Yes. They are using the same modular design as Bulldozer, Piledriver etc.

---

Yes and no. Raistmer's A10-5700 is from the Trinity line of APUs which uses Piledriver (Bulldozer) architecture. The C-60 APU is based on Bobcat.

---

Soli Deo Gloria

Been a while since I posted to this thread. To get back to main focus of improving AMD performance versus the status quo of Intel processors, I hope everyone running an AMD FX processor has installed the required Microsoft AMD Scheduler KB's. They are not automatically installed by Windows Update. It is up to the AMD user to install them manually. KB2645594 corrects Windows 7 process scheduler to allow the AMD core module architecture to work properly. If you hadn't installed this patch you wouldn't have been using all your cores. Along with KB2645594 you also need to install KB2646060 which disables core parking which again could make Windows not use all your FX cores. Just wanted to make that fact known since it hadn't come up in the thread before.

I can find no good reason to install these hot fixes. I am running an FX-8350. My resource monitor indicates all 8 cores are in use. Am I missing something, or was this a optional download in Windows Update? If it were an optional update, then I have already installed it and didn't realize I may have had a problem to begin with.

---

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4et7kDGSRfc#t=899

I hope this link works. It really is great fodder for the Intel vs. AMD crowd. It also helped me to understand the hotfix issue we have been talking about.

---

I can find no good reason to install these hot fixes. I am running an FX-8350. My resource monitor indicates all 8 cores are in use. Am I missing something, or was this a optional download in Windows Update? If it were an optional update, then I have already installed it and didn't realize I may have had a problem to begin with.

They weren't offered as an optional Windows Update originally. You had to go searching for them via the Microsoft Knowledgebase site as HotFixes. Based on the description in the HotFixes, the common Windows compilers, optimized for Intel hardware, did a poor job in scheduling worker threads because of the unique AMD core module architecture. There was a performance loss in running AMD processors in heavily loaded systems. With what we do with BOINC, I would think our systems qualify as heavily loaded. I never qualified the differences before and after on my systems, just accepted the recommended HotFixes as well researched with the server crowd. I simply am making the knowledge of their existence as beneficial toward the original posters intent of optimizing performance when using AMD FX technology

---

Seti@Home classic workunits:20,676 CPU time:74,226 hours

A proud member of the OFA (Old Farts Association)

I can find no good reason to install these hot fixes. I am running an FX-8350. My resource monitor indicates all 8 cores are in use. Am I missing something, or was this a optional download in Windows Update? If it were an optional update, then I have already installed it and didn't realize I may have had a problem to begin with.

They weren't offered as an optional Windows Update originally. You had to go searching for them via the Microsoft Knowledgebase site as HotFixes. Based on the description in the HotFixes, the common Windows compilers, optimized for Intel hardware, did a poor job in scheduling worker threads because of the unique AMD core module architecture. There was a performance loss in running AMD processors in heavily loaded systems. With what we do with BOINC, I would think our systems qualify as heavily loaded. I never qualified the differences before and after on my systems, just accepted the recommended HotFixes as well researched with the server crowd. I simply am making the knowledge of their existence as beneficial toward the original posters intent of optimizing performance when using AMD FX technology

And I feel you are correct. I did some snooping and found some good info. I misunderstood. I though it was a matter of how many cores were used, not how they were used. I think it makes good sense to install the hot fixes. Only time will tell if it makes a real difference.

Thank you and happy crunching!

---

So, coming up on 24,000 RAC. I really appreciate the help I have found here. Currently 6/6, GPU/CPU. No freezing or lock ups. Temps are acceptable, 44C CPU/73C GPU (each). I think I'll let it sit for a while. I do still need some high CFM fans though, maybe next week.

Peace all! Happy crunching.

---

I was just happy to see my new fx with the new driver can feed the gpu jobs with the CPU power saving features on (down clocking, core parking). The point of gpu-only is to save power.

That said the two hot fixes seem to kill core parking. Still deciding if I'll keep them.

I was just happy to see my new fx with the new driver can feed the gpu jobs with the CPU power saving features on (down clocking, core parking). The point of gpu-only is to save power.

