# Awesome Llano Overclocking Tool



## Mathragh (Jan 16, 2012)

Hi guys!

I just wanted to share this awesome overclock with you lot, and inform you of this really nice new overclocking tool at the same time!

I managed to overclock my GF's lappy with an AMD A6-3410MX APU from 1,6GHz with 2,3GHz turbo, to 2,2GHz with a massive 3,1GHz turbo!
Also, the 2,2GHz overclock is managed with a lower voltage than the voltage it used running at 1,6GHz. 

I did this with a overclocking tool called FusionTweaker, which lets you manually set the multiplier and voltage for each different P-state the APU has(it even includes 2 P-states for the North bridge, though I'm not sure that part of the program is fully functional)
The default voltage for P-state 1(the highest non-turbo P-state) at 1,6GHz was 1,1125 volts, but the overclock of 2,2GHz was managed with a voltage of 1,0625. 
I could go even higher than 2,2GHz, but even at a lowered voltage, it already got about 3 degrees hotter than without the overclock, so i decided to play it safe and leave it at 2,2GHz and 1,0625V.



Below are some screenies:

Here I overclocked and undervolted only the P1 state (from 1,6GHz at 1,1125 volts to 2,2GHz at 1,0625 volts).








After that I wanted to make sure the APU didnt get too hot with both the CPU and GPU part at max load. I did this by running prime95 at 4 threads and running furmark burn-in at the same time







Then I tried out the max stable turbo frequency. I managed the Turbo speed of 3,1GHz by simply leaving the turbo voltage at stock, and increasing the multiplier untill the system began to get unstable when running prime95 at just 2 out of 4 threads. With only 2 threads loaded by prime95, both CPU-Z and FusionTweaker reported the cores still switching to the turbo state. I figured that this would be the best way to test turbo stability(as opposed to running prime95 at all 4 cores, since then the turbo doesnt seem to be kicking in anymore).







So, I am a happy person!(and so is the GF ), and the best part about this overclock is that it doesnt even really increase the temperature of the APU in a significant way (about 3 C max).

I havent yet had the time to undervolt those other P-states in order to reach better battery life, but these results promise alot for that aswell!

Also I'd say this overclock promises some nice performace improvements for everyone with a Llano APU!

Furthermore, I'm open for any suggestions or requests regarding this overclock, as i'm actually not really a veteran overclocker, and always willing to learn more



UPDATE: 
I managed to get the Idle clocks down from 800MHz to 500MHz, I found this the lowest I could go without noticing the slowdown.
The 500 Mhz clock only needed a puny 0,65V to be stable, instead of the stock 0,9375V at 800MHz.

This is gonna do alot for idle power use and battery life!


EDIT: Upping the multiplier doesnt seem to work for all desktop Llano APU's.

PS
For everyone interested, I read about FusionTweaker for the first time here, and its downloadable here. The first link also contains a link to a tweaking utility for brazos. The Brazos tweaking utility is limited to tweaking the voltage only.


----------



## Mathragh (Feb 1, 2012)

For anyone interested,I finalized tweaking the P states.

Things ended up being alot greater, including a performance increase of about 18-30% at about the same power use, and battery life improvement from ~5 hours to about 6,5H.

These are the P states I found being the most optimal, and stable for about 2 weeks now.

Stock      mult       	volt        	Custom   mult       volt
P0	23	1,3500	P0	31	1,3500
P1	16	1,1125	P1	22	1,0625
P2	15	1,0875	P2	16	0,8875
P3	14	1,0625	P3	14	0,8500
P4	13	1,0250	P4	13	0,8250
P5	12	1,0000	P5	12	0,8000
P6	10	0,9625	P6	10	0,7625
P7          8            0,9375    P7          5            0,6500

Edit: Sadly, I cannot seem to get the layout any better.


----------



## Zen_ (Feb 2, 2012)

Very cool little app! I didn't know about it, and it's working really well with a desktop A4-3400 I just built. I tried doing a minor O/C with the base clock without much luck, but with this the multiplier is fully unlocked and I really like that you can adjust the full range of p-states so it still idles at minimum power. Just tried 3.2 GHz on P0 and it went no problem. 

Now I'll have to try some tweaking with the E-350 in my X120e too!


----------



## Mathragh (Feb 2, 2012)

Zen_ said:


> Very cool little app! I didn't know about it, and it's working really well with a desktop A4-3400 I just built. I tried doing a minor O/C with the base clock without much luck, but with this the multiplier is fully unlocked and I really like that you can adjust the full range of p-states so it still idles at minimum power. Just tried 3.2 GHz on P0 and it went no problem.
> 
> Now I'll have to try some tweaking with the E-350 in my X120e too!



Awesome! a 500Mhz overclock without any hassle is great =D what voltage are you on at your P-0 state btw?
I wonder how much you can tweak it further^^

Also, good luck with the E-350 tweaking

Edit: I also suppose the thread should be renamed to something more appropriate, as mobile llano chips dont seem to be the only chips benefitting from this, and the unlocked multi is also a fairly important factor


----------



## Zen_ (Feb 3, 2012)

Attached is what I set to start with...can't seem to find any stress test or CPU temp monitoring apps that work with these chips.

This actually works a lot slicker that EFI tweaking. When I messed around with the base clock in the EFI, something went haywire with the APU multiplier (EFI showed 47x and so did CPU-Z), thin black horizontal lines appeared on the desktop, and I had to reflash the EFI. I like how this starts as a service in the OS so nothing is messed around with through the boot process.


----------



## Mathragh (Feb 3, 2012)

Did you try prime95 for stress testing? worked great for my chip.
Also, the newest version of HWmonitor (downloadable from cpuid.com) should support bulldozer chips.


----------



## Yo_Wattup (Feb 3, 2012)

so this works with all llano apus?

and can you oc with a mobo that has oc disabled in bios?


----------



## Mathragh (Feb 3, 2012)

Yo_Wattup said:


> so this works with all llano apus?



As far as I know, yep.



Yo_Wattup said:


> and can you oc with a mobo that has oc disabled in bios?



Also, yep!

However, I dont think the NB part of the chip(including the graphics part) can be tweaked with this.


----------



## Yo_Wattup (Feb 3, 2012)

And it loads up on startup good? you tried shutting and stuff?


----------



## Mathragh (Feb 3, 2012)

Yo_Wattup said:


> And it loads up on startup good? you tried shutting and stuff?



Yeah, as long as you set everything up correctly, it works like a charm.
Its been running for 2-3 weeks now on my GF's lappy, and it works great


----------



## Yo_Wattup (Feb 3, 2012)

Mathragh said:


> Yeah, as long as you set everything up correctly, it works like a charm.
> Its been running for 2-3 weeks now on my GF's lappy, and it works great



Cool. Thanks heaps for the link, I'm currently overclocking my girfriends A8-3800 as I type. So far up to 3.1Ghz from 2.4Ghz.


----------



## Mathragh (Feb 3, 2012)

Awesome man! thats quite an OC already!

Just make sure things dont get too hot, you might want to test the OC with both the CPU, and the GPU part fully stressed.


----------



## Yo_Wattup (Feb 3, 2012)

good idea, currently at 50C with just the cpu at 100%, I thought as long as I don't go too far above that, I should be right for the whole apu, but it wouldn't hurt to stress the gpu i suppose.


----------



## Yo_Wattup (Feb 3, 2012)

currently at 3.6ghz... 50C.. will gpu test when I get a blue screen (IF I get a blue screen at this rate... it just keeps going up and up!) 

EDIT: and now somehow its cooled to 48C  

DOUBLE EDIT: Seems the multi only goes up to 36, and can't change the BCLK. Well that's me then. 3600mhz it is. I ain't complaining.


----------



## Mathragh (Feb 3, 2012)

Yo_Wattup said:


> currently at 3.6ghz... 50C.. will gpu test when I get a blue screen (IF I get a blue screen at this rate... it just keeps going up and up!)



Whoah man, thats some awesome overclock !

Are you using CPU-Z to verify that you actually have all 4 cores running at that speed?

EDIT:

Have you tried upping the multiplier of the P0(turbo) state aswell?

You might get some more out of that one?

Also, if it is suddenly cooling down, one prime thread might have had an error, also proving the CPU isn't stable at the frequency. You might want to watch Task manager closely for any core to drop down on load. This error might also explain why the mult wont go any higher


----------



## Yo_Wattup (Feb 3, 2012)

Mathragh said:


> Whoah man, thats some awesome overclock !
> 
> Are you using CPU-Z to verify that you actually have all 4 cores running at that speed?
> 
> ...



Yes and yes. 36 is max. Tried lowering the divider of the NB to up the gpu frequency but doesn't seem to let me. 

Now going for as low volts as possible, currenlty at 1.224V according to CPU-Z, and 45C. My 2500k with a Noctua NH-D14 idles at 38C, these temps are ridiculous. Yeah, I'm officially impressed.


----------



## Flanker (Feb 3, 2012)

amazing stuff


----------



## Mathragh (Feb 3, 2012)

Yo_Wattup said:


> Yes and yes. 36 is max. Tried lowering the divider of the NB to up the gpu frequency but doesn't seem to let me.
> 
> Now going for as low volts as possible, currenlty at 1.224V according to CPU-Z, and 45C. My 2500k with a Noctua NH-D14 idles at 38C, these temps are ridiculous. Yeah, I'm officially impressed.



Very nice!

To be honest, I dont really get why these chips are clocked and volted so incredably docile. 
It seems like they could've easily clocked these Llano chips a lot better, or let them suck quite a bit less power at stock. 
I mean, my GF's lappy with her A6-3410MX can consistently do with 0,2V less then whats been given at stock, then there is your chip which apparently performs even more amazingly once tweaked right. 
I wonder wether all chips clock this good, and if so, I wonder what the reason is behind these stock volts and speeds while there seems to be much more performance to be had across the whole product line.


----------



## Yo_Wattup (Feb 3, 2012)

Mathragh said:


> Also, if it is suddenly cooling down, one prime thread might have had an error, also proving the CPU isn't stable at the frequency. You might want to watch Task manager closely for any core to drop down on load. This error might also explain why the mult wont go any higher



Yep, task manager and my windows gadget both say all cores at 100%, and have been since i downloaded the program which is when I started running prime.

At 1.160V according to GPU-Z and fusion tweaker! Coretemp says 41C. 

It's getting hard to believe.  But all the programs' stats relate to each other.. did I get a good chip maybe?


----------



## Mathragh (Feb 3, 2012)

Yeah, apparently . 
Thats incredible! and also makes my question in my former post even more true.

Have you also tried putting other kinds of load on it?

Also! quite important note: When you undervolt your P-states, make sure the voltage of the lower P state is never higher than the voltage of a higher P-state( For an instance, P1@1,2V and P2@1,3V). 
If your higher P state has a lower voltage then a lower P state, the 'Make permanent' thingy wil bug, and the process wont start correctly.
So, make sure your P-state voltages make sense! ^^


----------



## Yo_Wattup (Feb 3, 2012)

Mathragh said:


> Very nice!
> 
> To be honest, I dont really get why these chips are clocked and volted so incredably docile.
> It seems like they could've easily clocked these Llano chips a lot better, or let them suck quite a bit less power at stock.
> ...



Same reason they underclock every chip: either to make the higher-end chips appear much faster, or my personal opinion; so that when the other manufacturer releases a higher clocked cpu, they can easily compete. 

And thanks for the P-State voltage tip... When I get a BSOD Ill do some other tests, one thing at a time.


----------



## Mathragh (Feb 3, 2012)

Yo_Wattup said:


> Same reason they underclock every chip: either to make the higher-end chips appear much faster, or my personal opinion; so that when the other manufacturer releases a higher clocked cpu, they can easily compete.



Yeah, but still, your clockspeed is way higher than the highest binned chip, and the voltage way lower, the same goes for the mobile chip in my gf's lappy.


----------



## FlanK3r (Feb 3, 2012)

awesome man, can u show some comparsion before and after OC (benchmarks)???


----------



## Yo_Wattup (Feb 3, 2012)

Still lowering volts, temps gone up from 41-44 though... (that desktop gadget there is running off coretemp for temps)



FlanK3r said:


> awesome man, can u show some comparsion before and after OC (benchmarks)???


 
Good idea, I wasn't planning on doing benches because it's my girlfriends rig, but I suppose, why not? Will have to wait till tommorrow though.


