Conclusion
AMD’s Black Edition (BE) processors make it really easy to overclock your processor, as these CPUs can be configured to any clock speed setting you like--only the processors’ physical limits will stop you. In contrast, regular edition CPUs will support only those processor multiplier settings that are required to operate at the rated speed or lower, in many cases (which opens the door to some interesting comparisons between multiplier versus bus speed overclocking, too).
Overclocking regular processors thus means altering the base clock in order to receive a higher core clock speed, which may require faster memory or better cooling. From this point of view, AMD’s Phenom II X4 940 Black Edition offers an excellent value for enthusiasts, giving them high performance and maximum (over) clocking flexibility at reasonable prices.
Performance And Efficiency Scale Nicely With Phenom II
The performance results were pretty straightforward. each clock speed bump translates into measurably increased performance in almost all benchmarks and applications we used. Since we did not have to increase the processor voltage at up to 3.4 GHz, the resulting efficiency kept increasing. Better performance at marginally increased power consumption means better power efficiency. Even the 3.6 GHz setting, which required a manual voltage setting slightly above the default value, resulted in excellent power efficiency.
Refrain From Voltage Increase
The only clock speed setting we recommend against using was the 3.8 GHz configuration, which required the core voltage to be increased more than the resulting clock speed was able to yield in performance. We also had an issue where Cool’n’Quiet would not kick in any more, despite being enabled in the BIOS. This resulted in exorbitant idle power consumption of +43 W when compared to default speed and also +47% increased peak power. Since the resulting performance does not increase by this much, the resulting power efficiency shows a considerable drop.
Clearly, the current architecture at the current stepping and voltage performs best in between 3.2 and 3.4 GHz. 3.6 GHz provided even better power efficiency and increased performance, but we had to manually adjust the processor voltage. Knowing this, we’d be eager to see even faster versions of AMD’s Phenom II processors, as the current clock speeds do not unfold the power efficiency that is hidden in AMD’s current architecture.
Editor's Note: In discussing the 3.8 GHz Cool'n'Quiet issue with representatives at AMD, we touched on a concept that we'd previously never really talked about on Tom's Hardware: its Fusion gaming utility.
Fusion might be a good way for enthusiasts to better control power consumption, as it allows the system to run at its stock clock speed--with Cool'n'Quiet enabled during periods of low utilitzation. Before you fire up a game, a simple button-press instantiates a configured profile, setting whichever frequencies and voltages you've specified in the Overdrive utility, garning that extra performance. By switching back and forth in this manner, you can enable the benefit of overclocking almost on-demand, without the inconvenience of setting each parameter manually.
Latest CPU News
Latest CPU reviews
- 24/05 – Overclocking Core i7-3770K: Learning To Live With Compromise
- 22/05 – Core i5-3570K, -3550, -3550S, And -3570T: Ivy Bridge Efficiency
- 15/05 – AMD A10-4600M Review: Mobile Trinity Gets Tested
- 14/05 – Core i7-3720QM: Ivy Bridge Makes Its Mark On Mobility
- 23/04 – Intel Core i7-3770K Review: A Small Step Up From Sandy Bridge
hmm not quite what I had expected from the article but still it gives a good insight of what the phenom II can do.

What I expected or rather would have like to see is the way that delivers the most performance, the multiplier oc or high memory bus speed oc etc. Or if a combination of those will deliver the highest oc ratings.
for the rest its a good article which can be used for those who value good performance at an acceptible power usage.
I think that would be a very good follow up article, maybe using the 3.6Ghz speed in different ways ie, overclocking the bus compared to multiplier
Wouldn't go that far. For servers and clusters the advantage was and still is, almost always in AMD's favour what with simplified and more efficient memory controllers, together with lower latencies.
Plus, in some tests the speed difference between the A64 and Core 2 architecture is not that great (with a few tests really showing what the A64 can do). Plus, when Core 2 came out and people were looking for stable, fast chipsets with onboard features..where were they? AMD was streets ahead. AMD is now competing on price, and can more than make up for what is looses in core performance, by offering products are very good prices. In terms of overclocking I got a 2.1GHz AMD part that will do 2.8GHz on a stock cooler and a little bit more voltage..not bad for an 'inferior' product
I think that would be a very good follow up article, maybe using the 3.6Ghz speed in different ways ie, overclocking the bus compared to multiplier
I'd like to see that test incorporate some heavy-multi-tasking as well..really load down all the four cores, as well as the bus as much as possible. Then compare it to the non-native Quad from Intel. Maybe some supplemental information on the way AMD processors work, for people who aren't familiar with them, ie
- base frequency/bus speed
- HT links: CPUCPU, and CPUNB, NBSB
- HT width
- Memory speeds
..how these things relate to each other and whether it's worth clocking some or all of them to see a measurable return in your overclock. Even for experience Intel users this must appear as double-Dutch if they've never used it before.
I like these overclocking results, they look fairly linear, upto a point. Thanks for doing the groundwork so the rest of us can build cheap GTAIV rigs
it is good to see AMD being back into the game. there 45nm parts and new strategy seem to make alot of diffrence. according to fudzilla amd had some changes at the top http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php? [...] &Itemid=66 John Byrne who is known for the succes of the radeon 4k series is now vice president of both GPU and CPU bussiness this might be a good step towards profitability. and you can actualy call the phenom 920 and 940 amds radeon 4850 and 4870 for the cpu market if you like. i have no doubt we can compare the future models such as the 955 part with 3.2ghz of clockspeed to the radeon 4890 in marketing strategy. fudzilla also claimed amd might boost its market share to 30% in Q2 of this year. this is good news indeed and lets hope they finaly break even. I my self might build an amd system soon phenom 920 seems a good choice for its price since i cannot afford a core i7 setup togheter with a radeon 4890 this should be near perfect
i know 4890 might seem a bit more expansive then 4870 but at the place i plan to buy it it isnt even 30 euro diffence with 4870 512mb version. 4890 is known to be considerably faster then 4870 512mb. here are some benchmarks btw http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php? [...] mitstart=1