MoBo reporting wrong processor 2

[ADoozer]

i started building a new system last night

MS-6590 version 2 motherboard
AMD Athlon XP 3000+ (333FSB)

and for whatever reason the motherboard is reporting that the processor is a 1700+, is there any way to confirm that the processor is actually a 3000+ without removing the heatsink and paste. (the packaging was completely sealed so im hoping this is a motherboard issue, and not the wrong chip.)

any input appreciated

If somethings hard to do, its not worth doing - Homer Simpson
adoozer.servebeer.com

 

[Freestone]

In BIOS, ensure that your FSB is set to 166 (which will be doubled internally by the CPU to the desired 333MHz). I believe this setting will be found in the Frequency/Voltage Control section of BIOS.

This link AMD Processor Utilities and Updates has two CPU ID utilities, though if your clock speed is off, I'm unsure of there results.

 

[paparazi]

ADoozer
Yes, as Freestone has already pointed out, this is nearly always down to incorrect FSB settings being sellected in the bios or jumpers on the motherboard.
Set to 166 via jumper or bios (this then doubles, DDR, to the 333 needed by the CPU to attain the XP3.0+ 333fsb CPU's true 2.167ghz clock speed.
There may also be an outside chance of the need to update the bios in order for this faster CPU to be recognised.
Martin

Start by questioning and soon you will be answering.
So please take but remember to return and give when you can.

 

[ADoozer]

good job guys... i did try setting the FSB using the windows core program supplied with the mobo, but that kept crashing the PC.
ive done it manually now and it seems stable (recognises the xp3000+ and is running around 2170Mhz)
did have a problem with the core monitor(forgot its exact name) freezing up the desktop, but that seems to have fixed itself.

anyway thanks all round


If somethings hard to do, its not worth doing - Homer Simpson
adoozer.servebeer.com

 

[ADoozer]

while im on the subject of processors, what is an average temp for a 3000+? (previous biggest processor was a 2000+)

it has front fan (intake) rear fan(exhaust) (no airflow through PSU though) and is sitting idle around 58° which seems a touch high. (ambiant room temp is about 25°)

thnx again.

If somethings hard to do, its not worth doing - Homer Simpson
adoozer.servebeer.com

 

[paparazi]

ADoozer
Nice one!
There does seem to be a lttle misconception about heat and CPU speed, what you really want to look at is power consumption in watts of the processor, which turns out some very interesting facts about heat produced by these CPU's.
Don't quote me on this because I'm going on memory but generally the hottest CPU's are those that were/are at the highest end of the particular core model ie:

Slot 900 Athlon?
Thunderbird 1400
Palomino XP2.1+
Thoroughbred "A" XP2.4+
Thoroughbred "B" XP2.6+ ?
Barton XP3.2+

Now the funny thing is, ALL THESE CPU's, produce about the same amount of heat!!!!!!!! between 75/85watts.
SOOOOOO! thats why so many users had problems cooling the old Thunderbird 1.4 266fsb's.
Around that time there just weren't any manufactures producing the massive copper heatsink/coolers that are available now.

So to relate this to your specific question.
The old Palomino (square core) XP2.0+ CPU's was very close to the core design limits and produced nearly as much heat as the much newer "Barton" XP3.0+

So you can now see why MHZ ratings on Heatsink/fan units are a bit of a mockery, when it is clear that an older Thunderbird core 1.4 needs as big a heatsink as a Barton XP3.0+.

There is another important factor in all of this, that is core footprint size.
As you probably know, AMD socket A CPU's have something of a repution for producing heat when compared to Intel P4's,
again this is a misconception, the equivelant P4 often is just as hot, it is just that Intel CPU's don't have the very small core footprint of an AMD XP.
This small heat transfer footprint has to carry the same amount of kinetic heat as the P4 which has many times the heat transfer area.
So therefore proper fitment with high quality paste is far more critical on an Athlon.
Lastly those AMD CPU's that have the very smallest cores ie: Thorouhbred "A" are the most difficult to cool especially the very fastest in that core range.
This is why many manufactures have started using copper base's on their heatsinks, as this material is a better heat conductor than Alluminium (note* Alluminium is better at dispersing the heat this is why you often see heatsinks made of both materials)
Martin

Start by questioning and soon you will be answering.
So please take but remember to return and give when you can.

 

[ADoozer]

wow... very thorough.

ive seen lots of equations on the AMD sight about power and air flow rates and things like that. but from your above description i assume that an idle 58° is not too bad.

i also assume the 85° critical limit still applies to all AMD chips.

unfortunately ive been away from the top end builds of recent so im not as clued up as i used to be.

if there are any tech sites aimed at AMD i would love to hear about them (currently looking into a AMD athlon 64 processors)

thanks again for the info

If somethings hard to do, its not worth doing - Homer Simpson
adoozer.servebeer.com

 

[paparazi]

ADoozer
58C isn't the end of the world but a few degrees higher than I would expect from this CPU.
Having said all of this, alot depends on the operating conditions (how warm it is in the room where the PC is situated)
As we speak we are experiencing a warm spell in the UK, my room temperature is 26C and I have a idle CPU temp of 49C with a case temp of 42C.
The CPU hovers around 51/52C when under heavey load.

Lian Li PC6089 (4x 80mm fans)
Gigabyte Ga-7NNXP
XP3.2+
160 SATA 60 ATA
FX5900 256mb
1 gig PC3200
3 roms
Audigy

But then!!! I do have an all copper Thermalright SLK900-A
CPU cooler with a pretty standard (and quiet) 80x25x80
YS-Tech fan , around 40cfm.

There isn't a problem running your CPU at these slightly higher temperatures, it is generally considered that anything under 60C max is fine and stable. But be warned most XP's can start to become flakey if they are aload to go mid 60's C or higher.

I think AMD XP max's range from 80 to 90C depending on core but this is "burn out point! in reality all will blue screen and lock up well before these max's are reached.
Martin

Start by questioning and soon you will be answering.
So please take but remember to return and give when you can.