----------



## Mathragh (Feb 3, 2012)

Perhaps the jump in temps is from the voltage jumping higher when the processor momentarily jumps to the p0 turbo state


----------



## Yo_Wattup (Feb 3, 2012)

p0 is at the same settings... for the stress testing i set all the performance states the same


----------



## Mathragh (Feb 3, 2012)

Weird shit, I actually noticed the same thing when I was testing, but I thought it was just an artifact


----------



## xBruce88x (Feb 3, 2012)

if i remember right, turbo mode only overclocks 2 cores while downclocking the others to stay within tdp. this is why when all cores are loaded turbo mode doesnt kick in. turbo mode is more or less for apps that dont take advantage of multiple threads and prefer clock speed over number of cores. with that said, you dont really need a very high o/c for turbo mode and you could probably lower it a tad along with voltage.


----------



## Mathragh (Feb 3, 2012)

xBruce88x said:


> if i remember right, turbo mode only overclocks 2 cores while downclocking the others to stay within tdp. this is why when all cores are loaded turbo mode doesnt kick in. turbo mode is more or less for apps that dont take advantage of multiple threads and prefer clock speed over number of cores. with that said, you dont really need a very high o/c for turbo mode and you could probably lower it a tad along with voltage.



In Llano, i dont think Turbo underclocks the cores not being turbo-ed.

Just take a look at the screenies in the first post, both CPU-Z and that tweak utility show that cores turbo, while the rest of the cores stay in the P1-state. Turbo also ups the voltage for the whole CPU plane, so the increased voltage should increase heat.

However, as his Turbo state doesnt have a higher voltage than the P1-state, higher temperatures because of momentary higher voltages cant happen.

I'm also wondering how low you got the voltage at the end, Yo_Wattup!


----------



## Yo_Wattup (Feb 3, 2012)

It was getting close to beer time last night, so I finished at 1.120V.  Resuming this morning, and I got down to 1.060V before FINALLY getting my first blue screen, sticking to 1.072V now.  Ambient air temp is a bit cooler than last night, 100% load is at 36C. Idle is 18C which is around ambient temp.  Now trying for as low voltage I can get in P7/6 state (400/800mhz), Coz sometimes my GF forgets to turn it of during the day, pumping up my electricity bill, :shadedshu so I if I could get the voltage uber-low, combined with the onboard graphics, I'd end up with quite the power saving-rig. Hahaha, charge an iPod from it and it doubles energy consumption..


----------



## Mathragh (Feb 3, 2012)

Whoah! thats some insanely low volts for 3,6Ghz O.O, the lappy doesnt even get close to 3Ghz at that voltage!

You must really have a great chip good for you!

Lets just hope it can survive a night stress testing at that voltage^^


----------



## xBruce88x (Feb 5, 2012)

looks like a handy guide/tool. Gave you a thanks since i linked it in another thread.


----------



## NdMk2o1o (Feb 6, 2012)

Will this work for an E-450 also? just got my new lappy this morning and can't wait to get home and play with it


----------



## Mathragh (Feb 6, 2012)

NdMk2o1o said:


> Will this work for an E-450 also? just got my new lappy this morning and can't wait to get home and play with it



This one wont, but if you look at the bottom of my first post, theres a link to a tool for the E450(brazos)

Havent heard of anyone else using that one for his brazos, so looking forward to hearing about some results!

Oh! IIRC, the tool for brazos only supports voltage tweaking and not the increase of the multiplier, as the mult isnt upwards unlocked(like in Llano). Perhaps you can let it run at turbo frequencies at stock though.


----------



## NdMk2o1o (Feb 6, 2012)

Mathragh said:


> This one wont, but if you look at the bottom of my first post, theres a link to a tool for the E450(brazos)
> 
> Havent heard of anyone else using that one for his brazos, so looking forward to hearing about some results!
> 
> Oh! IIRC, the tool for brazos only supports voltage tweaking and not the increase of the multiplier, as the mult isnt upwards unlocked(like in Llano). Perhaps you can let it run at turbo frequencies at stock though.



Ah damn, I can't find anything about the turbo on an e-450 are you sure you are not just referring to the grahics ability to clock up to 600mhz from 508? with the brazos tool can you adjust the bclk?


----------



## Mathragh (Feb 6, 2012)

I dont think so, but i'd suggest you just give it a try!
If nothing else you can still tweak the voltage and improve power usage and battery life


----------



## NdMk2o1o (Feb 6, 2012)

Mathragh said:


> I dont think so, but i'd suggest you just give it a try!
> If nothing else you can still tweak the voltage and improve power usage and battery life



That sucks, after a bit of googling I think you're completely correct, was looking for a 2ghz+ OC , oh well. Will try out the brazos tool for voltage and report back


----------



## Yo_Wattup (Feb 7, 2012)

Okay some basic cpu benches: 

3600mhz with PassMark: (3253 overall points)






2400mhz/2700mhz turbo: (2995 points overall)





3600mhz 3dmark vantage, only cpu benches:





2400kmz/2700mhz turbo:





Overall, a little dissapointed in the performance gains, considering it was a 150% boost in frequency. But an overclock is an overclock, nonetheless, and this overclock was the easiest I've ever done.



And here's how it compares to my 4.6ghz 2500k in PassMark: (9009 points) EDIT: sorry that's 4.5ghz, 4.6 is 9188


----------



## Mathragh (Feb 7, 2012)

Thanks for those benchies!
Indeed, you'd expect some better results from such a huge overclock.
I only got the chance to test Winrar on the overclocked Llano, and with a lesser overclock it gave me +18% (from 548KB/s -> 645KB/s) with a single thread, and +21% (from 1475KB/s to 1783 KB/s) when multithreading.

However, this was with "only" a 35% OC on the turbo(from 2,3GHz to 3,1GHz), and a 38% (1,6GHz to 2,2GHz) on the non turbo.

Based on those results, i'd expect a larger boost in performance from your even higher OC.
At what speed does your memory run? Perhaps things are getting bottlenecked by slower memory (I bought 8GB 1600MHz mem for the laptop when i saw it had just 4GB of 1333MHz)


----------



## Yo_Wattup (Feb 7, 2012)

Mathragh said:


> Thanks for those benchies!
> Indeed, you'd expect some better results from such a huge overclock.
> I only got the chance to test Winrar on the overclocked Llano, and with a lesser overclock it gave me +18% (from 548KB/s -> 645KB/s) with a single thread, and +21% (from 1475KB/s to 1783 KB/s) when multithreading.
> 
> ...



The memory on her computer has always got me. It says on it, PC3 10800 (or whatever 1333mhz equates to) but in CPU-z it doesn't show the speed, just the timings which red 5-5-5-something, which leads me to believe that its not 1333mhz, but then why would it say its 1333 on the sticks?  I don't know. I'll be replacing the ram soon anyway... ill get back to ya. 

Good performance results on your machine though.  Your results are almost the exact same ratio as your overclocks (in terms of %age)... which is how it should be...


----------



## Mathragh (Feb 7, 2012)

Yo_Wattup said:


> The memory on her computer has always got me. It says on it, PC3 10800 (or whatever 1333mhz equates to) but in CPU-z it doesn't show the speed, just the timings which red 5-5-5-something, which leads me to believe that its not 1333mhz, but then why would it say its 1333 on the sticks?  I don't know. I'll be replacing the ram soon anyway... ill get back to ya.
> 
> Good performance results on your machine though.  Your results are almost the exact same ratio as your overclocks (in terms of %age)... which is how it should be...



Thanks! and aye, i'll sneak out her laptop this afternoon to do some more benching 
I'll try Passmark on it aswell, maybe it'll give some insight on the performance of your chip aswell.


----------



## wahdangun (Feb 7, 2012)

Yo_Wattup said:


> The memory on her computer has always got me. It says on it, PC3 10800 (or whatever 1333mhz equates to) but in CPU-z it doesn't show the speed, just the timings which red 5-5-5-something, which leads me to believe that its not 1333mhz, but then why would it say its 1333 on the sticks?  I don't know. I'll be replacing the ram soon anyway... ill get back to ya.
> 
> Good performance results on your machine though.  Your results are almost the exact same ratio as your overclocks (in terms of %age)... which is how it should be...



and make sure you get at least 1866 ram, because llano really bandwidth starved


----------



## Yo_Wattup (Feb 7, 2012)

wahdangun said:


> and make sure you get at least 1866 ram, because llano really bandwidth starved



meh, its just the gf's rig, ima just get 4-8gb 1600


----------



## Mathragh (Feb 7, 2012)

KK! got some passmark results, and they look promising!

Stock (1,6GHz - 2,3GHz Turbo)





OC (2,2GHz - 3,1GHz Turbo)





Thats more like it!

A ~30% increase!

Also means that indeed your processor is probably greatly bottlenecked by the RAM

EDIT: Can I also ask a Moderator to change the Thread title into "Awesome Llano Overclocking Tool"? (without the "mobile" part and with the addition of Tool, since the tool is quite significant to the successes we've been having here, and that it doesnt only work for mobile Llano's)


----------



## Yo_Wattup (Feb 8, 2012)

Mathragh said:


> KK! got some passmark results, and they look promising!
> 
> Stock (1,6GHz - 2,3GHz Turbo)
> http://i204.photobucket.com/albums/bb205/maffraff/PassmarkStock.png
> ...



Thats sweet as man! So your 2200mhz mobile llano is not far behind my 3600mhz desktop llano.. I will definitely be getting some better ram soon.  BTW what RAM/speed you running?

Also it's much easier to just message a random mod to change the title. Try mussels he's pretty cool.


----------



## Mathragh (Feb 8, 2012)

Yo_Wattup said:


> Thats sweet as man! So your 2200mhz mobile llano is not far behind my 3600mhz desktop llano.. I will definitely be getting some better ram soon.  BTW what RAM/speed you running?
> 
> Also it's much easier to just message a random mod to change the title. Try mussels he's pretty cool.



I'm running 1600MHz, as thats the highest this chip can do stock.

Your chip on the other hand should be able to do 1866MHz. 

I've also found some performance comparison graphs which show what faster memory can do for your chip, even at stock speeds here, and here.

Hope it helps in your descision making^^.

Also thanks for the tip! I will PM mussels.


----------



## RejZoR (Feb 8, 2012)

Can FusionTweaker be used on Zacate class APU's as well? I'm thinking of giving it a spin on my E-450 (Compaq CQ57).


----------



## Mathragh (Feb 8, 2012)

RejZoR said:


> Can FusionTweaker be used on Zacate class APU's as well? I'm thinking of giving it a spin on my E-450 (Compaq CQ57).



No, but BrazosTweaker can, but i believe the multiplier isnt partially unlocked in brazos, unlike in Llano, so that kinda limits to overclocking. Howerver, you can still tweak the voltage.

A link to brazostweaker is at the bottom of my first post.


----------



## Mussels (Feb 8, 2012)

seems like an alternative to K10stat, which i used for similar results.


----------



## Mathragh (Feb 8, 2012)

Mussels said:


> seems like an alternative to K10stat, which i used for similar results.



Aye, I think its from the same author.


----------



## Mussels (Feb 8, 2012)

http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2523057&postcount=11


^ this post here has a laptop review i'm working on slowly, and it includes some power saving results. so far i've managed a 10% battery life boost, with a 600Mhz overclock XD more tests to come!


----------



## Mathragh (Feb 8, 2012)

Mussels said:


> http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2523057&postcount=11
> 
> 
> ^ this post here has a laptop review i'm working on slowly, and it includes some power saving results. so far i've managed a 10% battery life boost, with a 600Mhz overclock XD more tests to come!



Awesome!
Sounds exactly like my laptop overclocking experiences, with both the speed increase and power savings at the same time haha.

The review seems quite nice and thourough, however, maybe you should mention the impact the extra stick of RAM would probably have on performance, as the doubling of RAM bandwith probably does loads for the performance.

Keep up the good work!


----------



## Mussels (Feb 8, 2012)

i'll have to do that.


does this tool have the option to lock to certain clocks? trying to lock to 800Mhz for power tests, but its not sticking on K10 stat.


----------



## Mathragh (Feb 8, 2012)

Mussels said:


> i'll have to do that.
> 
> 
> does this tool have the option to lock to certain clocks? trying to lock to 800Mhz for power tests, but its not sticking on K10 stat.



Nope, I used windows advanced power management for that. You'll have to fiddle a bit with the max clock percentages, but you should be able to get it not to clock over 800MHz with that


----------



## Mussels (Feb 8, 2012)

Mathragh said:


> Nope, I used windows advanced power management for that. You'll have to fiddle a bit with the max clock percentages, but you should be able to get it not to clock over 800MHz with that



oh duh, you can do it via CCC/AMD vision center as well, i just forgot that we can mix and match programs there.


