PDA

View Full Version : The Phenom TLB errata or is it something more...


werty316
02-13-2008, 05:45 AM
Saw this originally posted on VR-Zone (http://forums.vr-zone.com/showthread.php?t=236421). I am quite surprised as I never heard about this issue that there may something that is deeper than the simple TLB errata issue in the Phenom chips.

What does everything think about this:


Originally Posted by ragemonkey
I think THG should investigate this issue, it is popping up in forums everywhere.

There has been much speculation over why AMD has not released Phenom parts of speeds greater than 2.3ghz. The going perception was that the TLB errata was a big contributor, and possibly an immature manufacturing process. Unfortunately, the problem is actually much deeper than that. Thanks to the release of the Phenom 9600 Black Edition, the problems with Phenom have become painfully obvious. Plainly stated, AMD is selling a busted chip, and many people are getting ripped off, and I think places like THG and OCguide need to call them out on this. Look around the net... it is a huge problem... and one I wouldn't be suprised if AMD eventually got sued over. This problem will also explain the true reason as to why AMD is going to release a Tri-Core chip.

The problem may seem trite, as purchasing a 9600BE is a gamble. But the problem is not just with the Black Edition, but with all current B2 Phenoms. Most of them cannot be overclocked, yes, this is true and a well-known fact. However, there is also a growing number of Phenom buyers who cannot not run stable even at stock clockspeeds.

I recently took a chance on one of these chips and have had the same experience that many others on the internet are having. Here is my experience;

My configuration is:

AMD Phenom 9600 Black Edition cooled by a Zalman 9700
Gigabyte GA-MA790X-DS4 Socket AM2+ motherboard
4GB Gskill 5-5-5-15 DDR2-800 Memory (4x1GB Sticks)
3x74GB WD Raptors in RAID 0, Primary Drive
500GB Seagate PMR Hard Disk
eVGA 8800GTS 320MB
Vista Ultimate 64bit

My Phenom experience:

Upon installing the Phenom in my system, it booted up fine without a problem. I have not OC'd the chip at all at this point, simply running it at stock settings. Once it booted into Vista, I played around with it for a bit with no issues. I then decided to do the first real test, which was to see what the Vista rating on the processor was. I clicked on the "refresh my score" link... and the testing began. During the test I got my first BSOD. The details read...

"A clock interrupt was not received on a secondary processor within an allocated time. Error 0x101"

I rebooted the system and tried again. This time the rating completed without a hitch and showed a glowing 5.9 rating for the processor. About 20 minutes later, the same error happened again.

This happens at stock speed. Any attempts to overclock either results in the BSOD or Vista wont finish booting at all.

Over the next two days I fought with this problem to no avail. I tried bumping the Vcore, the NB voltage, tried setting the RAM down... everything I could think of. Nothing.

I then did some research online and found some interesting info on the subject...

http://forums.amd.com/forum/messageview.cfm?catid=319&threadid=90533&enterthread=y&STARTPAGE=1

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=175878

...a simple search, just google "BSOD clock interrupt Phenom", there are no shortage of hits...

Upon researching this problem I found that many Phenom users are having this same problem. Many only when trying to overclock... but also... many when trying to just run their chip at stock speeds. The problem points to one thing... a partially or wholley defective third core. Apparently, many people have had to use AMD Overdrive to purposely *underclock* the 3rd processing core (Core2, no pun intended) by lowering the multiplier specifically for that core, in order for the chip to run stable. The rest have had to do so in order to get any sort of stable overclock beyond 2.4 ghz. Does this sound familiar?? It should, as it is the frequency above which all Phenoms were yanked by AMD. The truth appears to be coming out... AMD doesn't have Phenoms above 2.4ghz available because one of the cores is flawed and won't allow for a stable chip at or above 2.4ghz. The errata appears to be more spin than anything... let the masses feast on the errata as the underlying issue when the real issue that is the manufacturing process being quite flawed at this point.... tries to fly under the radar. If AMD didn't want this flaw to be exposed, as I'm sure they didn't, they should have never released the 9600BE.

