How to identify Athlon CPU? A7N8X-E Dlx having trouble with 3200+ CPU. CPU fraud?

[Erik Harris]

I bought an XP 3200+, and the sticker on the chip looks right, gives me all
the right data, but any sticker can be stuck onto any CPU. I'm having trouble
getting this thing running at the proper speed in my new A7N8X-E Deluxe
motherboard, and I'm not sure which is bad, the CPU or the MoBo (but I suspect
the CPU). I bought the OEM chip from what I've always considered to be a
reputable seller (mWave.com, I've purchased a few things from them over the
last 3 years or so, so they're not a fly-by-night place), but I'm suspecting
that they might have sold me a rebadged chip (their supplier might be at
fault, or they might be less reputable than I thought).

Quite often, the Asus Voice POST feature tells me "system failed due to CPU
overclocking" and won't boot up, especially if I try running at 200x11. I can
pretty consistently run at 166x11, and the chip is recognized as a 2500+.

Given that stickers can be easily defrauded, how do I know what CPU I've got?
I've tried a number of CPUID programs (both of the programs from AMD's website
plus cpu-z, from cpuid.com). They all seem to "tell me what I want to hear."
If I'm running it as an Athlon 2500+, it tells me that it's an Athlon 2500+.
If I run it as an Athlon 1900+ (133x11), it tells me that it's an Athlon
1900+. Even the EAX value changes depending on what speed I'm running at.

Also, on one of my reboots, I tried setting the multiplier to something other
than 11. It seemed to work, but I need to investigate further to see if it
actually runs at a different multiplier. Aren't all Athlon XP 3200+ chips
locked at 11? The lock doesn't change if I lower the bus speed, does it?
i.e. if I'm running at 166MHz instead of 200MHz, should I be able to increase
the multiplier? I'd have assumed that the answer was "no."

To sum up - is there any way to know whether or not I'm a victim of CPU fraud?
I've still got time before mWave's 30-day warranty on the chip runs out, and
if this chip does turn out to be bad, I want to know ASAP. :-(

Thank you very much in advance for any help you can offer.

 

[Ed]

I bought an XP 3200+, and the sticker on the chip looks right, gives me all
the right data, but any sticker can be stuck onto any CPU. I'm having trouble
getting this thing running at the proper speed in my new A7N8X-E Deluxe
motherboard, and I'm not sure which is bad, the CPU or the MoBo (but I suspect
the CPU). I bought the OEM chip from what I've always considered to be a
reputable seller (mWave.com, I've purchased a few things from them over the
last 3 years or so, so they're not a fly-by-night place), but I'm suspecting
that they might have sold me a rebadged chip (their supplier might be at
fault, or they might be less reputable than I thought).

Quite often, the Asus Voice POST feature tells me "system failed due to CPU
overclocking" and won't boot up, especially if I try running at 200x11. I can
pretty consistently run at 166x11, and the chip is recognized as a 2500+.

Given that stickers can be easily defrauded, how do I know what CPU I've got?
I've tried a number of CPUID programs (both of the programs from AMD's website
plus cpu-z, from cpuid.com). They all seem to "tell me what I want to hear."
If I'm running it as an Athlon 2500+, it tells me that it's an Athlon 2500+.
If I run it as an Athlon 1900+ (133x11), it tells me that it's an Athlon
1900+. Even the EAX value changes depending on what speed I'm running at.

Also, on one of my reboots, I tried setting the multiplier to something other
than 11. It seemed to work, but I need to investigate further to see if it
actually runs at a different multiplier. Aren't all Athlon XP 3200+ chips
locked at 11? The lock doesn't change if I lower the bus speed, does it?
i.e. if I'm running at 166MHz instead of 200MHz, should I be able to increase
the multiplier? I'd have assumed that the answer was "no."

To sum up - is there any way to know whether or not I'm a victim of CPU fraud?
I've still got time before mWave's 30-day warranty on the chip runs out, and
if this chip does turn out to be bad, I want to know ASAP. :-(

Thank you very much in advance for any help you can offer.

If you have a unlocked CPU you should be able to raise and lower the
multiplier in the bios no matter what the FSB is set too, but there are
limits as how far you can go up and down, tho anything from 9x to 12.5x
shouldn't be a problem. If it's a locked CPU it should just stay at 11x
no matter what you set it to.

Yes the XP3200+ uses 11x (2200MHz - 200x11.0)

Do you have PC3200 ram and have it set to 100% so it runs in sync of the
FSB? Not sure if that has anything to do with your problem but these
boards generally don't like running in async mode.

Ed

 

[Almeyda]

sounds that theres a chance that u've been taken for a ride... well either
that or the Ram is overcloking because its rated at 333mhz(166fsb) and ur
running at 400mhz(200fsb) and thats perhaps why ur getting the warning.

im running a 2500+ @ 3200 speed on same mobo and i dont get any warning but
then again my ram supports the speed im currently overclockin.

older 2500 bartons were able to be unlocked by mobos and ran fine
overclocked to 11x200, its possible that they sold you a 2500 knowing that
it quite simply can be clocked to 3200 (without changing mutliplier).

but that seems unlikely... though u need to find out. also the way to check
is on the chip itself it will give you the details to assure you if its 3200
or not.