----------



## Mathragh (Feb 8, 2012)

Mussels said:


> oh duh, you can do it via CCC/AMD vision center as well, i just forgot that we can mix and match programs there.



Ha! true!

forgot about vision center aswell 

EDIT:
haha now i remember, and I did not forget. I couldnt use vision because i lowered the lowest P-state multiplier to 5 instead of the stock 8. That way the idle voltage is now 0,65 Volts, but you cannot get that low with vision center

Xibit Edit:
And also, thanks for changing the Thread Title!


----------



## NdMk2o1o (Feb 8, 2012)

*Can overclock brazos :d*

Just found out you can overclock Brazos, not by the multi but by the multi ratio, default for p0 is 33 / 1 = 1650mhz, changed it to 33 / 1.5 and bam I have a 2200mhz chip in p0 state  going to find the max oc with default voltage and then see if I can reduce the voltage as well


----------



## Mathragh (Feb 8, 2012)

NdMk2o1o said:


> Just found out you can overclock Brazos, not by the multi but by the multi ratio, default for p0 is 33 / 1 = 1650mhz, changed it to 33 / 1.5 and bam I have a 2200mhz chip in p0 state  going to find the max oc with default voltage and then see if I can reduce the voltage as well



VERY nice!!

This will make lots of people happy!

Great find man!


----------



## NdMk2o1o (Feb 8, 2012)

Mathragh said:


> VERY nice!!
> 
> This will make lots of people happy!
> 
> Great find man!


----------



## Mathragh (Feb 8, 2012)

Whoah! awesome! In what steps can you set the divider? 

I wonder what brazos can do, coz as far as I know, there hasnt been done alot of Brazos OC-ing yet! 

exitinggg


----------



## NdMk2o1o (Feb 8, 2012)

Mathragh said:


> Whoah! awesome! In what steps can you set the divider?
> 
> I wonder what brazos can do, coz as far as I know, there hasnt been done alot of Brazos OC-ing yet!
> 
> exitinggg



steps are 0.25 

NB seemed to be running toasty at 64c so am going to drop the NB voltages and mess with p2 state as p1 never seemes to be used from what I have observed and hopefully find a nice blend of power and performance


----------



## Mathragh (Feb 8, 2012)

NdMk2o1o said:


> steps are 0.25
> 
> NB seemed to be running toasty at 64c so am going to drop the NB voltages and mess with p2 state as p1 never seemes to be used from what I have observed and hopefully find a nice blend of power and performance



Okay!

Isnt the NB also on the APU chip itself? If so, It might also pay to drop the CPU volts.

anyway, keep up the awesomesauce


----------



## NdMk2o1o (Feb 8, 2012)

Mathragh said:


> Okay!
> 
> Isnt the NB also on the APU chip itself? If so, It might also pay to drop the CPU volts.
> 
> anyway, keep up the awesomesauce



Seems stable at 2.6ghz on P0 state, vcore reduced from 1.35v at stock 1.65ghz to 1.3v in the process


----------



## Mathragh (Feb 8, 2012)

NdMk2o1o said:


> Seems stable at 2.6ghz on P0 state, vcore reduced from 1.35v at stock 1.65ghz to 1.3v in the process



That's great man! A massive 58% overclock at lower voltages than at stock.

I guess this calls for another thread title modification, since Brazos is now also being awesomely overclocked.


----------



## NdMk2o1o (Feb 8, 2012)

Mathragh said:


> That's great man! A massive 58% overclock at lower voltages than at stock.
> 
> I guess this calls for another thread title modification, since Brazos is now also being awesomely overclocked.



Passes IBT at 2,6ghz, ran 3dmark01 and scored 8500... seems slow considering it's a DX11 GPU, just installed Steam and L4D2 is now downloaded so going to see how playable it is 

Do I dare shoot for 3.3ghz? lol


----------



## Mathragh (Feb 8, 2012)

As long as your temps are kept in check, I guess why not!
Also, isn't there a way you could actually lower the mult itself? Perhaps with fusiontweaker or k10stat.
It would be nice if you could make the overclocking a bit more granular


----------



## Yo_Wattup (Feb 8, 2012)

NdMk2o1o said:


> steps are 0.25
> 
> NB seemed to be running toasty at 64c so am going to drop the NB voltages and mess with p2 state as p1 never seemes to be used from what I have observed and hopefully find a nice blend of power and performance



So what are your max clocks on p1/p2 state? you should be able to lower your voltage plently lower than 1.3V, or overclock plenty more.


----------



## NdMk2o1o (Feb 8, 2012)

Yo_Wattup said:


> So what are your max clocks on p1/p2 state? you should be able to lower your voltage plently lower than 1.3V, or overclock plenty more.



555mhz/0.8v & 1200mhz/0.85v

bear in mind 1.3 is for 2.6ghz where default was 1.65ghz@1.35v


----------



## Yo_Wattup (Feb 8, 2012)

NdMk2o1o said:


> 555mhz/0.8v & 1200mhz/0.85v
> 
> bear in mind 1.3 is for 2.6ghz where default was 1.65ghz@1.35v



Okay so p0 isnt like a turbo state like quad core desktop llanos, its more like a 'regular' state while p1/p2 are power saving states correct?


----------



## NdMk2o1o (Feb 8, 2012)

Yo_Wattup said:


> Okay so p0 isnt like a turbo state like quad core desktop llanos, its more like a 'regular' state while p1/p2 are power saving states correct?



P0 state is 100%, P1 is 1/2 and P2 is 1/3 give or take but as you see you can adjust them. 

Who's ready for some awesome shit? Brazos E-450 1.65ghz with a whopping 100% overclock...... 3.3ghz IBT stable...........


----------



## Yo_Wattup (Feb 8, 2012)

Epiiiiiiiic! Don't stop there man! Go as high as you can @ 1.35V! 

Also its a good idea to do some benches to see if your ram is holding you back like mine.


----------



## NdMk2o1o (Feb 8, 2012)

Yo_Wattup said:


> Epiiiiiiiic! Don't stop there man! Go as high as you can @ 1.35V!
> 
> Also its a good idea to do some benches to see if your ram is holding you back like mine.



Can't go any higher as am limited to a 33x1 ratio, can't go lower than 1


----------



## pantherx12 (Feb 8, 2012)

Damn thanks for sharing this guys!

May actually recommend these laptops to people now!


----------



## Mussels (Feb 9, 2012)

pantherx12 said:


> Damn thanks for sharing this guys!
> 
> May actually recommend these laptops to people now!



mine kicks ass, only starcraft II gives me trouble due to engine limitations on anything but low settings. (pylon bug)


stupidly power efficient at idle, with good performance too.


----------



## NdMk2o1o (Feb 9, 2012)

Yo_Wattup said:


> Epiiiiiiiic! Don't stop there man! Go as high as you can @ 1.35V!
> 
> Also its a good idea to do some benches to see if your ram is holding you back like mine.



What RAM do you have? I have a single 4GB stick @1333 9.9.9


----------



## Mathragh (Feb 9, 2012)

NdMk2o1o said:


> What RAM do you have? I have a single 4GB stick @1333 9.9.9



Thats as fast as your chip will do, so you're good when to comes to RAM


----------



## Yo_Wattup (Feb 9, 2012)

NdMk2o1o said:


> What RAM do you have? I have a single 4GB stick @1333 9.9.9



See posts #40.  

Your ram should be okay. You'd benefit from 1600mhz ram, but if what Mathragh said is true, then dont worry bout it.


----------



## MadduckUK (Feb 12, 2012)

NdMk2o1o - sorry to piss on your chips here, but i think rather tan getting a 100% overclock with no voltage increase i think there could be another far more boring explenation. Could we have some benchies, at least superpi to show that ANYTHING is happening other than cpuz misreporting the speed?

Iv got an e450 x121e on order, and an overclock of any sort would be the icing on the cake, but y'know.. realistically iv seen similar phantom overclocks before


----------



## Mussels (Feb 13, 2012)

MadduckUK said:


> NdMk2o1o - sorry to piss on your chips here, but i think rather tan getting a 100% overclock with no voltage increase i think there could be another far more boring explenation. Could we have some benchies, at least superpi to show that ANYTHING is happening other than cpuz misreporting the speed?
> 
> Iv got an e450 x121e on order, and an overclock of any sort would be the icing on the cake, but y'know.. realistically iv seen similar phantom overclocks before



it works on these chips, i've got similar clocks. AMD is underclocking them seriously. i've done 1.4 -> 2.8 on my laptop nice and stable, the cooling just couldnt keep up long term.


----------



## MadduckUK (Feb 13, 2012)

Mussels said:


> it works on these chips, i've got similar clocks. AMD is underclocking them seriously. i've done 1.4 -> 2.8 on my laptop nice and stable, the cooling just couldnt keep up long term.




No, im serious.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3SRjS1HURjc

It needs to be verified so we know it isn't like this. 

Its like this isn't it  oh well



> Example:
> E-350 - 1.6GHz
> FSB 100MHz
> Multiplier 32x
> ...



http://code.google.com/p/brazostweaker/wiki/UserguideBrazosTweaker


----------



## Yo_Wattup (Feb 13, 2012)

MadduckUK said:


> No, im serious.
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3SRjS1HURjc
> 
> ...



That youtube dude's ram is likely the bottleneck, we've been over this.


----------



## Mathragh (Feb 13, 2012)

Well, i can say with certainty that the overclock on llano is working. There's some benchies further up the thread to back that up.
 I have no reason to believe the OC on Brazos isn't working. However, I'm still curious about benchies, as no one has both overclocked, and benched brazos in this thread before. 
So, just to get this rumour of the OC not working on brazos out of the air, could someone here who has OCed brazos post some benchies of before, and after the OC?

EDIT: indeed it seems the author of the software states that this overclock doesn't work, and that cpu-z reports the frequency wrongly. Makes me even more curious, but doesn't bode well


----------



## HTC (Feb 13, 2012)

I tried tinkering with this and did some benches using IBT and it was looking good:







Tinkered some more and was going from this:






To this:






Did some IBT to check for stability and, after passing, updated the service and applied before moving on to the next P-State and then, just after applying P2 it crashed 
Had to go to safe mode and disable the service to enter windows normally again and tried increasing voltage on that P-State but it still crashed 

OK: let's start over! Disabled FusionTweaker's service again in safe mode and, after entering normally into windows, updated the service with the default values (those in the 2nd pic). Changed P7 to 6 multi @ 0.725 (that's 0.05 more then before), ran IBT which passed with flying colors and then, after updating and applying, it crashed again ... WTF  it didn't do this with 0.05 volts less before but now it does? WTH 

It's back @ default again and only on power saver scheme


----------



## Mathragh (Feb 13, 2012)

Perhaps you should test your settings without making a process for it. If you simply click on "apply" the settings will get saved, but your processor will be at stock again after a reboot, or bluescreen. Apart from that, maybe temps have something to do with your results? Higher temps usually mean a higher voltage is needed.

Don't give up tweaking! There's bound to be some gain to be had with your processor


----------



## MadduckUK (Feb 13, 2012)

Yo_Wattup said:


> That youtube dude's ram is likely the bottleneck, we've been over this.







Mathragh said:


> Well, i can say with certainty that the overclock on llano is working. There's some benchies further up the thread to back that up.
> I have no reason to believe the OC on Brazos isn't working. However, I'm still curious about benchies, as no one has both overclocked, and benched brazos in this thread before.
> So, just to get this rumour of the OC not working on brazos out of the air, could someone here who has OCed brazos post some benchies of before, and after the OC?
> 
> EDIT: indeed it seems the author of the software states that this overclock doesn't work, and that cpu-z reports the frequency wrongly. Makes me even more curious, but doesn't bode well




Well ill be able to test it hopefully tomorrow, latest wednesday. I'm pretty sure what is going to happen though.


----------



## HTC (Feb 13, 2012)

Mathragh said:


> *Perhaps you should test your settings without making a process for it.* If you simply click on "apply" the settings will get saved, but your processor will be at stock again after a reboot, or bluescreen. Apart from that, maybe temps have something to do with your results? Higher temps usually mean a higher voltage is needed.
> 
> Don't give up tweaking! There's bound to be some gain to be had with your processor



You may have miss understood me: i tested 1st and, after passing, i updated the service. The thing is, @ 1st it was OK up to P2 and then it crashed. When i tried it again, it didn't even make P7 without crashing (not the IBT: the service update) and that was with 0.05 more volts.


