Windows 7: Updated Rig, teething problems?

I updated my rig to :
AMD FX-4100
Gigabyte GA-78LMT-S2PT (BIOS: FC)
Everything else's the same, except no SP1 of Win 7.



I had some problems (while trying to run Win 7 of old install), for starters display kept going into standby, I discovered that the GPU was hot, I mean really hot! I took it out reseated and took the pesky wires out of the fan's way and re-formatted and clean installed the OS. I also enabled SMART & turned off something called Core Performance Boost (which I thought may cause problems, does it?).

It's been running ok since, I ran prime 95 for 25 mins. (On CoreTemp I adjusted the offset to 11 - max temp. was 59 deg. C, lowest 25 degrees.) and later took a furmark 720p test with Post FX on & off. I'm posting the results.

Any thoughts on the stability of the system?

Let your graphics card chew on this for 15 minutes or so. Watch the temps carfully, if all is well, I'd call it stable. Keep an eye out for graphical artifacts and the like, odd shapes, colors etc.

Valley Benchmark | Unigine: real-time 3D engine (game, simulation, visualization and VR)

http://unigine.com/products/heaven/

You can also run it through 3dmark11 for extra confidence.

http://www.3dmark.com/3dmark11/download/

And if your processor can pass this on top of prime95, its probably ok.

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...pack-interface

Turbo CPB is just a boost clock (Same thing as Intel Turbo Boost). If your processor fails stress testing with it on, turn it off (It shouldn't) otherwise leave it be. It shouldn't cause any issues at all.

I'll try running Valley Benchmark, I've run Linpack...but haven't had time for full 15 passes- I gave it 5, no problems showed. P95 blend test ran for 25 mins or so. I'll run Linpack again.

I had turned off Turbo because I thought that this mobo isn't exactly the Ace of its kind ( I mean, it takes its own good time before going 'beep' and showing the Gigabyte logo! Is that okay?) So would it'd be able to handle the mild overclocking (voltage, temps etc.), even by AMD itself?

PS. I've run Valley Benchmark (18 passes) on High, my resolution, 2x AA...it ran fine, temp. was maximum 65 degrees C.

A few of my AMD PC's have long post times, so by my experience I would consider that normal.

65c for a 6700 series radeon is flirting but acceptable. 70c is the threshold for those cards. Meaning it will throttle down to keep the GPU below 70c BUT they have a maximum safe temperature of like 85c and shut down at 100c (or die). I wouldn't go anywhere near that unless I was extreme benchmarking. Keep it under 70c and your 100% safe.

If by mild overclocking you mean not messing with voltages. You might be able to add 100 or 200 mhz to it. Varies from chip to chip. If you add 100mhz and it fails stress testing, it probably won't overclock at all with out more power.

A lucky FX 4100 can do 4.6ghz on 1.31v on good air cooling and has a maximum operating temp of 70c. don't go anywhere near that and over clocking should be fine. However, DO NOT exceed 1.4v. or you will blow that chip right off your board and it will fly into orbit.

You can leave the turbo boost on. The only reason it would cause a problem is if the MB or CPU is defective or the MB/cpu get to hot. If everything stays in the acceptable ranges it really doesn't matter what model/make the board is. They all get their parts from the same place.... most of the time. =P

P.S your mixed&matched ram may impact stability with over-clocking.

His may or may not be one of those, but it will never get that high on the motherboard he has. One big reason is that it doesn't have the power subsystems that the newer 970/990 based boards have, that is required to get the most out of FX CPU's.

Wouldn't happen to have any external hard drives connected would you? Mine takes a bit longer to boot when I have mine connected, and is quite a bit quicker with it not.

I might add Prime95 need to run several hours, 8 or more, to get a good test.

I didn't realize that about his MB. Thanks for the update. AMD chips leave a bad taste in my mouth so my experience with them is quite limited. I've RMA'd 9 of them over 6 years. So I stick to buying
Intel now. I've never even killed one with aggressive over clocking.

Hmm. No, I haven't any external HDDs present right now. My previous Asus mobo showed a blinking icon before going to logo screen, so I was a little perturbed. It takes about 23 seconds to get to the logo screen (then it says something sometimes before windows boot logo shows up about my resolution needs to be adjusted to match the LCD- though I have matched it in Windows!). I don't intend to overclock at all, in fact I think I'll let the Core performance Boost feature stay off, what say folks?

My GPU gave a scare the first time, but it's been running Dead Space 3 okay for half an hour on medium/High settings (temp. goes to 53/55 c. max), idles around 43 c. in this cool season (summer would be a different scenario in India!)

ok I was under the impression that there was a slightly longer post time than normal. 23 seconds would indicate something is wrong. That's huge. I have an Athlon 64 FX on a 30 dollar mother board that boots in 15 seconds to desktop.

For your GPU, the idle seems high but the temps under load are perfect.

Yes, once it gets to the logo part it boots up nice and fast, but before that...! Could RAM be the cause? You know, being not the same pair. I'm giving some previous/after upgrade specs.