# Athlon II X4 vs Phenom II X2



## Dent1 (Jun 23, 2010)

This thread is to conclude which is the better overall processor taking into consideration of numerous tasks ranging from encoding, rendering, single threaded and multi threaded gaming.

The two processors in question are the Phenom II X2 and the Athlon II X4 series.

The applications that shall be run are:

WPrime
CineBench
3D Marks 2006 (CPU test)
Crysis Benchmark
Final Fantasy XIV Benchmark
Sciencemark
Passmark

(more applications to be added later)


*WPrime*  - lower is better
brandonwh64 - Phenom II X3 720 @ 2.6GHz - 21.624 seconds
brandonwh64 - Phenom II X3 720 unlocked X4 @ 2.6GHz - 16.062 seconds
brandonwh64 - Phenom II X3 720 @ 2.6GHz with 1 core disabled - 31.937 seconds
Dent1 - Athlon II X4 620 @ 2.6GHz (stock) -15.907 seconds
Dent1 - Athlon II X4 620 @ 2.6GHz (stock) with 1 core disabled - 21.32 seconds
Dent1 - Athlon II X4 620 @ 3.1GHz - 13.417 seconds
JrRacingFan - Athlon II X2 240 @ 2.6GHz - 33.231
NdMk2o1o - Phenom II 550 X2 @ 3.1GHz HT Link @ 2400Mhz - 25.837 seconds

*3d Mark 06 CPU test* - higher is better
Dent1 - Athlon II X4 620 @ 2.6GHz (stock) - 3617
Dent1 - Athlon II X4 620 @ 2.6GHz (stock) with 1 core disabled - 2900
Dent1 - Athlon II X4 620 @ 3.1GHz - 4219
JrRacingFan - Athlon II X2 240 @ 2.6GHz - 2057
brandonwh64 - Phenom II X3 720 with 1 core disabled @ 2.6GHz - 2195
brandonwh64 - Phenom II X3 720 @ 2.6GHz - 3159
brandonwh64 - Phenom II X3 720 unlocked to X4 @ 2.6GHz - 3939
brandonwh64 - Phenom II X3 720 unlocked to X4 @ 3.225GHz - 4780
NdMk2o1o - Phenom II 550 X2 @ 3.1GHz HT Link @ 2400Mhz - 2566

*Final Fantasy XIV* @ 1280x720p - higher is better
Dent1 - Athlon II X4 620 @ 2.6GHz (stock) - 4850 @ 650/1100MHz - Score: 2994
Dent1 - Athlon II X4 620 @ 2.6GHz (stock) with 1 core disabled - 4850@ 650/1100MHz / - Score: 2798
Dent1 - Athlon II X4 620 @ 3.1GHz - 4850 @ 650/1100MHz - Score: 3183

*Final Fantasy XIV* @ 1920x1080p - higher is better
brandonwh64 - Phenom II X3 720 unlocked to X4 @ 3.4GHz, 8600GTS 512MB - Score: 528


----------



## erocker (Jun 23, 2010)

Excluding Crysis, all of those bench's are multi threaded. Of course the quad core will win. Clock for clock is not fair in this case. The only reason I would get a 555 is due to it's better overclocking ability and unlocked CPU as opposed to the Athlon II. I would love to see what clock speed the 555 needs to equal the Athlon II with multi threaded bench's.  

If you need any Phenom II quad results, feel free to let me know.


----------



## Dent1 (Jun 23, 2010)

erocker said:


> Excluding Crysis, all of those bench's are multi threaded. Of course the quad core will win.



I am not sure if you've been following the other thread but NdMk2o1o seems to think the Phenom II X2s 6MB of L3 cache makes it the better overall processor in all tasks compared to the Athlon II X3 (and X4) despite it costing more, whereas I'm saying the Phenom II X2 is only better in single threaded games, but in multi threaded games and work related tasks i.e. encoding, rendering, compression the extra core negates the missing cache. I do not have an X3 so we are simulating its performance with my X4 instead.


http://forums.techpowerup.com/showthread.php?goto=newpost&t=125044

Which single threaded benchmarks should I add to this, to make it fair?


----------



## erocker (Jun 23, 2010)

Most game benchmarks are "single threaded" though they will distribute the load over whatever cores are available. So just pick whatever games you have and use Fraps if you have it available.