----------



## Mathragh (Feb 13, 2012)

Oops, I think you may be correct. my bad.
 That just leaves heat, or a weird bios bug as a potential explanation. Weird.
Are all the other P-states still working at lower voltage? 
also, is there any specific reason you're using the power saver scheme?


----------



## HTC (Feb 13, 2012)

Mathragh said:


> Oops, I think you may be correct. my bad.
> That just leaves heat, or a weird bios bug as a potential explanation. Weird.
> Are all the other P-states still working at lower voltage?
> also, is there any specific reason you're using the power saver scheme?



I had it @ performance and was using all the P-states @ the same multi and volts except those that were tested and passed.

Example: all P-states @ 6 multi with 0.675 volts and, after it passed IBT, updated service and applied, all P-states except P7 @ 9 multi with 0.7375, and so on, all the way to P2 when it crashed after updating service.

When i tried it again, wasn't even able to set P7 and that was with 0.05 more volts: crashed right after updating service.

Gave up on that figuring some sort of bug and placed it on power saver scheme.


----------



## NdMk2o1o (Feb 13, 2012)

MadduckUK said:


> NdMk2o1o - sorry to piss on your chips here, but i think rather tan getting a 100% overclock with no voltage increase i think there could be another far more boring explenation. Could we have some benchies, at least superpi to show that ANYTHING is happening other than cpuz misreporting the speed?



Trust me its doing something as heat increased substantially aswell due to higher clocks and it felt a lot more responsive not too mention I got an 5fps increase in COD MW1, I did run IBT though only to test for stability not benches, will try and do a 3dmark run and super pi1m of before and after tonight, not doing much else as I don't really have time though that should answer your question


----------



## MadduckUK (Feb 13, 2012)

NdMk2o1o said:


> Trust me its doing something as heat increased substantially aswell due to higher clocks and it felt a lot more responsive not too mention I got an 5fps increase in COD MW1, I did run IBT though only to test for stability not benches, will try and do a 3dmark run and super pi1m of before and after tonight, not doing much else as I don't really have time though that should answer your question



thank you, this is exactly what we need 

people are going to go CRAZY for brazos lappies/netbooks if this pans out.


----------



## Mathragh (Feb 13, 2012)

HTC said:


> I had it @ performance and was using all the P-states @ the same multi and volts except those that were tested and passed.
> 
> Example: all P-states @ 6 multi with 0.675 volts and, after it passed IBT, updated service and applied, all P-states except P7 @ 9 multi with 0.7375, and so on, all the way to P2 when it crashed after updating service.
> 
> ...



Thats really weird.

The only thing I can suggest then is retry the lowest voltage for every P-state.

I'm not sure whats causing the instability, it could be heat(although I doubt it), it could be a bios issue, or even a motherboard issue(Voltage regulators getting weird at low volts(I dont have a clue)).



MadduckUK said:


> thank you, this is exactly what we need
> 
> people are going to go CRAZY for brazos lappies/netbooks if this pans out.



Also remember that NdMk2o1o has a newer Brazos, the E450(clocked at 1,65GHz instead of 1,60GHz). Perhaps this explains why he can overclock, while others have failed before(with a E350)


----------



## MadduckUK (Feb 13, 2012)

Mathragh said:


> Also remember that NdMk2o1o has a newer Brazos, the E450(clocked at 1,65GHz instead of 1,60GHz). Perhaps this explains why he can overclock, while others have failed before(with a E350)



you never know, it could be as simple as that 

edit: this could really do with its own thread now, or at least when the results of benchies get dropped. Far too important to be hanging out in a Llano thread. 

edit again: we should be looking at a passmark of:

751 @ 1650 (stock)
1000 @ 2200
1180 @ 2600
1500 @ 3300

... roughly... using known values of the E-300, E-350 and E-450.


----------



## MadduckUK (Feb 15, 2012)

right, x121e E-450 has just arrived, at work though so will have to wait until later - but at least ill get a definite answer at some point today 

edit: ill also find out if its a red or a black lid - laptop roulette 

edit2: couldn't wait, its red - although a very nice red that photos don't do justice to i have to say.


----------



## InnocentCriminal (Feb 15, 2012)

I was reading about this over at semi-accurate. _Really_ want to be able to give this a shot on my old man's new Dell M5040.

Great thread btw guys!


----------



## Mathragh (Feb 15, 2012)

MadduckUK said:


> right, x121e E-450 has just arrived, at work though so will have to wait until later - but at least ill get a definite answer at some point today
> 
> edit: ill also find out if its a red or a black lid - laptop roulette
> 
> edit2: couldn't wait, its red - although a very nice red that photos don't do justice to i have to say.



Awesome man! congratulations!

Red also suits the time of the year 

Cant wait to hear about the OC-ing results!


----------



## MadduckUK (Feb 15, 2012)

Mathragh said:


> Awesome man! congratulations!
> 
> Red also suits the time of the year
> 
> Cant wait to hear about the OC-ing results!



Well wait no longer! 

As i feared "overclocking" does bugger all :shadedshu

sandra cpu, wprime, super pi, im not bothering with anything else until NdMk2o1o comes back with some numbers that suggest it works  then we can figure out if there is an undocumented step or something.


----------



## Yo_Wattup (Feb 16, 2012)

MadduckUK said:


> Well wait no longer!
> 
> As i feared "overclocking" does bugger all :shadedshu
> 
> sandra cpu, wprime, super pi, im not bothering with anything else until NdMk2o1o comes back with some numbers that suggest it works  then we can figure out if there is an undocumented step or something.



Try OCing your ram.


----------



## MadduckUK (Feb 16, 2012)

Yo_Wattup said:


> Try OCing your ram.



sure, link?


----------



## Mathragh (Feb 16, 2012)

Yo_Wattup said:


> Try OCing your ram.



Unless his bios has a specific option for overclocking the RAM, i doubt its possible.

Also, he should atleast see SOME increase when overclocking, if only in temperature, or benchmarks that fit in the L2 cache(prime95 can do that i think)


----------



## MadduckUK (Feb 16, 2012)

Mathragh said:


> Unless his bios has a specific option for overclocking the RAM, i doubt its possible.



there is no ram adjustment of any sort, Yo_Wattup is most probably well aware of this. is it some sort of forum in-joke?


----------



## NdMk2o1o (Feb 16, 2012)

MadduckUK said:


> Well wait no longer!
> 
> As i feared "overclocking" does bugger all :shadedshu
> 
> sandra cpu, wprime, super pi, im not bothering with anything else until NdMk2o1o comes back with some numbers that suggest it works  then we can figure out if there is an undocumented step or something.



Sorry completely forgot about this, I did run Super Pi, no need to run anything else as there was zero difference running at stock compared to supposed OC  did have a placebo effect though, does that count?


----------



## Mathragh (Feb 16, 2012)

NdMk2o1o said:


> Sorry completely forgot about this, I did run Super Pi, no need to run anything else as there was zero difference running at stock compared to supposed OC  did have a placebo effect though, does that count?



Awww, bummer.

Ah well, another mistery solved i guess.


----------



## Mussels (Feb 16, 2012)

ah well, at least we know it works on llano.


----------



## HTC (Feb 16, 2012)

Mussels said:


> ah well, at least we know it works on llano.



According to post #83 (check posts #86 and #88 as well) it doesn't work on all Llanos 

Since then, i tried not messing with the multi and only lower the volts (giving much higher then what's seen in post #83) and it still crashes 

Either it's a bug in the program or something in my particular hardware that prevents the program to function properly


----------



## Mussels (Feb 16, 2012)

HTC said:


> According to post #83 (check posts #86 and #88 as well) it doesn't work on all Llanos
> 
> Since then, i tried not messing with the multi and only lower the volts (giving much higher then what's seen in post #83) and it still crashes
> 
> Either it's a bug in the program or something in my particular hardware that prevents the program to function properly



mobile or desktop? seems like its the mobile ones that are teh best.


----------



## HTC (Feb 16, 2012)

Mussels said:


> mobile or desktop? seems like its the mobile ones that are teh best.



Desktop.


----------



## Mathragh (Feb 16, 2012)

Yo_Wattup also has a desktop chip, and he had some unbelievable results, apart from the fact that his RAM sucked, lol.

So i wouldnt count out desktop chips, even more, since they're actually exactly the same sillicon.
The only difference between desktop and laptop chips is how their P-states have been set(and perhaps slightly different leak-currents, favoring lower leak currents for laptop chips).


----------



## MadduckUK (Feb 16, 2012)

NdMk2o1o said:


> Sorry completely forgot about this, I did run Super Pi, no need to run anything else as there was zero difference running at stock compared to supposed OC  did have a placebo effect though, does that count?



 time for some undervolting then, if i cant have speed over stock i'll bloody well have battery life over it


----------



## Mathragh (Feb 16, 2012)

MadduckUK said:


> time for some undervolting then, if i cant have speed over stock i'll bloody well have battery life over it



Haha, thats the spirit! 

Awaiting some results!


----------



## Yo_Wattup (Feb 19, 2012)

MadduckUK said:


> there is no ram adjustment of any sort, Yo_Wattup is most probably well aware of this. is it some sort of forum in-joke?



I am not well aware of that, why would there not be an option in bios to adjust your memory? I was just trying to help.. don't get your panties in a bunch..


----------



## MadduckUK (Feb 20, 2012)

Yo_Wattup said:


> I am not well aware of that, why would there not be an option in bios to adjust your memory? I was just trying to help.. don't get your panties in a bunch..



you sound SEETHING


----------



## HTC (Feb 21, 2012)

Managed to get it to work but @ much higher voltages then before.

Default voltages:







Current voltages:






Some testing using IBT and 4 GB RAM:







Not so sure is stable because, while i was trying to test some voltages, it crashed right after *successfully passing IBT*, which leads me to believe this test doesn't work so well for stability proofing, @ least not for APUs.


----------



## Yo_Wattup (Feb 21, 2012)

MadduckUK said:


> you sound SEETHING



*facepalm*

Ok.

For the record are you a female?


----------



## Mathragh (Feb 21, 2012)

HTC said:


> Managed to get it to work but @ much higher voltages then before.
> 
> Not so sure is stable because, while i was trying to test some voltages, it crashed right after *successfully passing IBT*, which leads me to believe this test doesn't work so well for stability proofing, @ least not for APUs.



Those voltages seem way more plausible tbh, Thats about as much of a voltage drop as mine does.

Also, for real stability testing, you should also test the turbo seperately from full load, as turbo usually doesnt kick in when all 4 threads are at full load. Also, testing your APU with both the CPU, and GPU part fully loaded will be the best way to test for stability at full load, since only then the temperature will reach the highest they can go.

Another point; since turbo doesnt really kick in when the chip is under the most load anyway, you can be safe with higher voltages, and thus a higher frequency, without it costing you alot of power and heat. So I recon you can get alot more out of that turbo state!
(you can start by just leaving the turbo voltage at what it was, and testing for the max stable frequency at that voltage)

Keep it up!


----------



## HTC (Feb 21, 2012)

Mathragh said:


> Those voltages seem way more plausible tbh, Thats about as much of a voltage drop as mine does.
> 
> Also, for real stability testing, you should also test the turbo seperately from full load, as turbo usually doesnt kick in when all 4 threads are at full load. Also, testing your APU with both the CPU, and GPU part fully loaded will be the best way to test for stability at full load, since only then the temperature will reach the highest they can go.
> 
> ...



Had to increase one voltage increment in all PStates: it was crashing and i didn't know which PState was the culprit but, for now, seems more stable.

Got all PStates to match P7 and loaded IBT: once it passed, got P1-P6 to P6 values and loaded IBT again. Did this all the way to P0. Does this not test the turbo properly?

As for the allot more from the turbo part, OCing was never my intention: cutting power was.


----------



## Mathragh (Feb 21, 2012)

HTC said:


> Had to increase one voltage increment in all PStates: it was crashing and i didn't know which PState was the culprit but, for now, seems more stable.
> 
> Got all PStates to match P7 and loaded IBT: once it passed, got P1-P6 to P6 values and loaded IBT again. Did this all the way to P0. Does this not test the turbo properly?
> 
> As for the allot more from the turbo part, OCing was never my intention: cutting power was.



How you test your turbo state is the most fail-safe, but it is also overdoing it a bit. You are testing the turbo speed on all 4 cores, while in real life in these APU's, it will never turbo all 4 cores if they are loaded fully(meaning the temperature will be a bit lower, although i guess this is more important in laptops than it is for desktops). 

