the ICH5R and the Seagate 80GB on the Silicon Image running Gentoo with full DMA support.
The Athlon64's impress me with their ability to surpass the P4 even with it's hyperthreading capabilities and larger cache memory. Now if AMD releases a chipet that supports SATA like the i875/i865 I'd jump ship and pick one up.
_________________
Phanbox64: MSI K8N Neo2, AMD Athlon64 3500+, ATI Radeon 9800XT, Corsair TwinX1024-3200C2 1024MB SDRAM, 2 WD 74GB Raptors & 120GB SATA HD, Audigy2 ZS, Plextor PX-708A DVD-/+RW, Pioneer DVD-106S DVD-ROM, CoolerMaster WaveMaster Case |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Malakin
Veteran
Joined: 14 Apr 2002
Posts: 1692
Location: Victoria BC Canada
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 06, 2004 9:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | I haven't seen anyone mention how much easier it is to configure the kernel for a P4 versus AMD. I still see a lot of requests for help with getting the nforce2 and KT400 drivers properly compiled and working in the Gentoo forums. |
You see this because the nforce2 is very popular, mine worked without doing anything special. kt400 has worked for a long time just fine and before nforce2 it was also very popular.
| Quote: | | Now if AMD releases a chipet that supports SATA like the i875/i865 I'd jump ship and pick one up. |
The Nvidia pro 250, SiS 755FX and the VIA K8T800 are all Athlon 64 chipsets that support SATA. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
krunk
Guru
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Posts: 316
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 06, 2004 3:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
For the record, I've used linux on intel and amd platforms and see absolutely no difference in ease of configuration.
(Hyper Threading has been a bitch to me with the 2.6 kernel.)
_________________
G4 1ghz iBook
PowerMac G3 (B&W) [Powered by Gentoo and Gentoo alone ]
Dual G5
iPod 3rd generation |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gelfling
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 21 Jan 2003
Posts: 106
Location: Avenel, NJ
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 06, 2004 5:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Now if AMD releases a chipet that supports SATA like the i875/i865 I'd jump ship and pick one up. |
The Nvidia pro 250, SiS 755FX and the VIA K8T800 are all Athlon 64 chipsets that support SATA.[/quote]
Maybe under Windows, but show me proof that these chipsets support SATA HD's under linux with full DMA support...
_________________
Phanbox64: MSI K8N Neo2, AMD Athlon64 3500+, ATI Radeon 9800XT, Corsair TwinX1024-3200C2 1024MB SDRAM, 2 WD 74GB Raptors & 120GB SATA HD, Audigy2 ZS, Plextor PX-708A DVD-/+RW, Pioneer DVD-106S DVD-ROM, CoolerMaster WaveMaster Case |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Malakin
Veteran
Joined: 14 Apr 2002
Posts: 1692
Location: Victoria BC Canada
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 06, 2004 6:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Maybe under Windows, but show me proof that these chipsets support SATA HD's under linux with full DMA support... |
I don't have any of these new boards so I have no idea but they're all very new, the 875 has been out for quite some time now. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Elm0
Apprentice
Joined: 24 Nov 2002
Posts: 281
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 06, 2004 7:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I believe the VIA KT800 has the same integrated northbridge SATA chipset as my VIA KT600 board and I can confirm it works excellently under Kernel 2.6. I still run a 1.33Ghz Thunderbird, waiting for Doom 3 to come out before I upgrade AMDs are good especially the new AMD64 models (I will probably go with AMD next time just because I just bought a new mobo to replace a faulty one therefore the easiest upgrade path is AMD) however if I was speccing a new PC (32-bit) I would go for Intel probably, just a better HSF attachment design, easier for self build. Not much between them peformance wise, though AMD is slightly cheaper. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Malakin
Veteran
Joined: 14 Apr 2002
Posts: 1692
Location: Victoria BC Canada
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 06, 2004 10:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Not much between them peformance wise, though AMD is slightly cheaper. |
At everything but the high end AMD is a _lot_ cheaper.
Very low end:
$45usd Duron 1.6Ghz
$115usd Celeron 2.7Ghz
(Duron is still faster)
http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=1927&p=14
Low end:
$60usd Athlon XP1800+
$130usd P4A 1.8Ghz
(Athlon is still faster)
Mid:
$90usd Athlon XP2500+
$170/175usd P4C 2.4Ghz/P4C 2.6Ghz
High:
$230 Athlon 64 3000
$280 P4C 3.0Ghz |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Elm0
Apprentice
Joined: 24 Nov 2002
Posts: 281
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 07, 2004 4:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I stand corrected, those are quite significant price differences. Definetly food for thought... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mastergoon
Apprentice
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Posts: 161
Location: Portland, OR
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 09, 2004 4:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
i have a p4 2.8ghz and an xp 2500+
the 2500+ is only slightly slower, but seems to be quite a bit more unstable (ive had some cpu errors)
on the other hand tis much cheaper |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
krunk
Guru
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Posts: 316
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 09, 2004 8:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
2500+ here, stable as a rock. (As in not a single cpu related error ever) Even when I OC it 300mhz with a 200 FSB
_________________
G4 1ghz iBook
PowerMac G3 (B&W) [Powered by Gentoo and Gentoo alone ]
Dual G5
iPod 3rd generation |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Malakin
Veteran
Joined: 14 Apr 2002
Posts: 1692
Location: Victoria BC Canada
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 09, 2004 10:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | the 2500+ is only slightly slower, but seems to be quite a bit more unstable (ive had some cpu errors) |
This won't have anything to do with the cpu, it's either poor hardware setup (heat problems?) or a software problem.