----------



## brandonwh64 (Jun 23, 2010)

Edited then


----------



## Dent1 (Jun 23, 2010)

brandonwh64, this thread is a project thread, we are doing a scientific test here, if you want to post benchmarks do it in the other thread or do it after we finished the experiment. Erocker can you delete that please.

PS. brandonwh64, those benchmarks are not showing the Athlon II X3 and Phenom II X2 at the same clock speed, which is what this experiment is about


----------



## brandonwh64 (Jun 23, 2010)

Also if you would like i could do some of those benches for you with my Phenom II x3 720 @ stock settings if it would help get things moving?


----------



## Dent1 (Jun 23, 2010)

brandonwh64 said:


> Also if you would like i could do some of those benches for you with my Phenom II x3 720 @ stock settings if it would help get things moving?



Perhaps a little bit later. We should probably get the statistics for the Athlon II X3/X4 vs Phenom II X2 first, then once everything is done we can add your 720 in the mix.
I need some help guys: 
-Which applications should I use for testing? – I’m open for suggestions, it has to be scientific so nothing that fraps can measure, if its a game it has to have its own built in benchmark!

I propose that NdMk2o1o lowers his OC to 3.0GHz and I will do the same, we both should have HT Links and NB of 2000Mhz.  This way it only measures 6MB cache vs o cache/extra core, anyone agree?


----------



## brandonwh64 (Jun 23, 2010)

Dent1 said:


> Perhaps a little bit later. We should probably get the statistics for the Athlon II X3/X4 vs Phenom II X2 first, then once everything is done we can add your 720 in the mix.
> 
> I need some help guys:
> 
> ...



Is this going to be a CPU test only? maybe some sciencemark? also passmark is ok benching software along with everest


----------



## IronRuler (Jun 23, 2010)

The PII will win in gaming. Everything else goes to the quad IMO. But for the pice of the quad I would just grab a 720BE.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Jun 23, 2010)

if the Athlon II was released with 4MB L2 and as a Black Edition unit, it would be a good sell.


----------



## NdMk2o1o (Jun 23, 2010)

Dent1 said:


> I am not sure if you've been following the other thread but NdMk2o1o seems to think the Phenom II X2s 6MB of L3 cache makes it the better overall processor in all tasks compared to the Athlon II X3 (and X4) despite it costing more, whereas I'm saying the Phenom II X2 is only better in single threaded games, but in multi threaded games and work related tasks i.e. encoding, rendering, compression the extra core negates the missing cache. I do not have an X3 so we are simulating its performance with my X4 instead.
> 
> 
> http://forums.techpowerup.com/showthread.php?goto=newpost&t=125044
> ...



Hang on before you go on your little crusade, I never said that a PII dual is better than an Athlon x4 so please get it right, I said compared to the x3 the pII is better overall cause as it does get beat out in some multithreaded tasks the margin is very small and it is even keeping up even though the Athlon has the extra core, now add to the fact the extra L3 cache, higher stock clock and better overclockaqbility and the PII is the obvious choice over the Athlon x3. 

So If you like when we get this going just for information purpposes I will run the benches on 2 cores, stock and overclocked though we really need an Athlon x3 in here aswell unless I run at 3 cores compared to your 4.


----------



## Dent1 (Jun 23, 2010)

NdMk2o1o said:


> Hang on before you go on your little crusade, I never said that a PII dual is better than an Athlon x4 so please get it right, I said compared to the x3 the pII is better overall cause as it does get beat out in some multithreaded tasks the margin is very small and it is even keeping up even though the Athlon has the extra core, now add to the fact the extra L3 cache, higher stock clock and better overclockaqbility and the PII is the obvious choice over the Athlon x3.



When looking at the reviews the Phenom II X2 rarely ever beats the Athlon II X3 in multi threaded applications, it would be almost impossible too. 



NdMk2o1o said:


> So If you like when we get this going just for information purpposes I will run the benches on 2 cores, stock and overclocked though we really need an Athlon x3 in here aswell unless I run at 3 cores compared to your 4.



I am more interested in doing this to help people with struggling decision to make on which CPU to choose, we should put our egos aside and lets make this an educational experience for everyone.

Also once a benchmark has be run we need to open up CPU-Z and GPU-Z take take a screenshot of the specification in the background side by side with the score.


Edit:

NdMk2o1o,

If you want I can disable 1 core on my Athlon II X4 to make it a X3 and hence it will be Athlon II X3 without cache vs Phenom II X2 with 6MB cache.