Also, a higher Turbo state may actually lower power consumption a bit, as it will mean(atleast in some cases) that the processor may be going to a lower powerstate quicker aswell, and thus will stay more of its time in a idle, low power state. Also, if you want to lower your power useage, you can always lower your lowest P state multiplier to something like 5 instead of 8. This wil probably allow you to drop the voltage to somewhere around the 0,65 volts.


----------



## HTC (Feb 21, 2012)

Mathragh said:


> How you test your turbo state is the most fail-safe, but it is also overdoing it a bit. You are testing the turbo speed on all 4 cores, while in real life in these APU's, it will never turbo all 4 cores if they are loaded fully(meaning the temperature will be a bit lower, although i guess this is more important in laptops than it is for desktops).
> 
> Also, a higher Turbo state may actually lower power consumption a bit, as it will mean(atleast in some cases) that the processor may be going to a lower powerstate quicker aswell, and thus will stay more of its time in a idle, low power state. *Also, if you want to lower your power useage, you can always lower your lowest P state multiplier to something like 5 instead of 8. This wil probably allow you to drop the voltage to somewhere around the 0,65 volts.*



That's what i did @ first (check post #83): didn't work so well 

Dunno what's the default for laptops but for my APU, all of the PStates have the 4 cores @ the same multi (check pic below): doesn't this mean that the turbo, when it kicks in, does so with all 4 cores?


----------



## Mathragh (Feb 21, 2012)

HTC said:


> That's what i did @ first (check post #83): didn't work so well :



Well, I guess i can only say what I did to get to the P-state and voltage that I ended up:

First of all i just set the lowest P state mult to '5'.
Then i get into the advanced power management section of windows, and set the maximum processor frequency of my current power scheme to something like '5%', so the APU wouldnt go higher than its lowest P-state.
After that i just started lowering the voltage, and noting the voltage I was on, untill i got a bluescreen.
Then i booted back  up, and set the voltages 2 steps higher than where I bluescreened.

Its been stable for over a month now this way




HTC said:


> Dunno what's the default for laptops but for my APU, all of the PStates have the 4 cores @ the same multi (check pic below): doesn't this mean that the turbo, when it kicks in, does so with all 4 cores?
> 
> http://img.techpowerup.org/120213/2012-02-11_130818.png



Nope, that only means that the turbo will turbo all the cores up to the same frequency, (instead of like, one core turbo-ing to 2,9GHz, while another goes only up to 2,8GHz) Llano's can alter the P-state for all cores seperately I think.


----------



## Mussels (Feb 21, 2012)

in the program i use, turbo has its own P state and a checkbox to disable it. the reason it has it visible on all four cores is because any two of the four can run at turbo - and they swap in real time.

its not like core 0 + 1 turbo and the threads are moved to it, the cores the active threads are on have turbo go to them - and if those threads move, so does the turbo.


----------



## Steevo (Feb 21, 2012)

Mathragh said:


> Thats really weird.
> 
> The only thing I can suggest then is retry the lowest voltage for every P-state.
> 
> ...


Mine did the same, it was caused by the miniscule time difference in the request for more power and the actual delivery at the next speed/power state, bumping up the voltage cured it. I think it is also related to a weaker core that causes it.

I ran OCCT for a hour each on my lowered voltage and tweaked speeds, but still got the occasional crash, and just bumping the voltage back up a few notches from where it was stable provided the fix.




Now we need to find out how to overclock the graphics core.


----------



## Mussels (Feb 21, 2012)

Steevo said:


> Mine did the same, it was caused by the miniscule time difference in the request for more power and the actual delivery at the next speed/power state, bumping up the voltage cured it. I think it is also related to a weaker core that causes it.
> 
> I ran OCCT for a hour each on my lowered voltage and tweaked speeds, but still got the occasional crash, and just bumping the voltage back up a few notches from where it was stable provided the fix.
> 
> ...



i had to do the same thing actually, with the higher than stable voltages.

and yeah i wanna OC my APU so bad


----------



## Modestweaker (Feb 29, 2012)

I want to thank Mathragh for starting this discussion. This is the exact kind of information I was looking for. I have a Lenovo with the A63400M and I was wondering if it could live up to the AMD expectation for overclocking. I must report that I am pleased.

I ran SuperPi with stock settings getting the following numbers:




Then I bumped up my P0 profile to 3GHz and the P1 set to 2GHz. This seemed like a generous overclock without pushing the limits all day. Instant win:




Did I do my math wrong is this a %43 performance increase?


----------



## Mathragh (Feb 29, 2012)

Very nice results!!

great overclock man^^

Be sure to also give undervolting a try, most of us in this thread have been quite succesfull in lowering the power use at the same time as overclocking.

And its always nice to hear someone found my post usefull thanks!


----------



## Modestweaker (Feb 29, 2012)

Thanks,
I have turned down my idle VID until I got bluescreen. Right now I am idling at 600MHz with a VID of 0.775v.

I found through observation that my computer spends most of it's time either at P7 or P1 so these are the settings that I gave more aggressive voltage underclocks. My P1 is rocking solid at 2GHz using only 1.025V. With a heavy load on it the temperature stays about 59C after the fans pick up.


----------



## m&m's (Feb 29, 2012)

May someone run 3DMark 11 in Performance preset? With before and after overclocking? I would like the see the Detailed scores,
(3DMark Score, Graphics Score, Physics Score, Combined Score, GraphicsTest1, GraphicsTest2, GraphicsTest3, GraphicsTest4, PhysicsTest and CombinedTest). I would to see the gain in 3D that you got by overclocking your Llano!


----------



## Mathragh (Feb 29, 2012)

m&m's said:


> May someone run 3DMark 11 in Performance preset? With before and after overclocking? I would like the see the Detailed scores,
> (3DMark Score, Graphics Score, Physics Score, Combined Score, GraphicsTest1, GraphicsTest2, GraphicsTest3, GraphicsTest4, PhysicsTest and CombinedTest). I would to see the gain in 3D that you got by overclocking your Llano!



I could do that, however, remember that we're only overclocking the CPU part of the APU here.

The GPU(northbridge) part of the APU is locked sadly, so we cannot tweak that bit.

Still interested?


----------



## m&m's (Feb 29, 2012)

Mathragh said:


> I could do that, however, remember that we're only overclocking the CPU part of the APU here.
> 
> The GPU(northbridge) part of the APU is locked sadly, so we cannot tweak that bit.
> 
> Still interested?



Yes I am.


----------



## Mathragh (Feb 29, 2012)

m&m's said:


> Yes I am.



Ok, i'll give it a go tomorrow


----------



## Mathragh (Mar 1, 2012)

OK, results for 3DMark 11 are in. Did a run with both stock and OC, and both with crossfire off and on.

Crossfire acted up weird, GPU-Z reported the GPU part of the APU randomly downclocking at full load, I guess this is why hybrid crossfire performs so bad at alot of things. The FPS greatly fluctuated with crossfire aswell, jumping up and down 50% all the time and causing very visible fps drops.

Anyway, here are the results, only have links coz I dont have the full or professional version of 3DMark 11.

Stock(1,6GHz, 2,3GHz Turbo), crossfire off For some reason, it shows the speed of the CPU part as 2,2 GHz instead of stock.
OC(2,2GHz, 3,1GHz Turbo), Crossfire Off Instead of showing the OC here, the CPU speed is shown as stock.

Stock(1,6GHz, 2,3GHz Turbo), Crossfire on
OC(2,2GHz, 3,1GHz Turbo), Crossfire on


----------



## HTC (Mar 1, 2012)

Had to increase the voltages and did so across all P-States (check attachment): had freezes which only went away with a hard reset.

Tried some overclocking (P0 only) and put it @ 1.4125 voltage with multi 32 and fired up IBT. To my surprise, even though CPU-Z showed the OC, IBT had roughly the same GFlops as with the 29 multi. Tried the 34 multi with same results as 32 multi


----------



## Mathragh (Mar 1, 2012)

Weird, whats more, your service configuration shows you have 9 P-states, while the bottom two states are clearly not P-states but northbridge states. Perhaps the tweaking utility is a bit buggy with your APU.

With your RAM frequency you should definately see atleast some results at a higher clock.
Perhaps you could try something like superPI, Prime95 or Winrar?


----------



## HTC (Mar 1, 2012)

Mathragh said:


> Weird, whats more, your service configuration shows you have 9 P-states, while the bottom two states are clearly not P-states but northbridge states. Perhaps the tweaking utility is a bit buggy with your APU.
> 
> With your RAM frequency you should definately see atleast some results at a higher clock.
> *Perhaps you could try something like superPI*, Prime95 or Winrar?



With P0 @ multi 29:







With P0 @ multi 34:







Although both pics don't show, CPU-Z reported 2900 MHz on the 1st pic and 3400 MHz on the 2nd.

As you can see, virtually identical results


----------



## Mathragh (Mar 1, 2012)

HTC said:


> As you can see, virtually identical results



well, one simple way to find out if the program works: try clocking it at something like 2,3GHz and try again.

Also, are you absolutely sure your RAM runs at the 1600MHz specified in your system info?


----------



## HTC (Mar 1, 2012)

Mathragh said:


> well, one simple way to find out if the program works: try clocking it at something like 2,3GHz and try again.
> 
> Also, are you absolutely sure your RAM runs at the 1600MHz specified in your system info?



When i was testing for the different P-States (up to multi 29), IBT would respond accordingly to different multis: it's just when the multi is over 29 that it doesn't show any results.

Yes: the RAM runs @ 1600 (check attachment).


----------



## Mathragh (Mar 1, 2012)

Well, fusiontweaker simply wouldnt set the multiplier above the limit of the A6-3410MX(which was 31x), however, Yo_wattup had a higher limit, and was able to reach it. I dont know why yours doesnt seem to work though. 

Have you tried......
Windows performance index...? lol


----------



## Mussels (Mar 1, 2012)

could be temp throttling, watch the clocks in realtime (and no, not with CPU-Z. something that shows all cores)


----------



## Mathragh (Mar 1, 2012)

Mussels said:


> could be temp throttling, watch the clocks in realtime (and no, not with CPU-Z. something that shows all cores)



Fusiontweaker itself should be nice for this, shows the clocks in real time.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Mar 1, 2012)

Mathragh said:


> Fusiontweaker itself should be nice for this, shows the clocks in real time.



is that lano specific, fusion tweeker ,or will it tweek an Fx chipset


----------



## Mathragh (Mar 1, 2012)

theoneandonlymrk said:


> is that lano specific, fusion tweeker ,or will it tweek an Fx chipset



Well, its not officially supported, but ofc you could try!

It might actually work if AMD uses the same chip communication scheme for both Llano and Bulldozer.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Mar 1, 2012)

nope apparently not ,though i did get .net framework errors , i do have that upto date and working fine so id say no , ah well, i do loves me tweekin soft .

i have a beady on this thread as a lano with dual pciex16 @ 4/8 whatever, is in my mind as a possible 2nd folding rig, soon my 5800,s will need a new mobo to call home ,hopefully that is


----------



## HTC (Mar 2, 2012)

Mussels said:


> could be temp throttling, *watch the clocks in realtime* (and no, not with CPU-Z. *something that shows all cores*)





Mathragh said:


> Fusiontweaker itself should be nice for this, shows the clocks in real time.



When it was doing SuperPi, FusionTweaker said it was @ P0 state, meaning @ 2900 MHz for the 1st pic and 3400 MHz for the 2nd pic (the pics from this post).


----------



## Mathragh (Mar 2, 2012)

HTC said:


> When it was doing SuperPi, FusionTweaker said it was @ P0 state, meaning @ 2900 MHz for the 1st pic and 3400 MHz for the 2nd pic (the pics from this post).



And while it was under load, it also showed the 4 bars in the top of the fusiontweaker window, with behind those bars saying it was running at 3,4GHz? Grasping at straws here, but something must be causing this.


----------



## HTC (Mar 2, 2012)

Mathragh said:


> And while it was under load, *it also showed the 4 bars in the top of the fusiontweaker window*, with behind those bars saying it was running at 3,4GHz? Grasping at straws here, but something must be causing this.



If you mean those green bars, yes.

Does this pic help (attachment)? Took it during SuperPi.


----------



## Mathragh (Mar 2, 2012)

Yep, that was it, thank you.

What are your temps like?  Do you think it would be possible to clock the CPU higher than 3,4GHz? Also, you might want to clock your P1 state the same as your P0 state, see if that helps...