That said the two hot fixes seem to kill core parking. Still deciding if I'll keep them.

"Important; If you apply this update, you cannot revert the settings by uninstalling this update. This update should only be installed on computers that have KB2645594 installed."

I haven't any problems after applying the Hot Fixes. I do believe they are permanent though.

---

I was just happy to see my new fx with the new driver can feed the gpu jobs with the CPU power saving features on (down clocking, core parking). The point of gpu-only is to save power.

I'm sorta laughing at this ..... my GPUs consume twice as much power as my CPU. If I wanted to save power, I wouldn't run ANY GPUs. I mainly save power [i.e.-money] by running the systems off my free solar power.

---

Seti@Home classic workunits:20,676 CPU time:74,226 hours

A proud member of the OFA (Old Farts Association)

I was just happy to see my new fx with the new driver can feed the gpu jobs with the CPU power saving features on (down clocking, core parking). The point of gpu-only is to save power.

That said the two hot fixes seem to kill core parking. Still deciding if I'll keep them.

"Important; If you apply this update, you cannot revert the settings by uninstalling this update. This update should only be installed on computers that have KB2645594 installed."

I haven't any problems after applying the Hot Fixes. I do believe they are permanent though.

If you look in system restore you will see the installer created a restore point before installing the hot fixes. You can roll back. Also the Kb entries recommended creating a manual restore point.

I was just happy to see my new fx with the new driver can feed the gpu jobs with the CPU power saving features on (down clocking, core parking). The point of gpu-only is to save power.

I'm sorta laughing at this ..... my GPUs consume twice as much power as my CPU. If I wanted to save power, I wouldn't run ANY GPUs. I mainly save power [i.e.-money] by running the systems off my free solar power.

In terms of rac/Watt flops/Watt the gpu is much better so my personal decision is to stop CPU processing. That only makes sense if the CPU can use its power saving features.

I concede that point with regard to RAC/efficiency. But you only would get the power saving feature of the CPU when it isn't actively feeding the GPUs. Some projects require quite a bit of CPU resource to crunch their GPU tasks.

---

Seti@Home classic workunits:20,676 CPU time:74,226 hours

A proud member of the OFA (Old Farts Association)

Holy COW! Just noticed that Windows 10 has somehow adjusted my BIOS. Is that possible?! My FSB is 230 and my CPU is humming along at 4700mhz without issue (so far). Has anyone else experienced this?

---

Gentlemen,

I started a Thread; Optimizing GPUs.

Any input you may have is greatly appreciated. You have been a great help to me already.

---

No but I'm not using win 10

---

Holy COW! Just noticed that Windows 10 has somehow adjusted my BIOS. Is that possible?! My FSB is 230 and my CPU is humming along at 4700mhz without issue (so far). Has anyone else experienced this?

I would seriously doubt it. At first thought, I would think whatever program you're using to report FSB/CPU speed is mis-reporting. Otherwise, I would think you may have accidentally chose to overclock it, perhaps while trying to get your RAM to run at it's rated speed?

I would seriously doubt it. At first thought, I would think whatever program you're using to report FSB/CPU speed is mis-reporting. Otherwise, I would think you may have accidentally chose to overclock it, perhaps while trying to get your RAM to run at it's rated speed?

I concur Ozzie if that chip is at 4.7 ghz then I would expect him to have a real problem with over heating and blowing the PSU so I reckon it's not reporting what speed it's acutally at

---

Holy COW! Just noticed that Windows 10 has somehow adjusted my BIOS. Is that possible?! My FSB is 230 and my CPU is humming along at 4700mhz without issue (so far). Has anyone else experienced this?

I would seriously doubt it. At first thought, I would think whatever program you're using to report FSB/CPU speed is mis-reporting. Otherwise, I would think you may have accidentally chose to overclock it, perhaps while trying to get your RAM to run at it's rated speed?

HAH win 10 NSA edition will not only change your life but also your settings if M$ don't like it

---

I came down with a bad case of i don't give a crap

HAH win 10 NSA edition will not only change your life but also your settings if M$ don't like it

good one .

I'm going to call win 10

10 NSA from now on hehehehehehehe

---