----------



## NdMk2o1o (Jun 23, 2010)

Dent1 said:


> When looking at the reviews the Phenom II X2 rarely ever beats the Athlon II X3 in multi threaded applications, it would be almost impossible too.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



We can do that, You run stock clocks over my stock clocks as thats what we were talking about, also get a definitive list of benches. I'm probably not going to be able to bench until tomorrow night though 

The more I think of it we should also use the same memory speed and timings to take that out of the equation. Maybe have a set of 2 multithreaded and 2 single threaded tests?


----------



## Dent1 (Jun 23, 2010)

NdMk2o1o said:


> We can do that, You run stock clocks over my stock clocks as thats what we were talking about, also get a definitive list of benches. I'm probably not going to be able to bench until tomorrow night though
> 
> The more I think of it we should also use the same memory speed and timings to take that out of the equation. Maybe have a set of 2 multithreaded and 2 single threaded tests?




If we just run at stock clocks you'd have a 500Mhz advantage and it would cause ambiguity in the results i.e. if the Phenom II X2 is leading we wouldn’t know for sure whether it’s because of the 500Mz advantage or because of the L3 cache advantage or both.

I am happy to run the Athlon II X4 (with 1 core disabled) at stock clocks providing that afterwards we redo the tests at equal clock speeds.

I will start by running Wprime v2.03 tonight, and I will put the NB and HT link @ 2,000 MHz, memory bus speed @ 1333 MHz with default timings.


----------



## NdMk2o1o (Jun 23, 2010)

Dent1 said:


> If we just run at stock clocks you'd have a 500Mhz advantage and it would cause ambiguity in the results i.e. if the Phenom II X2 is leading we wouldn’t know for sure whether it’s because of the 500Mz advantage or because of the L3 cache advantage or both.
> 
> I am happy to run the Athlon II X4 (with 1 core disabled) at stock clocks providing that afterwards we redo the tests at equal clock speeds.
> 
> I will start by running Wprime v2.03 tonight, and I will put the NB and HT link @ 2,000 MHz, memory bus speed @ 1333 MHz with default timings.



whats your stock then 2.6? ok bump it up to 2.7 cause as i recall thats the particular chip we were talking about and comparing, yes I have a 400mhz advantage, you have an extra core, whats your point? I didnt just say only the extra L3 makes up the performance did I? Why would I think that 2 cores at the same clock speed are better than 3?? 

My whole point was the 550 is the better buy.


----------



## Mussels (Jun 23, 2010)

the phenom II will be faster in gaming, the athlon II x4 will be faster in encoding/rendering.

whichever CPU comes out on top, will be purely decided by how many of each test you run, be they games, or synthetic multi threaded tests.


----------



## newtekie1 (Jun 23, 2010)

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/105?vs=120

*shrug*

I think I'd go with the X4...

You also have to consider that, in the few instances when the 555 would be better, the 630 is good enough that the user would not notice the difference.  Everyone seems to want to talk about how much better the 555/550 would be at games, due to their single threaded nature.  However, when you crank up the graphics settings as high as possible, the graphics card is going to the limitting factor.  There isn't a modern game out where the 630, even at stock, is going to limit you to below 60FPS, so the x2 being better at gaming is a pretty moot point.


----------



## Dent1 (Jun 23, 2010)

NdMk2o1o said:


> Why would I think that 2 cores at the same clock speed are better than 3??
> 
> My whole point was the 550 is the better buy.



Exactly which was my entire point in the other thread, the Athlon II X3 has an additional core and the only reasons why the Phenom II X2 might win occasionally and narrowly in gaming is because of the clock speed difference in the reviews. 

I said that if the Athlon II X3 or X4 was clocked identically to the Phenom II X2 the reviews will show a different picture, the X2 might still win in single threaded games but even more narrowly. What you are saying is contradictory, you openly admit that 3 cores is better than 2 yet you still say the 550 is better


Also bear in mind the Athlon II X3 is faster than the Athlon II X4 in single threaded gaming.


Edit:

In addition, you said that we need to look at the "overall" picture, so our decision shouldnt be just based on gaming!