----------



## HTC (Mar 2, 2012)

Mathragh said:


> Yep, that was it, thank you.
> 
> What are your temps like?  Do you think it would be possible to clock the CPU higher than 3,4GHz? Also, you might want to clock your P1 state the same as your P0 state, see if that helps...



Max is 3.6 GHz @ 1.4125 volts: it doesn't allow any higher.

Here's a pic (attachment) of it while running SuperPi. It scored worse then @ 2900: 25.848.

As for temps, i don't really know. I use a Noctua NH-C12P.


----------



## Mathragh (Mar 2, 2012)

HTC said:


> Max is 3.6 GHz @ 1.4125 volts: it doesn't allow any higher.
> 
> Here's a pic (attachment) of it while running SuperPi. It scored worse then @ 2900: 25.848.
> 
> As for temps, i don't really know. I use a Noctua NH-C12P.



Ok, you might want to monitor your temps then, throttling might explain everything.

try this for monitoring your temperatures.


----------



## HTC (Mar 2, 2012)

Mathragh said:


> Ok, you might want to monitor your temps then, throttling might explain everything.
> 
> try this for monitoring your temperatures.



Check attachment.


----------



## Mathragh (Mar 2, 2012)

HTC said:


> Check attachment.



Those temperatures are way off. Unless you're sitting outside with an ambient temperature of sub zero, your CPU temperature sensors are way off. Thats probably a faulty sensor for you. Is there a way you can force the CPU fan to run at 100% in the bios?


----------



## HTC (Mar 2, 2012)

Mathragh said:


> Those temperatures are way off. Unless you're sitting outside with an ambient temperature of sub zero, your CPU temperature sensors are way off. Thats probably a faulty sensor for you. Is there a way you can force the CPU fan to run at 100% in the bios?



I think so: would have to check.

You really think the temps are off? It's a bit chilly here and, according to a small temp monitoring box i have on top of my case, it's 19.4º C (check attachment).


----------



## Mathragh (Mar 2, 2012)

HTC said:


> I think so: would have to check.
> 
> You really think the temps are off? It's a bit chilly here and, according to a small temp monitoring box i have on top of my case, it's 19.4º C (check attachment).



Yeah, but Hwmonitor showed your min temps as 3 degrees, hardware can NEVER(with air cooling) be cooler than the ambient air, so my guess is your CPU is getting too hot, but the motherboard isnt aware and doesnt spin up the CPU fan to cool the CPU down. This in turn can cause thermal throttling and can also explain why your scores at 3,6GHz are actually a bit lower, since you upped the voltage a bit for that, which will cause the CPU to throttle even quicker.


----------



## HTC (Mar 2, 2012)

Mathragh said:


> Yeah, but Hwmonitor showed your min temps as 3 degrees, hardware can NEVER(with air cooling) be cooler than the ambient air, so my guess is your CPU is getting too hot, but the motherboard isnt aware and doesnt spin up the CPU fan to cool the CPU down. This in turn can cause thermal throttling and can also explain why your scores at 3,6GHz are actually a bit lower, since you upped the voltage a bit for that, which will cause the CPU to throttle even quicker.



I think it's the temp sensor acting up.

Here's a pic while using OCCT (attachment).


----------



## Mathragh (Mar 2, 2012)

Then, I dont have a clue.... Perhaps someone else has a better idea?


----------



## HTC (Mar 2, 2012)

Mathragh said:


> Then, I dont have a clue.... Perhaps someone else has a better idea?



It ain't only the temps that seem messed up: check the voltages in my previous post's pic.

In any case, it's not really a problem since i'm not looking to overclock. This was a test exercise: a failed one, it seems.


----------



## DaC (Mar 7, 2012)

Ok guys..... I just finished tweaking my llano a4-3310MX from my Samsung 305v4a notebook.
I'm using 2x2gb @1066 for awhile

units: mhz@v
P7 From 800@0.8** to 500@0.6875
P6 From 1000@0.9** to 1000@0.8125
P5 From 1200@1.050 to 1200@0.8625
P4 From 1400@1.150 to 1400@0.9250
P3 From 1600@1.2125 to 1600@0.9750
P2 From 1800@1.2750 to 2000@1.0875 @ 75.5C during OCCT stress test
P1 From 2100@1.3750 to 2500@1.2500 @ 83.5C during OCCT stress test
P0 From 2500@1.4125 to 3000@1.3625

Default clock 2100@1.3750 temps were around 83C during OCCT stress test
What do you guys think about these temps ? I saw over amd website that this cpu thermal desing is 100C.


----------



## Mathragh (Mar 7, 2012)

Very nice!! 
looks good, and those temps are OK, you wouldnt want to go a lot higher, but seeing that your stock temps were about the same, i'd say you're fine

Congratulations on the overclock man!


----------



## Yo_Wattup (Mar 7, 2012)

You could probably try lowering the voltages further. 

And I still haven't got faster RAM... must get onto that...


----------



## Mathragh (Mar 7, 2012)

Hehe, those voltages seem about right for a laptop chip, they need a bit more voltage since they run quite a bit hotter. They're around the same volts as I use.

Also, you should get 2 of these RAM sticks, they rock for the money


----------



## DaC (Mar 8, 2012)

Mathragh said:


> Very nice!!
> looks good, and those temps are OK, you wouldnt want to go a lot higher, but seeing that your stock temps were about the same, i'd say you're fine
> 
> Congratulations on the overclock man!



Thanks man! This software you showed me is really great!
I miss the gpu and north bridge settings to be working..... well anyway, one day they'll probably make it work...



Yo_Wattup said:


> You could probably try lowering the voltages further.
> 
> And I still haven't got faster RAM... must get onto that...



Well... I actually can't..... on all my tests I lowered the vcore to the point the system locked or reboot then  uped a notch the vcore and repeated the stress tests.... these really are the minimum for my chip....
To tell the truth I just had to up a notch the P0 state from the turbo.

I'm planning to get these rams Crucial 8GB (2 x 4GB) 204-Pin DDR3 SO-DIMM DDR3 13...

I'm only concerned because I saw nowhere whatever this chip supports 8gb of ram.


----------



## Mathragh (Mar 8, 2012)

DaC said:


> I'm planning to get these rams Crucial 8GB (2 x 4GB) 204-Pin DDR3 SO-DIMM DDR3 13...
> 
> I'm only concerned because I saw nowhere whatever this chip supports 8gb of ram.



Yeah, i dont know whether NB voltage and divider will ever be supported, but we can always hope I'm more curious as to whether Trinity will be supported aswell. Would be awesome for people to be able to OC and undervolt that too when it comes out.

And your chip does support 8GB of 1333MHz RAM, so you dont have to worry about that.


----------



## InternalSys (Mar 8, 2012)

Ok.So, i tested this awsome Tweaker tool, but something was wrong. I set my multiplier at 40x and the CPU worked at 4000Mhz - talking about AMD Athlon 631, and then i tested it on Passmark benchmarkin tool and i recieved the same result - 3300score, as on stock freq, also the same happened with the SuperPI benchmark i had the same results- 28s, as stock freq on really higher freq then normal, so prolly this tool isnt workin for me.

This was weird, then i took the overclockin software provided by Asrock named Asrock eXtreme tuner, and clocked it a bit only, the CPU was workin at 3,1 ghz instead 2,6 and then i tested it and the results greatly increased the Passmark score was like 4k and the SuperPI 1mb was 24s, even if the passmark score is really lower then passmark average, and i dont know why is that, iam trying to find out since i bought it, the same problem apears with the GPU, still the performances increased abit , if i compare it with that tweakin tool that only shows that the CPU works higher but nothing really happened


----------



## Mathragh (Mar 8, 2012)

InternalSys said:


> Ok.So, i tested this awsome Tweaker tool, but something was wrong. I set my multiplier at 40x and the CPU worked at 4000Mhz - talking about AMD Athlon 631, and then i tested it on Passmark benchmarkin tool and i recieved the same result - 3300score, as on stock freq, also the same happened with the SuperPI benchmark i had the same results- 28s, as stock freq on really higher freq then normal, so prolly this tool isnt workin for me.
> 
> This was weird, then i took the overclockin software provided by Asrock named Asrock eXtreme tuner, and clocked it a bit only, the CPU was workin at 3,1 ghz instead 2,6 and then i tested it and the results greatly increased the Passmark score was like 4k and the SuperPI 1mb was 24s, even if the passmark score is really lower then passmark average, and i dont know why is that, iam trying to find out since i bought it, the same problem apears with the GPU, still the performances increased abit , if i compare it with that tweakin tool that only shows that the CPU works higher but nothing really happened



This is weird indeed, HTC also tried to OC his desktop Llano with this tool, but his scores also did not really improve.
On the other hand, Yo_Whatup has had some succes with his desktop chip. 

I dont know whats going on here, but apparently it does not work in all cases.
Have you tried running it in administrator mode?(just trying to spam some ideas)


----------



## InternalSys (Mar 8, 2012)

Mathragh said:


> This is weird indeed, HTC also tried to OC his desktop Llano with this tool, but his scores also did not really improve.
> On the other hand, Yo_Whatup has had some succes with his desktop chip.
> 
> I dont know whats going on here, but apparently it does not work in all cases.
> Have you tried running it in administrator mode?(just trying to spam some ideas)



Iam on admin acc all the time the problem is... the settings works. My CPU-Z shows the CPU works on 4GHz, but for real when u test it , it actually works on stock freqs, whle the Asrock extreme utility shows only the multiplier was increased and the CPU freq is the same, so maybe thats the problem. Maybe i should delete that  tool, then try again, but i dont think that will solve the problem with the low scores, my system got another problem i think , and thats UNDERPOWER PSU, thats also why my gpu keeps to have like 13k scores on 3dmark 03 , and CPU have way lower results then passmark average, cos it cant get enought power from the PSU. 

So, i wonder, can the PSU be the problem to the components since it delivers max 230Wats of power, while the components spend way more


----------



## Mathragh (Mar 8, 2012)

InternalSys said:


> Iam on admin acc all the time the problem is... the settings works. My CPU-Z shows the CPU works on 4GHz, but for real when u test it , it actually works on stock freqs, whle the Asrock extreme utility shows only the multiplier was increased and the CPU freq is the same, so maybe thats the problem. Maybe i should delete that  tool, then try again, but i dont think that will solve the problem with the low scores, my system got another problem i think , and thats UNDERPOWER PSU, thats also why my gpu keeps to have like 13k scores on 3dmark 03 , and CPU have way lower results then passmark average, cos it cant get enought power from the PSU.
> 
> So, i wonder, can the PSU be the problem to the components since it delivers max 230Wats of power, while the components spend way more



Having a PSU that is rated below your used power is always a bad idea. Its indeed a wise descision to replace that, and your ram before expecting any real results


----------



## InternalSys (Mar 8, 2012)

Mathragh said:


> Having a PSU that is rated below your used power is always a bad idea. Its indeed a wise descision to replace that, and your ram before expecting any real results




Ok, so whats the power of the PSU i should take, so it can be good enought for my PC, but to be cheap, and about the RAM, i should take another stick and not change it


----------



## DaC (Mar 8, 2012)

Mathragh said:


> And your chip does support 8GB of 1333MHz RAM, so you dont have to worry about that.



Sweet! Thank you for the info.



InternalSys said:


> Ok, so whats the power of the PSU i should take, so it can be good enought for my PC, but to be cheap, and about the RAM, i should take another stick and not change it



I would say any good PSU above 450w is enough for most systems today....

Take a look at this page, go for the "lite" version and it'll be enough to enlight you on your decision.... http://extreme.outervision.com/psucalculator.jsp
Just take into consideration that an overclocked hardware usually eats a lot of more power than stock one when pushed too hard.