One nice thing about the 2500+ is it only uses 54 watts, plus since it's a barton is has a larger cache which makes the chip larger and gives it more surface area to transfer heat to the heatsink. This makes a 2500+ barton easy to keep cool. Compare this to the smaller die thoroughbred 2600+ which produces 62 watts of heat or a 2.6Ghz Northwood P4 at 63-69watts depending on the chip.
Reference:
http://users.erols.com/chare/elec.htm |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
floffe
Guru
Joined: 24 Nov 2003
Posts: 414
Location: Linköping, Sweden
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 09, 2004 10:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
And the 2500+ running cool makes it easy to overclock. If you have DDR400 memory, most people I've seen get to about the speed of a 2800+, and many up to the speed of a 3200+ (it really isn't that great a diffence as the numbers make it seem. 100+ = 66MHz more when dealing with Bartons. Still, it's a 300+ MHZ OC) without additional cooling. Unfortunately, I bought DDR333 memory with my 2500+  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
krunk
Guru
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Posts: 316
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 09, 2004 11:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| floffe wrote: | | And the 2500+ running cool makes it easy to overclock. If you have DDR400 memory, most people I've seen get to about the speed of a 2800+, and many up to the speed of a 3200+ (it really isn't that great a diffence as the numbers make it seem. 100+ = 66MHz more when dealing with Bartons. Still, it's a 300+ MHZ OC) without additional cooling. Unfortunately, I bought DDR333 memory with my 2500+ |
That's too bad, might try tweaking a bit. I'm using one pc2700 and one pc2400 stick or corsair both running at pc2700 speeds. My top stable OC is 3200+ speeds. I can't get the ram to 200mhz though (of course).
_________________
G4 1ghz iBook
PowerMac G3 (B&W) [Powered by Gentoo and Gentoo alone ]
Dual G5
iPod 3rd generation |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gelfling
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 21 Jan 2003
Posts: 106
Location: Avenel, NJ
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 09, 2004 11:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I just found this article on installing Mandrake 9.2 64bit version on a AMD 64 system, it's so good I might spring for a 3200+ and a Asus K8V Deluxe...
Read it at: http://www.warpedsystems.sk.ca/modules.php?op=modload&name=Sections&file=index&req=viewarticle&artid=34&page=1
_________________
Phanbox64: MSI K8N Neo2, AMD Athlon64 3500+, ATI Radeon 9800XT, Corsair TwinX1024-3200C2 1024MB SDRAM, 2 WD 74GB Raptors & 120GB SATA HD, Audigy2 ZS, Plextor PX-708A DVD-/+RW, Pioneer DVD-106S DVD-ROM, CoolerMaster WaveMaster Case |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Malakin
Veteran
Joined: 14 Apr 2002
Posts: 1692
Location: Victoria BC Canada
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 10, 2004 1:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | I just found this article on installing Mandrake 9.2 64bit version on a AMD 64 system, it's so good I might spring for a 3200+ and a Asus K8V Deluxe... |
The Athlon 64 3000+ is about half the price of the Athlon 64 3200+ and as the performance rating would indicate it's barely any slower.
http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=1937&p=5 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
taskara
Advocate
Joined: 10 Apr 2002
Posts: 3763
Location: Australia
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 10, 2004 2:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
athlon and nforce2 are great.. well supported and fast.
I have just switched from such a system to intel p4 i875 chipset, and it is also nice and fast, especially with hyper-threading (sorta smp)
but intel costs quite a bit more..
_________________
Kororaa install method - have Gentoo up and running quickly and easily, fully automated with an installer! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
floffe
Guru
Joined: 24 Nov 2003
Posts: 414
Location: Linköping, Sweden
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 10, 2004 2:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
| krunk wrote: | | That's too bad, might try tweaking a bit. I'm using one pc2700 and one pc2400 stick or corsair both running at pc2700 speeds. My top stable OC is 3200+ speeds. I can't get the ram to 200mhz though (of course). |
Yes, I've raised my multiplier and been stable at 12*166, but then I got some instability issues in windows (yes, it was before I installed gentoo). If I raise the FSB just a few MHz, I get quite a lot of trouble with the memory, at quite loose timings (I think 2.5-3-3-7). I guess there's a reason why it's tested ok for PC2700  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Gentoo Chat