----------



## Dent1 (Jun 23, 2010)

I need somebody impartial on this forum to look at this review of the Athlon II X3 435 and honestly analyse whether its a better prospect than the Phenom II X2 550 which is also listed taking into consideration of all the data, not just gaming. As the idea to get the overall better CPU.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/athlon-ii-x3-435.html


----------



## brandonwh64 (Jun 23, 2010)

I see the x3 athlon came in on top on the media processing page.


----------



## Mussels (Jun 23, 2010)

Dent1 said:


> Exactly which was my entire point in the other thread, the Athlon II X3 has an additional core and the only reasons why the Phenom II X2 might win occasionally and narrowly in gaming is because of the clock speed difference in the reviews.
> 
> I said that if the Athlon II X3 or X4 was clocked identically to the Phenom II X2 the reviews will show a different picture, the X2 might still win in single threaded games but even more narrowly. What you are saying is contradictory, you openly admit that 3 cores is better than 2 yet you still say the 550 is better
> 
> ...




all games, unless they are DX11, are single threaded when it comes to graphics. Even if you read taht a game is multi threaded, you will end up with your CPU limiting your graphics - so a faster CPU with less cores is more important.


----------



## Dent1 (Jun 23, 2010)

Ok as promised here is the first of the benchmarks. Its WPrime v2.03

Setup, Athlon II X4 620 @ 2.6 GHz (stock) with 1 core disabled! memory stock @ 1333MHz/Stock timings and I achieved a score of 21.32 seconds.








I have just completed the CPU benchmark portion of 3Dmarks 06 with its default detail and resolution. Again the spec was the same as above,  Athlon II X4 620 @ 2.6 GHz (stock) with 1 core disabled! memory stock @ 1333MHz/Stock timings. I achieved a CPU score of 2900.


----------



## brandonwh64 (Jun 23, 2010)

Ok! Here is some comparisons to your athlon. I downclocked to 2.6ghz like yours BUT since you have DDR3 @ 1334MHZ, i bumped my NB to 2600mhz for my DDR2 to compete.

First up is the Phenom II as a dual core






Second up is the Phenom II as a Tri Core






AND last up is the Phenom II as a Quad Core






For giggles. Phenom II 955 Speeds


----------



## Dent1 (Jun 23, 2010)

Ok, I added your scores to the first post. I actually find is surprising that the full blown Phenom X3 720 scores less (practically identical) to the Athlon II X3 in WPrime when at the same clock speeds, 21.32 vs.  21.624 seconds. This could be a pure example of L3 cache not being a huge factor in some applications, my feeling is that AMD uses higher clock speeds in the Phenom II series to make its performance seem more attractive than the Athlon II X3 counterpart whilst also masking the fact that the extra L3 isn’t always a benefit.


----------



## JrRacinFan (Jun 23, 2010)

If it helps any Dent1








CPU @ 2.6Ghz NB/HTLink @ 2Ghz w/ 800 5-5-5-15

Disabled CnQ while in windows with Phenom MSR Tweaker.


----------



## brandonwh64 (Jun 23, 2010)

Dent1 said:


> Ok, I added your scores to the first post. I actually find is surprising that the full blown Phenom X3 720 scores less (practically identical) to the Athlon II X3 in WPrime when at the same clock speeds, 21.32 vs.  21.624 seconds. This could be a pure example of L3 cache not being a huge factor in some applications, my feeling is that AMD uses higher clock speeds in the Phenom II series to make its performance seem more attractive than the Athlon II X3 counterpart whilst also masking the fact that the extra L3 isn’t always a benefit.



Would the DDR2/DDR3 have anything to do with it?


----------



## JrRacinFan (Jun 23, 2010)

brandonwh64 said:


> Would the DDR2/DDR3 have anything to do with it?



Post an everest & maxmemm bench. I can tell you from there.


----------



## Dent1 (Jun 23, 2010)

brandonwh64 said:


> Would the DDR2/DDR3 have anything to do with it?



Doubt it, its a WPrime is a CPU benchmark so the memory's bandwidth shouldnt be stressed at all. Even so you'd think that the additional L3 and 500Mhz OC on the NB would swing it for the Phenom II favour. Strange.

I will post an Everest later.

Taking a look @ JrRacingFan's score, he got 33.231 seconds on his Athlon II X2 240 @ 2.6GHz and brandonwh64 got 31.937 seconds on a full blown Phenom II 720 with 1 core disabled. Only a insignificant 1.294 seconds seperates the additional L3 cache!


----------



## brandonwh64 (Jun 23, 2010)

are we doing everest CPU queen?