----------



## InternalSys (Mar 8, 2012)

DaC said:


> Sweet! Thank you for the info.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Yeh, thank you i already seen that site and used it

And i just used it again and it says:


 Minimum PSU Wattage:	215 W
 Recommended 
 PSU Wattage: 265 W


----------



## Mathragh (Mar 8, 2012)

I bet that isnt ment for someone who overclocks his PC though, you could double that if you want to be safe for overclocking


----------



## HTC (Mar 9, 2012)

InternalSys said:


> *Ok.So, i tested this awsome Tweaker tool, but something was wrong. I set my multiplier at 40x and the CPU worked at 4000Mhz - talking about AMD Athlon 631, and then i tested it on Passmark benchmarkin tool and i recieved the same result - 3300score, as on stock freq, also the same happened with the SuperPI benchmark i had the same results- 28s, as stock freq on really higher freq then normal, so prolly this tool isnt workin for me.*
> 
> This was weird, then i took the overclockin software provided by Asrock named Asrock eXtreme tuner, and clocked it a bit only, the CPU was workin at 3,1 ghz instead 2,6 and then i tested it and the results greatly increased the Passmark score was like 4k and the SuperPI 1mb was 24s, even if the passmark score is really lower then passmark average, and i dont know why is that, iam trying to find out since i bought it, the same problem apears with the GPU, still the performances increased abit , if i compare it with that tweakin tool that only shows that the CPU works higher but nothing really happened





Mathragh said:


> *This is weird indeed, HTC also tried to OC his desktop Llano with this tool, but his scores also did not really improve.*
> On the other hand, Yo_Whatup has had some succes with his desktop chip.
> 
> I dont know whats going on here, but apparently it does not work in all cases.
> Have you tried running it in administrator mode?(just trying to spam some ideas)



Yup: the only success i've had with this tool, thus far, is the undervolting i'm doing. Zero luck with overclocking: it says it's overclocking (CPU-Z, FusionTweaker) but it doesn't show any results when actually testing, same as InternalSys.

Since i was just wondering how high i could go while undervolting and wasn't planning on keeping the overclock, it's no big deal but InternalSys and others might actually want to OC their APUs, unlike me.

In any case, i want to thank Mathragh and any others who tried to troubleshoot this problem.


----------



## Mathragh (Mar 9, 2012)

No problem at all man! Thats what we're here for!"

I just wish we could find out why this program seems so dodgy =D

Perhaps its a good idea to make a ticket at the programmers' site, let him take a look at the problem.


----------



## InternalSys (Mar 9, 2012)

As few other dudes said, the tweaking tool isnt working for everybody, but i noticed another problem. I tried instead changing the CPU/PCi-X speed, i changed the CPU multiplier in the BIOS settings and some weird thing happened, after that i logged into windows and checked Everest and CPU-z and they were showing that my CPU runs at 4GHZ 40x multiplier, but when i tested it, it showed that thats just FAKE thing since the scores were like on stock frequencies. After that i tried to overclock it again from the bios but instead changing the multiplier i overclocked the CPU frequency and then when i came back the results on benchmarks were way better. So it seems there is some BUG in the bios when u put any other multiplier thats bigger then stock multiplier in my case 26x it's just not working, its not affecting the CPU frequency and performance at all, even if it shows on some programs that it runs on much higher speeds, thats so false. The only program i used and it shows the real values is the Asrock Extreme overclockin tool, and thats the only tool that shows the real CPU frequency.

It seems that, thers bug in the ASROCK MBs or something like that, that is causin that problem, so you cant increase the multiplier... you can increase it but its just fake


So if anyone goin to those Asrock or whatever forums, will be good to write to BIOS devs about these problem, that needs to be solved.

So, this means Tweaking tool works, but... not always cos there is multiplier bug, the only way i noticed that let you overclock your CPU without increasing multi is to increase the freq

 thats it,comment


----------



## InternalSys (Mar 9, 2012)

Forgot to mention, tested Asrock overclocking tool, the Tweaking tool and BIOS tool, and the freq with the multiplier cannot be changed for real


----------



## Mathragh (Mar 9, 2012)

Okay, well, HTC has a gigabyte mobo, so I guess it isnt just the Asrock motherboards that are affected by it. I wonder what the creator of the tool has to say about it.


----------



## InternalSys (Mar 10, 2012)

Lawl Athlon 631 overclock

http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/38/29095410.jpg/

it was at 6k ghz


----------



## HTC (Mar 10, 2012)

InternalSys said:


> It seems that, thers bug in the ASROCK MBs or something like that, that is causin that problem, so you cant increase the multiplier... you can increase it but its just fake





Mathragh said:


> *Okay, well, HTC has a gigabyte mobo*, so I guess it isnt just the Asrock motherboards that are affected by it. I wonder what the creator of the tool has to say about it.



It seems AsRock isn't the only board maker affected by this because my gigabyte one suffers from the same problem, as Mathragh pointed out.

There's a new beta BIOS for my board that has updated AGESA code but i have yet to install it.


----------



## InternalSys (Mar 10, 2012)

HTC said:


> It seems AsRock isn't the only board maker affected by this because my gigabyte one suffers from the same problem, as Mathragh pointed out.
> 
> There's a new beta BIOS for my board that has updated AGESA code but i have yet to install it.



When you update it , tell me whats fixed and does it work properly


----------



## HTC (Mar 10, 2012)

InternalSys said:


> When you update it , tell me whats fixed and does it work properly



In case you're wondering, AGESA is:



> "...The AMD Generic Encapsulated Software Architecture (AGESA) is a
> library of validated processor procedures designed to aid customers with
> quick adoption of AMD technology into their products. AMI’s drop-in
> support of AGESA allows minimal time-to-market for APTIO® customers to
> ...



Source

This new BIOS may indeed resolve this issue: i'll probably update it Sunday.

EDIT

Forgot the small detail where it says the only thing my board's BIOS is updating is the AGESA code, which is why i posted the 1st part of this post ...


----------



## HTC (Mar 11, 2012)

InternalSys said:


> When you update it , tell me whats fixed and does it work properly





HTC said:


> This new BIOS may indeed resolve this issue: i'll probably update it Sunday.



Just updated it and tested: seems to NOT have worked: CPU-Z shows "overclock" but IBT doesn't go faster then stock, like with previous BIOS 

Whatever they changed in the AGESA code, i have yet no notice anything different with this new BIOS.

In attach are a couple of pics from my BIOS: the only OC i'm doing right now is with the RAM, and even that is just a tad overclock (timings, not speed).


----------



## InternalSys (Mar 11, 2012)

HTC said:


> Just updated it and tested: seems to NOT have worked: CPU-Z shows "overclock" but IBT doesn't go faster then stock, like with previous BIOS
> 
> Whatever they changed in the AGESA code, i have yet no notice anything different with this new BIOS.
> 
> In attach are a couple of pics from my BIOS: the only OC i'm doing right now is with the RAM, and even that is just a tad overclock (timings, not speed).



Lol, my BIOS is so different from your BIOS, Asrock made their bios like a Windows 7 APP , its not bios like - bios anymore. And i managed to overclock my ram up to 2400 mhz, from 1333, but iam not sure if it is overclocked for real , is there any bench to test it, so i can see if theres any improvment, cos when i tested it on my windows 7 test i didnt show any improvement hehe


----------



## HTC (Mar 11, 2012)

InternalSys said:


> Lol, my BIOS is so different from your BIOS, Asrock made their bios like a Windows 7 APP , its not bios like - bios anymore. And i managed to overclock my ram up to 2400 mhz, from 1333, but iam not sure if it is overclocked for real , is there any bench to test it, so i can see if theres any improvment, cos when i tested it on my windows 7 test i didnt show any improvement hehe



Because of my hardware RAID card, i can't have a board with UEFI BIOS only: incompatible 

This severely limited my choices for an APU board. This is the 1st non ASUS board since 1996.


As for your question, try AIDA64 or MaxMem: both of these should show if your RAM is actually OCed or not.


----------



## cadaveca (Mar 11, 2012)

Just FYI, Llano desktop chips do not actually change multi upwards from stock. It will appear that it has changed, but it doesn't have a real effect. Software tools will not help either. Every board I have tested works this way, and I have checked with other reviewers taht I talk to, and they find the same thing.


For underclocking, sure works great, but not for OC. You must increase HTT for OC.


----------



## Mathragh (Mar 11, 2012)

cadaveca said:


> Just FYI, Llano desktop chips do not actually change multi upwards from stock. It will appear that it has changed, but it doesn't have a real effect. Software tools will not help either. Every board I have tested works this way, and I have checked with other reviewers taht I talk to, and they find the same thing.
> 
> 
> For underclocking, sure works great, but not for OC. You must increase HTT for OC.



I wonder why laptop APU's and Yo_Wattup's chip doest seem to be locked then


----------



## cadaveca (Mar 11, 2012)

They are not "locked". The multi will appear to change in CPU-Z, but performance will not change at all.

I recently was working on a review of a Llano board, and the same applies. Doing some research led to other people having hte same problem...on some obards, you can just change multi in BIOS, it appears to work, but again, no performance change.

Of course, this seems confined to the A4, A6, and A8 chips, the other APUs, I am not sure of.


----------



## Mathragh (Mar 11, 2012)

cadaveca said:


> They are not "locked". The multi will appear to change in CPU-Z, but performance will not change at all.
> 
> I recently was working on a review of a Llano board, and the same applies. Doing some research led to other people having hte same problem...on some obards, you can just change multi in BIOS, it appears to work, but again, no performance change.



Okay, but the doesnt change the fact that i do get a measurable performance increase on my mobile Llano APU, and so did Mussels. In fact, I was able to get a 30% performance increase while not substantially increasing power draw, since i could lower the voltage a whole lot, even at a higher frequency. The screenies for this are at the start of the thread, and some further on.

Edit: So i wonder what makes those chips different from the ones that doesnt seem to be able to OC with this tool. Perhaps its actually the motherboard? I dont know.


----------



## cadaveca (Mar 11, 2012)

Mobile, sure, desktop, no. I am not 100% sure why there is a difference.

Performance increase without power draw increase kinda points at something else, IMHO. *You cannot magically get added performance without an increase in power consumption.* When transistors switch faster, they need more juice to do so.

I've seen myself results from 8 different boards, and I'm talked to other board reviewers at other sites about at least another 5 boards.


All desktop though.


----------



## Mathragh (Mar 11, 2012)

Hmm, well, thanks anyway for sharing your experience with desktop APU's  Will provide some clarity for desktop Llano users.

EDIT:
The power use did increase when i upped the frequency. In fact, I didnt dare up the frequency as high as I have it now, since the laptop would get too hot. With the voltage decrease at the same time as the higher mult, the cooling could sustain the higher clocks.


----------



## cadaveca (Mar 11, 2012)

Mathragh said:


> Hmm, well, thanks anyway for sharing your experience with desktop APU's  Will provide some clarity for desktop Llano users.
> 
> EDIT:
> The power use did increase when i upped the frequency. In fact, I didnt dare up the frequency as high as I have it now, since the laptop would get too hot. With the voltage decrease at the same time as the higher mult, the cooling could sustain the higher clocks.



Ah, I understand.

And yeah, you know, I will be mentioning this in my next A75 board review. I've already compiled results, with benchmarks, screenshots, and such, but I do nto think I will include all of that in the review, as I'm reviewing the board, not the APU.

Of course, the A8 3870 BE or whatever they call it..."K", maybe? does increase performance when multi is adjusted(using the same boards). It's a very weird situation, this multi thing on the "locked" desktop chips.


----------



## Mathragh (Mar 11, 2012)

cadaveca said:


> Ah, I understand.
> 
> And yeah, you know, I will be mentioning this in my next A75 board review. I've already compiled results, with benchmarks, screenshots, and such, but I do nto think I will include all of that in the review, as I'm reviewing the board, not the APU.
> 
> Of course, the A8 3870 BE or whatever they call it..."K", maybe? does increase performance when multi is adjusted(using the same boards). It's a very weird situation, this multi thing on the "locked" desktop chips.



Indeed it is. I'm just happy I found out about this tool, as it does loads for me. I'm still really puzzled though why these(or atleast mine) chips has that much headroom in both frequency and voltage. It can consequently do with 0,2V less then what it is put at at stock. You'd think that they would want to make these chips as energy efficient as possible. 

Also, i'm still not sure wether this actually works on ALL mobile chips. I think about 4 people on this forum with mobile Llano APU's have already succesfully used this tool to OC their mobile chips, with probably more not posting anything but still being succesfull.


----------



## HTC (Mar 11, 2012)

Mathragh said:


> I wonder why laptop APU's and *Yo_Wattup's chip* doest seem to be locked then



Maybe he has a "K" model? 

If not, i have no idea


----------



## InternalSys (Mar 12, 2012)

Will be good, if anyone have an AMD forums account, to go there and make a TOPIC about it , and if someone from AMD explains, it would be great


----------



## DaC (Mar 12, 2012)

Mathragh said:


> Indeed it is. I'm just happy I found out about this tool, as it does loads for me. I'm still really puzzled though why these(or atleast mine) chips has that much headroom in both frequency and voltage. It can consequently do with 0,2V less then what it is put at at stock. You'd think that they would want to make these chips as energy efficient as possible.