I tested this for myself and came to the same results. Whenever I tried to raise the multiplier on cores 0,1 and 3 I could go past 13 with no problems at all on stock voltage. The very instant I tried playing with core 2, BSOD. So my problem was the same as all the others... a bad 3rd processing core. But mine won't even run reliably at stock speeds...

I then decided to lower multiplier to see at what frequency the 3rd core will actually run reliable at. I first lowered it to 10.5 from the stock 11.5 (a freq. of 2100) and all stability issues seemed to vanish. I played with the system for the better part of a day and had no issues whatsoever. I stressed it rather intently with some video encoding projects and not a problem to be found. I then decided to push a little bit farther and raised the multiplier for the 3rd core to 11 (freq. of 2200). Unfortunately at this speed the random BSODs made a re-appearance rather quickly and I promtly re-adjusted the multi back down to 10.5. The bottom line was that the 3rd core can only run stable at or below 2.1ghz while the rest of the chip was capable of 2.6+ on stock voltage.

So for the money I spent, I got a functional and overclockable tri core cpu with an additional crippled core. This leads me to believe that the tri-core cpus will be capable of 2.6-3.0 speeds quite easily. Considering this issue is becoming more well-known by the day, AMD is facing a ticking timebomb in terms of when the major sites like THG will have a field day with this.

Bar None... AMD should not have released Phenom, much less the 9600 Black Edition.

It seems this problem is known by newegg already, as they appear to be granting RMAs rather unconditionally with these chips. I am RMAing mine currently, and hoping that the next one I get won't have the problem so severely. The word needs to spread and people need to not get ripped off. Hopefully this will inspire THG to do some investigating...

Source: http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/248265-28-phenom-exposed-shipping-flaky-cores

Dragon
02-13-2008, 05:54 AM
it definetly needs fixing . amd rushed this cpu out the door to quickly . but lets hope they get it fixed or thier next batch dont have this issue bc it be cool to see how well it does ...

PP Mguire
02-13-2008, 09:34 AM
Just for common knowledge besides quad cores are fairly pointless, this is why im NOT getting a Phenom. Just so ya know :) (No i didnt know about this in general, just knew they wherent quite right)

SonicWRX
02-13-2008, 02:40 PM
Who ever is running AMD is not making good decisions at all. Just think that if they had just came out with the 3 core version first. This problem would never have come to light. Then they could just have said that there where problems with the 4 core version that needed to be addressed before release. Maybe its just me but that seems like common sense. If I was a share holder with AMD I would be asking for someones head at this point. They are not making responsible decisions.

werty316
02-13-2008, 04:10 PM
It would have been better for AMD not release anything if it had problems than to release something that does have problems as it makes them look quite bad for not taking their time. Lets hope things can change for their later products down the road.

Chakka
02-13-2008, 05:07 PM
I think that for the most part, 80% of users do not overclock so that releasing the phenom as is will still make them money. However, the black edition is really the enthusiast crowd that wants to overclock - and I have read reports too that it is not overclockable. I think that was the only lame decision on AMD's part regarding phenom imo.

Miles
02-13-2008, 05:27 PM
You obviously didn't read my review which details quite a bit about this errata:grin:

Methious
02-13-2008, 06:34 PM
I read the review, and about a dozen others. I usually just encapsulate it by telling people it's not a good idea to go to Phenom right now pointing out that I'm phenom ready and not using one. I don't know that the b3 revision coming is going to be any better. I do know that I'm waiting to see the reviews on the new revision and if it isn't up to par looking to Intel this year.

Miles
02-13-2008, 07:23 PM
I read the review, and about a dozen others. I usually just encapsulate it by telling people it's not a good idea to go to Phenom right now pointing out that I'm phenom ready and not using one. I don't know that the b3 revision coming is going to be any better. I do know that I'm waiting to see the reviews on the new revision and if it isn't up to par looking to Intel this year.

Actually I was talking to Werty but I'm glad you read it as well:icon_tiphat:

werty316
02-13-2008, 07:44 PM
Yes Miles I did read the errata section of your AMD Phenom 9600: Black Edition review so what are you trying to get at?