----------



## JrRacinFan (Jun 24, 2010)

EDIT:

Correction- this is at 2.6Ghz


----------



## NdMk2o1o (Jun 24, 2010)

Dent1 said:


> Exactly which was my entire point in the other thread, the Athlon II X3 has an additional core and the only reasons why the Phenom II X2 might win occasionally and narrowly in gaming is because of the clock speed difference in the reviews.
> 
> I said that if the Athlon II X3 or X4 was clocked identically to the Phenom II X2 the reviews will show a different picture, the X2 might still win in single threaded games but even more narrowly. What you are saying is contradictory, you openly admit that 3 cores is better than 2 yet you still say the 550 is better
> 
> ...



Seriosly without getting into an argument about it, listen to what I am saying, yes the athlon x3 does beat out the 550 in SOME tests because of the extra core, though the not all. The pII benefits from the higher stock clocks, unlocked multi, better overclockability and the L3 cache not to mention you have a better chance of unlocking as it already has 6mb cache unlike the athlons which its 50 50 on whether you can unluck any extra cores and 50 50 on the extra cache. Thus making the PII the better choice for the price of the 2 said chips.

No where have I admitted the athlon x3 is the better all around chip so dont take my words and say that I have please.


----------



## Dent1 (Jun 24, 2010)

Final Fantasy IV benchmark
ATI 4850 OC'd @ 650/1100MHz
4GB DDR downclocked to 1333MHz
Athlon II X4 with 1 core disabled @ 2.6GHz

Score: 2798


----------



## Dent1 (Jun 24, 2010)

NdMk2o1o said:


> Seriosly without getting into an argument about it, listen to what I am saying, yes the athlon x3 does beat out the 550 in SOME tests because of the extra core, though the not all.




Agreed.



NdMk2o1o said:


> The pII benefits from the higher stock clocks, unlocked multi, better overclockability and the L3 cache not to mention you have a better chance of unlocking



The stock clocks of the Phenom II X2 are higher granted, but for people like you and me it isnt a big deal to knock the Athlons II X3 clock speed up to match the Phenom II X2. The Athlon II X3 does overclock just as well as the Phenom II series, granted it doesnt have the unlocked multi so you need to be more skilled to achieve the same OC and you'd need a motherboard with a half decent chipset to tolerate the high FSB increase but with the correct hardware and skill the overclocking potential is about the same.




NdMk2o1o said:


> as it already has 6mb cache unlike the athlons which its 50 50 on whether you can unlock any extra cores and 50 50 on the extra cache. Thus making the PII the better choice for the price of the 2 said chips.



But according to what you just said, there is a 1/2 chance that you'd unlock either cache or a core on he Athlon II X3, so even if the core doesn’t unlock there is a possibility of free cache. Whereas on the Phenom II X2 you only have the option to unlock a core. Two possible unlocks are better than one! Lets say the core does not unlock on the Athlon II X3 but L3 cache does unlock, An Athlon II X3 with L3 is still faster than a Phenom II X2 with a failed core unlock.

So although what you said made perfect sense, 2 possible unlocks is better than 1 possible unlock, at least you may get something for free, for the price of a cheaper processor to begin with!

Lets list the benefits of the Athlon II X3, cheaper than Phenom II X2 series, performs almost as well in single threaded games and sometimes better (despite clock speed being lower), surpasses the Phenom II X2 in multi-threaded games, multi-threaded games becoming more popular with developers, much faster in work related applications i.e. encoding, rendering, compressing, CAD etc, almost the same OC potential as Phenom II via FSB, possibility to unlock cache, possibility to unlock a core, future proof due to extra core, less likely to be replaced due to untapped potential and hence saving money on upgrades long term, less likely to bottleneck higher end video cards (SLI/Crossfire).



JrRacinFan said:


> EDIT:
> 
> Correction- this is at 2.6Ghz



Sorry I can not add this test to the database, there is no way I can tell which processor you ran this on, you need CPU-Z enabled side by side with the score.


----------



## brandonwh64 (Jun 24, 2010)

Dent1 said:


> Final Fantasy IV benchmark
> ATI 4850 OC'd @ 650/1100MHz
> 4GB DDR downclocked to 1333MHz
> Athlon II X4 with 1 core disabled @ 2.6GHz
> ...