Well, I don't know about the process of making this kind of stuff, but it's all about economics and engineering...

They control a small batch only and by the result of this batch, using statistics, they know more or less how this batch of chips will perform and set their specifications....
Of course there will always be some that work well better than the specifications (this is way overclockers love so much to search the "god sent chip") and others will just run very close to the specification set.
The important thing is to ensure a very low failure rate and because of that all of the chips gets the specification of maybe the worst performer or close to it.

That's why some gpus get 7970 labels while others 7950 label although being the same gpu... sometimes like phenom II the batches are so good that they have to put higher grade chips to lower specifications just to comply with the market strategy.

Checking each individual chip would lead to enormous costs and would make production cost just crazy...

So, people shouldn't blame x or y company for being a poor quality company just because they bought one defective product from them. It happens, the company knows that it will and it should be ready to deal with it... and if it isn't ready to well support their consumer, then it can be called a bad company. Or sometimes failure rate are just so high that there isn't any excuse.... hp notebooks anyone ?


----------



## Yo_Wattup (Mar 31, 2012)

So I FINALLY got some faster memory (sig), will be benching soon.


----------



## Yo_Wattup (Mar 31, 2012)

Okay, more strangeness coming from llano, passmark score has decreased to 2700 from 3200.  

But 3Dmark vantage has increased to 8300 compared to 7200 stock freqs and 8000 with old ram.






I am inclined to believe passmark is telling lies to me and that I should go off 3Dmark.


----------



## cadaveca (Mar 31, 2012)

Check benchmarks I use in my memory reviews for benches that wuill show differences from RAM changes. Personally i like Spi32M for that.


----------



## DaC (Apr 8, 2012)

I don't know if this has happened to you folks using the mobile Llano like me, but I realized that I had to up the otherwise stable vcore after plugging USB devices.
First I plugged a USB mouse on my notebook...... no problem, all voltages remained the same on my overclock result post: http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2566684&postcount=154 although I had already upped my P0 state 3 notches after this post.

Then I plugged my USB soundcard and a hdmi cable to hook it on my monitor.... the system begun to reboot with normal internet use.... youtube and stuff....... so I upped a notch all my P states (probably I wouldn't have to mess with them all, but I wasn't just with the will to test it)..... after that, everything went just smooth...

Today I plugged one more device, a USB (outlet powered) 3.5" hard drive.... the system begun to reboot again while watching some movies on VLC..... So I uppped all p states one more notch and everything seems fine....

It seems to me that the amount of usb ports being used actually interfere with the mobile Llano overclock capacity in the way that you have to use more vcore on it than with less usb ports (and hdmi) being used.....

What do you guys think ?


----------



## Mussels (Apr 8, 2012)

DaC said:


> I don't know if this has happened to you folks using the mobile Llano like me, but I realized that I had to up the otherwise stable vcore after plugging USB devices.
> First I plugged a USB mouse on my notebook...... no problem, all voltages remained the same on my overclock result post: http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2566684&postcount=154 although I had already upped my P0 state 3 notches after this post.
> 
> Then I plugged my USB soundcard and a hdmi cable to hook it on my monitor.... the system begun to reboot with normal internet use.... youtube and stuff....... so I upped a notch all my P states (probably I wouldn't have to mess with them all, but I wasn't just with the will to test it)..... after that, everything went just smooth...
> ...



i'm guessing you get vdroop with power hungry devices. i ran into something similar with mine, took everything up two notches and its stable since then (but apart from my first test, i've always had a USB mouse and keyboard connected)


----------



## DaC (Apr 8, 2012)

Mussels said:


> i'm guessing you get vdroop with power hungry devices. i ran into something similar with mine, took everything up two notches and its stable since then (but apart from my first test, i've always had a USB mouse and keyboard connected)



Interesting... so it might be pretty normal with it then...


----------



## Mussels (Apr 8, 2012)

DaC said:


> Interesting... so it might be pretty normal with it then...



a laptop having a weak PSU would not surprise me in the slightest, especially since they had the stock voltages set so high compared to what they really need. looks like they knew this happened, and upped the voltages to prepare for it.


----------



## Mathragh (Apr 8, 2012)

I didnt have such issues, but perhaps I just got lucky, the psu this laptop uses is quite big and looks fairly heavy duty(I know that shouldn't mean anything, lol). 
But anyways, good to know in case others encounter the same problem


----------



## DaC (Apr 8, 2012)

Mussels said:


> a laptop having a weak PSU would not surprise me in the slightest, especially since they had the stock voltages set so high compared to what they really need. looks like they knew this happened, and upped the voltages to prepare for it.



Yes, probably. To the point that my P0 state is in the same voltage as the stock, even thought I'm using 3.0ghz instead of the 2.5 stock.
Although I had to raise my P1 state a few notches, it's still a lot lower than stock one and with a 500mhz bump.
But yeah, makers do give a nice margin of safety when they set cpus, which is a good thing btw.



Mathragh said:


> I didnt have such issues, but perhaps I just got lucky, the psu this laptop uses is quite big and looks fairly heavy duty(I know that shouldn't mean anything, lol).
> But anyways, good to know in case others encounter the same problem




Well mine is rated at 19v 3.16A... it's fairly small and light... what's the output from yours ?


----------



## Mussels (Apr 8, 2012)

DaC said:


> Yes, probably. To the point that my P0 state is in the same voltage as the stock, even thought I'm using 3.0ghz instead of the 2.5 stock.
> Although I had to raise my P1 state a few notches, it's still a lot lower than stock one and with a 500mhz bump.
> But yeah, makers do give a nice margin of safety when they set cpus, which is a good thing btw.
> 
> ...



i wasnt talking about the brick, i meant internal to the laptop itself - its got to be split into 5V for the USB somewhere, for example.


----------



## DaC (Apr 8, 2012)

Mussels said:


> i wasnt talking about the brick, i meant internal to the laptop itself - its got to be split into 5V for the USB somewhere, for example.



Oh for sure.... "=]

Also 60W of brick is quite powerful, I don't think it would have any issue to drive everything the motherboard and it's components can push at full load.


----------



## Mussels (Apr 8, 2012)

DaC said:


> Oh for sure.... "=]
> 
> Also 60W of brick is quite powerful, I don't think it would have any issue to drive everything the motherboard and it's components can push at full load.



60W isnt the problem, its whatever splitting it into 3.3v and 5v - thats whats drooping (IIRC, laptops dont use 12v)


----------



## DaC (Apr 8, 2012)

Mussels said:


> 60W isnt the problem, its whatever splitting it into 3.3v and 5v - thats whats drooping (IIRC, laptops dont use 12v)



No 12v for laps ?  I didn't knew that... well living and learning.

Anyway, I have a samsung 305v4a and it comes with some utilities, one of them has a power consumption meter, I don't know if it's accurate or not, but while using OCCT CPU or Linpack consumption is 37watts.
On GPU stress it's around 27 watts.

I tried to run a OCCT power supply test, but it wasn't successful maybe I had to put more vcore on the cpu, but anyway.... I don't think I would want to mess with that.....
The power consumption jumped straight to 47watts even with only 50% cpu core stress, because when OCCT tried to go full, it failed the test.

I guess I could blow my notebook trying to push any further than that... I really don't think a samsung lap is designed thinking on a overclocker stressing test the components....


----------



## Mussels (Apr 9, 2012)

DaC said:


> No 12v for laps ?  I didn't knew that... well living and learning.



2.5" drives only have 5V, which is why they can be powered directly from USB. stands to make sense if 2.5" HD and SSD drives (and their CD/DVD drives as well) dont use 12V... then why even include it?


----------



## Sir B. Fannybottom (Apr 10, 2012)

My sister just got a new laptop, it's awesome.
View attachment 46606


----------



## Mathragh (Apr 10, 2012)

Kevinheraiz said:


> My sister just got a new laptop, it's awesome.
> http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=46606&stc=1&d=1334087623



Awesome, congrats! Did you settle on a nice clock/voltage for it?


----------



## Sir B. Fannybottom (Apr 10, 2012)

Mathragh said:


> Awesome, congrats! Did you settle on a nice clock/voltage for it?



Mhm, for everyday use shes going to be at 3.4ghz and for gaming shes going to be at 4.8 I really can't remember the voltages right now but I know they weren't too high. Full load around 60C and idle 30s-40s, ASUS made one hell of a laptop for only $400.


----------



## Yo_Wattup (Apr 11, 2012)

Kevinheraiz said:


> Mhm, for everyday use shes going to be at 3.4ghz and for gaming shes going to be at 4.8 I really can't remember the voltages right now but I know they weren't too high. Full load around 60C and idle 30s-40s, ASUS made one hell of a laptop for only $400.



Christ! How did you get 4.8, this tool only goes up to 3.6 on mine? Congrats also


----------



## Mathragh (Apr 11, 2012)

Yeah those clocks are unbelievable lol. Even the 100W black edition Llano's run at only 3,9GHz max.

Really interested in some screenshots and benchmarks!


----------



## Sir B. Fannybottom (Apr 11, 2012)

Mathragh said:


> Yeah those clocks are unbelievable lol. Even the 100W black edition Llano's run at only 3,9GHz max.
> 
> Really interested in some screenshots and benchmarks!



I've been trying to get her to do some but she keeps saying it'll take too long. When she comes over next weekend I'll be sure to post some!


----------



## DaC (Apr 11, 2012)

I want to see that one too! "=]


----------



## Entechlaron (Sep 3, 2012)

Thank you muchly for this post, excellent set of test values too 
I've tried a few other tweaking tools in the last couple of days, and nothing was working.. what with the oem software and the default setup asserting dominance.
Found I couldn't set vid to 1.3500.. peak of 1.2875 and multiplier of 40; A6-3410mx 1.6 - 2.3 upped to 2 - 2.8ghz -Easy
Will surely try for more later, Thank you


----------



## Mussels (Sep 3, 2012)

just as an update to this thread, i found my laptop randomly crashing and didnt know why. it was obvious in the end - the CPU voltage droops when on battery. i had to up the voltages, or just not OC/undervolt when on battery.


----------



## AMD A6-3410 1.6ghz (Sep 4, 2012)

just started to tune it up... gimme some tips please


----------



## Steevo (Sep 4, 2012)

Mussels said:


> just as an update to this thread, i found my laptop randomly crashing and didnt know why. it was obvious in the end - the CPU voltage droops when on battery. i had to up the voltages, or just not OC/undervolt when on battery.



I have that issue when my system drops to critical voltage and it tries to go to sleep. 


Easy fix is setting minimum and maximum processor speed while on battery and or while battery states like critical are in effect. I set while on battery everyting except Low battery 100% maximum and 10% minimum. Low battery and critical 50% maximum and 10% minimum.



AMD A6-3410 1 said:


> just started to tune it up... gimme some tips please





Keep raising it till you crash running OCCT at maximum on all cores with stock voltage, add a couple tenths if you have good cooling to the voltage and keep pushing. Then lower all states except the two highest by a few hundred Mhz and lower the voltage, start running OCCT and changing clock settings until you start to get faults, rise it by a few hundredths again and keep trying. 


It is very important to note that the voltage floor of the CPU is dependent on the die, if you reach a point where it just crashes you are undervolting too much, same seemed to apply to my laptop when I dropped below a certain frequency, I could never adjust the system to be stable at that low frequency. 

Don't forget to adjust your clock ramp too, I found that the settings they had were too jumpy, and the system would spend a lot of time changing frequencies and wasting energy.


----------



## amanago (Jul 27, 2015)

Mathragh said:


> For anyone interested,I finalized tweaking the P states.
> 
> Things ended up being alot greater, including a performance increase of about 18-30% at about the same power use, and battery life improvement from ~5 hours to about 6,5H.
> 
> ...



Thanks for these settings. It worked on my laptop.
I was just wondering on how to get/compute the proper voltage settings for each P states.


----------



## Mathragh (Jul 28, 2015)

amanago said:


> Thanks for these settings. It worked on my laptop.
> I was just wondering on how to get/compute the proper voltage settings for each P states.


These values will probably be different for every laptop (APU). The only way to find out is to trail/error with clocks and voltage till you've found the highest it can go with a voltage that doesn't cause your laptop to overheat.

Also when changing voltages make sure you think of the worst case scenario possible: Hot weather/room, high load on both CPU and GPU parts.


----------



## BUCK NASTY (Jul 28, 2015)

Wow, someone necro'd this thread.


----------

