Overclocking AMD's Phenom II X4 955

Following the same method used for overclocking the Phenom II X2 550, AMD's quad-core Phenom II X4 955 Black Edition was first set to 1.50 volts for the CPU core, 1.65 volts memory, and 1.45 volts for the memory controller. As soon as we began increasing its CPU core multiplier (“Adjust CPU Ratio” below) however, we found that the CPU cooler simply couldn’t keep up with four cores at full load and our selected voltage.

Stability tests with four threads of 64-bit Prime95 revealed that our system would crash at a CPU core temperature of 59° Celsius, as monitored by AMD OverDrive Utility. We knew that 1.50 volts would be almost ideal for our tests, if only the CPU cooler could keep up. So, rather than start from stock voltage and work our way up, we began with 1.50 volts and worked our way down, until the core no longer reached the offending temperature.

At 1.48 volts the CPU would reach 59° Celsius at a multiplier of 18x, resulting in a Prime95 program error (worker stopped for one core, or program thread). Choosing 1.46 volts allowed a 19x CPU multiplier before the same error occurred at the same temperature. At 1.45 volts (and a 19x CPU multiplier) the program would crash before reaching 59°, indicating more voltage would be required to operate at this speed.

But those voltage levels were achieved using the “CPU VDD Voltage” setting in BIOS, where the “not enough voltage” crash occurred due to voltage fluctuation under full load. Increasing the “CPU Voltage” in MSI's BIOS to 1.480 volts allowed the system to actually run at 1.456 volts under full load with a maximum CPU temperature of around 55°.

Stable at 19 x 200, CPU frequency could still be increased slightly via HT clock, labeled “Adjust CPU FSB Frequency” in the first BIOS screen shot above. Adjusting in increments of 2 MHz, the system was found stable at 202 MHz HT clock, but crashed after around 40 minutes at 204 MHz. 203 MHz allowed it to run without error at full load for several hours, yielding a final overclock of 3.85 GHz.

Peak temperature increased to 56.5° Celsius, barely shy of the 59° limit where heat would cause it to crash. It’s important to note that temperature has far less effect on stability at lower clock speeds, so that systems unable to obtain this relatively mild temperature will be limited in overclocking capability.

At DDR3-1624, our memory supported the same minimum latencies as previously found in the X2 550’s DDR3-1616 DRAM data rate.


  • Print
  • Send to a friend
  • Comment
  • Content also available in:
Sponsored links
Talkback
Anonymous 20/07/2009 11:18
Hide
-0+

Using top end motherboards isn't really budget overclocking, a cheap p43 board is sufficient for e5200 overclocking, additionally a q9400 is only 25% more than a q8200 and overclocks to 3.5Ghz with ease

wild9 22/07/2009 17:12
Hide
-0+

Quote :Overclocking is a collection of methods for making components run faster than the manufacturer intended.


..or allows, considering different models often come off the same wafer xD

wild9 22/07/2009 17:18
Hide
-0+

Quote :Disappointing headroom in the Q8000-series and a price-exclusion for Core i7 allow AMD's Phenom II X4 955 Black Edition to earn our value-overclocking recommendation for quad-core CPUs.


Still, I doubt the AMD-basher's will let that one rest..

spearhead 27/07/2009 19:21
Hide
-1+

I like it. I like to see how far we can push this technology as well as how to keep the idle TDP as low as possible. I think the phenom II 955 suits me the best. AMD overdrive allows you to set both preformance settings as well as the idle settings. Something were i7 failt for me.
I would like to keep cool and quiet on at all times because i dont would want a high power bill and because my computer is on for a few days in a row. So my challenge would be how can i keep the voltage and clocks very low at idle but maintain a resonable desktop preformance. However for gaming i can use some extra headroom. i like to fine tune it well.

parge 02/08/2009 14:28
Hide
-0+

Why the hell did you choose an 8200? That makes no sense at all, its poor overclocking performance is widely documented.

Better would be to choose something else, then have a side note saying 'do not buy this part to OC'.

Anonymous 03/08/2009 14:59
Hide
-1+

if you want a cheap stable intel overclockable intel quad core look for a Q6600 or if you really want a challenge look for a Q6700, both are very good OCers but are EOLed

Solitaire 08/08/2009 02:08
Hide
-0+

Strange to think its Intel that got an unfair bashing this time around. Using top-end mobos in a budget OC session is a major no-no. Using a Q8200 instead of something closer to the X4-955BE's price tag, like the Q9300, is just plain stupid.

To be honest, switching to budget mobos wouldn't have affected the outcome that much; from what reviews I've heard the MSI 770-C45 is a perfectly decent AM3 budget OC board going for a pittance and there are a few MSI and Gigabyte P35/P43 mobos in the same price range on the Intel side of things.

Katash 20/08/2009 22:08
Hide
-0+

I need to get out of my closet and start reading these forums way more.

Thanks for a very interesting thread :D
(Even if criticed by some)

nikko_lp640 27/11/2009 11:29
Hide
-0+

e5200 oc at fsb 1066 (no voltage increasing)
What would be the lifespan of the processor.

Comments are closed on this page.
Sponsored links
Ad
Ad

Best offers

The CPU Articles and reviews
Sponsored links

Newsletters