--
Almeyda

AMD2500XP @3200XP-11X200-2.21Ghz
A7N8X-E Deluxe > Corsair TWINX1024 XMS3200LL DualChannel
HIS Excalibur 9800XT 256mb @463/399 (Omegas 2.5.51 & ATI tool 0.20 No
Artifacts)
1x80GB SATA Seagate 8mg cache > 2x40GB ATA Seagate
SB AudigyES > ANTEC SuperLanboy 350 Case (350W SmartBlue PS)

 

[Ron Todd]

I bought an XP 3200+, and the sticker on the chip looks right, gives me all
the right data, but any sticker can be stuck onto any CPU. I'm having trouble
getting this thing running at the proper speed in my new A7N8X-E Deluxe
motherboard, and I'm not sure which is bad, the CPU or the MoBo (but I suspect
the CPU). I bought the OEM chip from what I've always considered to be a
reputable seller (mWave.com, I've purchased a few things from them over the
last 3 years or so, so they're not a fly-by-night place), but I'm suspecting
that they might have sold me a rebadged chip (their supplier might be at
fault, or they might be less reputable than I thought).

Quite often, the Asus Voice POST feature tells me "system failed due to CPU
overclocking" and won't boot up, especially if I try running at 200x11. I can
pretty consistently run at 166x11, and the chip is recognized as a 2500+.

Given that stickers can be easily defrauded, how do I know what CPU I've got?
I've tried a number of CPUID programs (both of the programs from AMD's website
plus cpu-z, from cpuid.com). They all seem to "tell me what I want to hear."
If I'm running it as an Athlon 2500+, it tells me that it's an Athlon 2500+.
If I run it as an Athlon 1900+ (133x11), it tells me that it's an Athlon
1900+. Even the EAX value changes depending on what speed I'm running at.

Also, on one of my reboots, I tried setting the multiplier to something other
than 11. It seemed to work, but I need to investigate further to see if it
actually runs at a different multiplier. Aren't all Athlon XP 3200+ chips
locked at 11? The lock doesn't change if I lower the bus speed, does it?
i.e. if I'm running at 166MHz instead of 200MHz, should I be able to increase
the multiplier? I'd have assumed that the answer was "no."

To sum up - is there any way to know whether or not I'm a victim of CPU fraud?
I've still got time before mWave's 30-day warranty on the chip runs out, and
if this chip does turn out to be bad, I want to know ASAP. :-(

Thank you very much in advance for any help you can offer.

Well..... Semi deja vu....

I also bought a -E with a OEM 3200+ form MWave, with the represented
to run swell Kingston DDR400 Value Mem. AIR, best I could get the
thing to run was 185 x 11, front & back. Paid the bucks and bought
the Corsair matched pair. The best I can mine to run reliably at is
195 x 11. Got to love them Mwave 3200+ OEMs. I gave up on the
correspondence with the Mwave folks around May as they kept insisting
it was impossible not to get 200x11 with the Kingston and the AMD
3200+ OEM cpu and it was all my fault......

Best of luck.

 

[Paul]

I bought an XP 3200+, and the sticker on the chip looks right, gives me all
the right data, but any sticker can be stuck onto any CPU. I'm having trouble
getting this thing running at the proper speed in my new A7N8X-E Deluxe
motherboard, and I'm not sure which is bad, the CPU or the MoBo (but I suspect
the CPU). I bought the OEM chip from what I've always considered to be a
reputable seller (mWave.com, I've purchased a few things from them over the
last 3 years or so, so they're not a fly-by-night place), but I'm suspecting
that they might have sold me a rebadged chip (their supplier might be at
fault, or they might be less reputable than I thought).

Quite often, the Asus Voice POST feature tells me "system failed due to CPU
overclocking" and won't boot up, especially if I try running at 200x11. I can
pretty consistently run at 166x11, and the chip is recognized as a 2500+.

Given that stickers can be easily defrauded, how do I know what CPU I've got?
I've tried a number of CPUID programs (both of the programs from AMD's website
plus cpu-z, from cpuid.com). They all seem to "tell me what I want to hear."
If I'm running it as an Athlon 2500+, it tells me that it's an Athlon 2500+.
If I run it as an Athlon 1900+ (133x11), it tells me that it's an Athlon
1900+. Even the EAX value changes depending on what speed I'm running at.

Also, on one of my reboots, I tried setting the multiplier to something other
than 11. It seemed to work, but I need to investigate further to see if it
actually runs at a different multiplier. Aren't all Athlon XP 3200+ chips
locked at 11? The lock doesn't change if I lower the bus speed, does it?
i.e. if I'm running at 166MHz instead of 200MHz, should I be able to increase
the multiplier? I'd have assumed that the answer was "no."

To sum up - is there any way to know whether or not I'm a victim of CPU fraud?
I've still got time before mWave's 30-day warranty on the chip runs out, and
if this chip does turn out to be bad, I want to know ASAP. :-(

Thank you very much in advance for any help you can offer.