I cannot do this test cause i have a 8400GS (crappy at games). it will probably score a 5 total LOLZ


----------



## Dent1 (Jun 24, 2010)

brandonwh64 said:


> I cannot do this test cause i have a 8400GS (crappy at games). it will probably score a 5 total LOLZ



lol, what happened to your 5850?, the one in your specification

Run 3Dmarks 06, just the CPU test instead.


----------



## brandonwh64 (Jun 24, 2010)

Dent1 said:


> lol, what happened to your 5850?, the one in your specification



Its in my I7 rig. THe phenom II is in my HTPC


----------



## JrRacinFan (Jun 24, 2010)

2.6Ghz resubmitted






@Dent1

It's ok, but you can trust me with this stuff.


----------



## brandonwh64 (Jun 24, 2010)

OK here is 3dmark06 and everest benches for X2/X3/X4/X4 OCed

This is Dual Core










This is TRI Core










This is Quad Core










Ok this one is it at 955BE speeds


----------



## Dent1 (Jun 24, 2010)

Why was this thread moved to system builders advice? I do not want help its an attempt to collect data, so its a project!


----------



## brandonwh64 (Jun 24, 2010)

Dent1 said:


> Why was this thread moved to system builders advice? I do not want help its an attempt to collect data, so its a project!



I dunno. i would PM a mod and ask. Technically it should be here due to you trying to find out what chip is the better deal since its for someone that wants to upgrade or rebuild there rig


----------



## Mussels (Jun 24, 2010)

sneeky did it, dont PM me.


----------



## brandonwh64 (Jun 24, 2010)

Mussels said:


> sneeky did it, dont PM me.



LOLZ!!!


----------



## NdMk2o1o (Jun 24, 2010)

Ok initial benches only wprime and 3d06 as of yet, running x2 and stock (3.1ghz) but to be fair looking at these scores without any overclocking or unlocking and comparing to the x2 and x3 they all look to be about the same (taking into consideration clock speeds) 

Seems cache aside from cache specific apps (games?) has little/no effect at least in wprime and 3d06, hmmm damn you AMD, you lied, you told me PII was 1337   might have to just run some unlocked to x4 and try get this sucker upto 3.8ghz  

oh ffs why resize the pic its not even that big in the 1st place and cant be read now  well tried as jpb, png and bmp and tpu hosting resizes it to stupidly small sizes every format so using image bam now


----------



## erocker (Jun 24, 2010)

Dent1 said:


> Why was this thread moved to system builders advice? I do not want help its an attempt to collect data, so its a project!



I don't know. Project logs are for building cases, stuff like that. This is a benchmarking test which could be classified under General Software. Since no real overclocking is being done, I'm not putting it in overclocking & cooling. General software it is.


----------



## Dent1 (Jun 24, 2010)

NdMk2o1o said:


> Seems cache aside from cache specific apps (games?) has little/no effect at least in wprime and 3d06, hmmm damn you AMD, you lied, you told me PII was 1337   might have to just run some unlocked to x4 and try get this sucker upto 3.8ghz



That is because L3 cache is very slow with high latencies, L3 is the lowest temporary memory on the CPU, if it had 6MB of L1 or L2 cache the performance boost would be drastically better, but L1 and L2 costs more to manufacture and hence why they dish it out in small sizes (kb/mb). I can remember when the original Phenom architecture was developed geeks argued that L3 isn't necessary and a waste of space and the up to 10% performance yield doesn’t justify the space it takes up on the die.

Try running the Final Fantasy XIV benchmark, it might make use of the extra cache, who knows. Hopefully the tests do not get distorted because of our GPUs.

http://www.techpowerup.com/downloads/1818/mirrors.php



NdMk2o1o said:


> oh ffs why resize the pic its not even that big in the 1st place and cant be read now  well tried as jpb, png and bmp and tpu hosting resizes it to stupidly small sizes every format so using image bam now



Try uploading using a different image hosting company, personally I am using TechPowerUp's very own image hosting service.  http://www.techpowerup.org/


----------



## TONYSALEM (Jun 25, 2010)

Hey guys. I decided to get the Phenom II x2 555 Black!! It unlocked to quad and seems to be stable using OCCT and Prime95. OCCT 1 hr and Prime95 for 2 hours and going!! Just thought i would post to let you guys know what i chose.. I will try to do some of these benches later this coming week but one of my hdd is making some crunching sounds like crazy so i have to pull it out of the raid and drop a new 1tb wd black in there this weekend!! Good luck and i am glad this thread came about. Oh yeah.. Phenom ftw! HAHAHA