Miles
02-13-2008, 07:50 PM
That you are probably right that this issue doesn't appear to have anything to do with the TLB Errata issues that I outlined in the article.

werty316
02-13-2008, 08:00 PM
Yeah maybe I should have reworded the title since they it appears to be two seperate issues...., ah screw it, I'll rename it.

EDIT: Done

PP Mguire
02-14-2008, 03:18 AM
Who ever is running AMD is not making good decisions at all.I upgraded for about 200 dollars to the system im running now (CPU mobo and RAM) and its AMD and outdoing my friends C2D both at stock. How is this stupid when i spent so little? Phenom is a bad choice, anything else is decent. Specialy when you want something cheap and have ran pretty much all AMD systems and know them like the back of your hand.

hatakezetsumei
02-14-2008, 04:43 AM
I have nothing much too say. *tears rolling down face* Unless they get this fixed in the next couple of months or triple core is good then ill get it but, if not fixed (hate to say this) then imma have to build a Core 2 duo system. It hurts just to say this.:frown: It needs to be fixed though because its kinda not smart to release something like this especially when your in a tight spot with the competiton coming out with good stuff that works.

You can say i am a Fan boy.

PP Mguire
02-14-2008, 05:23 AM
Then just get an X2. Not like you need 4 cores anyways. And you wont really notice the difference in games between an X2 6400+ and a C2D.

srpeters18
02-14-2008, 04:24 PM
I upgraded for about 200 dollars to the system im running now (CPU mobo and RAM) and its AMD and outdoing my friends C2D both at stock. How is this stupid when i spent so little? Phenom is a bad choice, anything else is decent. Specialy when you want something cheap and have ran pretty much all AMD systems and know them like the back of your hand.

He meant whoever is running the company. Not using their products. So defensive! And I'd have to agree with him, this was a piss-poor decision. They got so wrapped up in getting a quad-core out to compete with Intel and all they've done is hurt their reputation. Remember the Pentium and Pentium II days when AMD had a reputation of chips frying at stock speeds and all kinds of floating point errors? They spent a long time overcoming that and now this.

SonicWRX
02-14-2008, 06:04 PM
He meant whoever is running the company. Not using their products. So defensive! And I'd have to agree with him, this was a piss-poor decision. They got so wrapped up in getting a quad-core out to compete with Intel and all they've done is hurt their reputation. Remember the Pentium and Pentium II days when AMD had a reputation of chips frying at stock speeds and all kinds of floating point errors? They spent a long time overcoming that and now this.

Indeed i am talking only about this most recent release. The Athlon64 and the X2 age of AMD was(is) a good one. I still use those chips in computers at home and at work. They had a good reputation and a good hold on the cost effective PC market. Anyone looking to get a cost effective rig together should still go this way.

Ranzear
02-14-2008, 07:14 PM
I picked up a Phenom 9600 BE just a few days ago and have had nothing but the exact troubles detailed... and this is at 0c-18c under a peltier! Now I've had a bad boot or two and lost my boot sector on my array, but whats worse is the damn gimp chip won't even boot my Vista DVD so I can rebuild it, meaning further that I can't get online besides at work to start up a Newegg RMA.

I plan to RMA this thing until I get a good one, but that will likely take a few tries. For now I'll try dumping the multiplier or putting my 5000 BE or even my 6000 back in.


I don't think its too 'out-there' to wonder about industry sabotage...

PP Mguire
02-15-2008, 02:58 AM
He meant whoever is running the company. Not using their products.Oh i thought he meant consumers not employees/CEOs :(

srpeters18
02-15-2008, 08:12 PM
Indeed i am talking only about this most recent release. The Athlon64 and the X2 age of AMD was(is) a good one. I still use those chips in computers at home and at work. They had a good reputation and a good hold on the cost effective PC market. Anyone looking to get a cost effective rig together should still go this way.

Yeah, I currently have an X2 3800+ machine folding on two cores, two laptops both with a turion64x2 and have had no issues with them. C2Q on my gaming rig though.