----------



## brandonwh64 (Jun 25, 2010)

TONYSALEM said:


> Hey guys. I decided to get the Phenom II x2 555 Black!! It unlocked to quad and seems to be stable using OCCT and Prime95. OCCT 1 hr and Prime95 for 2 hours and going!! Just thought i would post to let you guys know what i chose.. I will try to do some of these benches later this coming week but one of my hdd is making some crunching sounds like crazy so i have to pull it out of the raid and drop a new 1tb wd black in there this weekend!! Good luck and i am glad this thread came about. Oh yeah.. Phenom ftw! HAHAHA



NICE!! you got a good one! see if you can get that thing to 4ghz as a quad!


----------



## NdMk2o1o (Jun 25, 2010)

brandonwh64 said:


> NICE!! you got a good one! see if you can get that thing to 4ghz as a quad!



Yup not bad, this is my 2nd 550, 1st one only unlocked to an x3, though I cant seem to get past 3.6-3.7 with this at x4


----------



## brandonwh64 (Jun 25, 2010)

NdMk2o1o said:


> Yup not bad, this is my 2nd 550, 1st one only unlocked to an x3, though I cant seem to get past 3.6-3.7 with this at x4



Its mainly cause its a C2 chip. My x3 720 will do about 3.8ghz but anything more would take some HIGH volts and its not worth it. The 555BE is a C3 and can go alittle higher


----------



## eidairaman1 (Jun 25, 2010)

C3 parts were not really known to break 3.8 on air either, it is the X6 that is doing it but I think AMD really did some work on the X6.


----------



## Dent1 (Jun 26, 2010)

I have a quick question, when you're unlocking or disabling a core, in the core calibration settings there are values you can assign either in positive or a negative integer in percentages. Does anybody know what this does, does it increase performance or stability. What is the default setting?

Also for the moderators, I sort of can see why this thread doesn’t below in the project log section, but it definitely does not belong in the general software section, can this thread either be moved back to the project log section or at least the general hardware section. Thank you.


----------



## brandonwh64 (Jun 26, 2010)

Dent1 said:


> I have a quick question, when you're unlocking or disabling a core, in the core calibration settings there are values you can assign either in positive or a negative integer in percentages. Does anybody know what this does, does it increase performance or stability. What is the default setting?
> 
> Also for the moderations, I sort of can see why this thread doesn’t below in the project log section, it definitely does not belong in the general software section, can this thread either be moved back to the project log section or at least the general hardware section. Thank you.



I dont use the core values, i just set it on auto and let the board decide. but what you can do is use like OCCT and find the core thats failing and adjust it to get it stable


----------



## Dent1 (Jun 27, 2010)

Athlon II X4 @ 2.6GHz, stock!
4GB DDR downclocked to 1333MHz


3Dmarks 06 score: 3617
Wprime score: 15.907 seconds










Final Fantasy IV benchmark
ATI 4850 OC'd @ 650/1100MHz
4GB DDR downclocked to 1333MHz
Athlon II X4 @ 2.6GHz (stock)

Score: 2994


----------



## brandonwh64 (Jun 27, 2010)

I have an 8600GTS on the way so once it arrives i will do the FF benchmark with it


----------



## Dent1 (Jun 30, 2010)

Athlon II X4 620 @ 3.1GHz
4GB DDR3 @ 1274 MHZ
HT/NB @ 1912 MHz
ATI 4850 OC'd @ 650/1100MHz

WPrime: 13.417 seconds
3D Mark 06: 4219
Final Fantasy XIV: 3183


----------



## brandonwh64 (Jun 30, 2010)

my 8600GTS should be comming in, in the next couple of days. I will run more benches then. also got water on my Phenom II so i will post some 3.6ghz Wprimes


----------



## brandonwh64 (Jul 1, 2010)

Was your Final Fantasy XIV benches on High or low?


----------



## brandonwh64 (Jul 1, 2010)

This is cpu at 3.4ghz and with an 8600GTS 512MB

This is 1080P high


----------



## Dent1 (Jul 4, 2010)

brandonwh64 said:


> Was your Final Fantasy XIV benches on High or low?



I ran it @ 720p which is low, my monitor is only 19".


----------