An interesting problem. The chips all start out the same, until the
bridges program the "grade" of the chip. Fraud can be perpetrated by
meddling with the bridges. In the case of changing a 2500+ to a
3200+, one is 166x11 and the other is 200x11. The only difference
might be the FSB_sense[1:0] pins. See PDF page 87 of this document:

http://www.amd.com/us-en/assets/content_type/white_papers_and_tech_docs/26237.PDF

"FSB_Sense[1:0]

Pins FSB_Sense[1:0] pins are either open circuit (logic level of 1)
or are pulled to ground (logic level of 0) on the processor package
with a 1k ohm resistor. In conjunction with a circuit on the
motherboard, these pins may be used to automatically detect the
front-side bus (FSB) setting of this processor. Proper detection of
the FSB setting requires the implementation of a pull-up resistor on
the motherboard...

Table 26. Front-Side Bus Sense Truth Table
FSB_Sense[1] FSB_Sense[0] Bus Frequency
1 0 RESERVED
1 1 133 MHz
0 1 166 MHz
0 0 200 MHz"

FSB_sense[1] is pin AG31
FSB_Sense[0] is pin AH30
VSS (GND) is pin AH32

Using an ohmmeter, flip the chip over and measure from a sense
pin to the nearest VSS (GND) pin. If both sense pins read 1K ohms,
you haven't been defrauded. If FSB_Sense[0] is open circuit, you
have a 2500+ with a new label stuck on it.

That is the best test I can come up with.

To help you visually, go here:

http://www.ocinside.de/go_e.html?/html/workshop/pinmod/amd_pinmod.html

Select "PCB View" "AMD Barton" and set the FSB to 200MHz. PCB
view is like viewing the bottom of the motherboard, and it is the
same view you see when looking at the bottom of the CPU chip.
The pattern you see on the screen would correspond to what those
two 1K resistors are attempting to do - bridge AG31 to AH32 and
bridge AH30 to AH32. Use that pattern to help guide where to measure
with the ohmmeter.

Use antistatic precautions when working on the CPU.

HTH,
Paul

 

[Paul]

I bought an XP 3200+, and the sticker on the chip looks right, gives me all
the right data, but any sticker can be stuck onto any CPU. I'm having trouble
getting this thing running at the proper speed in my new A7N8X-E Deluxe
motherboard, and I'm not sure which is bad, the CPU or the MoBo (but I suspect
the CPU). I bought the OEM chip from what I've always considered to be a
reputable seller (mWave.com, I've purchased a few things from them over the
last 3 years or so, so they're not a fly-by-night place), but I'm suspecting
that they might have sold me a rebadged chip (their supplier might be at
fault, or they might be less reputable than I thought).

Quite often, the Asus Voice POST feature tells me "system failed due to CPU
overclocking" and won't boot up, especially if I try running at 200x11. I can
pretty consistently run at 166x11, and the chip is recognized as a 2500+.

Given that stickers can be easily defrauded, how do I know what CPU I've got?
I've tried a number of CPUID programs (both of the programs from AMD's website
plus cpu-z, from cpuid.com). They all seem to "tell me what I want to hear."
If I'm running it as an Athlon 2500+, it tells me that it's an Athlon 2500+.
If I run it as an Athlon 1900+ (133x11), it tells me that it's an Athlon
1900+. Even the EAX value changes depending on what speed I'm running at.

Also, on one of my reboots, I tried setting the multiplier to something other
than 11. It seemed to work, but I need to investigate further to see if it
actually runs at a different multiplier. Aren't all Athlon XP 3200+ chips
locked at 11? The lock doesn't change if I lower the bus speed, does it?
i.e. if I'm running at 166MHz instead of 200MHz, should I be able to increase
the multiplier? I'd have assumed that the answer was "no."

To sum up - is there any way to know whether or not I'm a victim of CPU fraud?
I've still got time before mWave's 30-day warranty on the chip runs out, and
if this chip does turn out to be bad, I want to know ASAP. :-(

Thank you very much in advance for any help you can offer.

An interesting problem. The chips all start out the same, until the
bridges program the "grade" of the chip. Fraud can be perpetrated by
meddling with the bridges. In the case of changing a 2500+ to a
3200+, one is 166x11 and the other is 200x11. The only difference
might be the FSB_sense[1:0] pins. See PDF page 87 of this document:

http://www.amd.com/us-en/assets/content_type/white_papers_and_tech_docs/26237.PDF

"FSB_Sense[1:0]

Pins FSB_Sense[1:0] pins are either open circuit (logic level of 1)
or are pulled to ground (logic level of 0) on the processor package
with a 1k ohm resistor. In conjunction with a circuit on the
motherboard, these pins may be used to automatically detect the
front-side bus (FSB) setting of this processor. Proper detection of
the FSB setting requires the implementation of a pull-up resistor on
the motherboard...

Table 26. Front-Side Bus Sense Truth Table
FSB_Sense[1] FSB_Sense[0] Bus Frequency
1 0 RESERVED
1 1 133 MHz
0 1 166 MHz
0 0 200 MHz"

FSB_sense[1] is pin AG31
FSB_Sense[0] is pin AH30
VSS (GND) is pin AH32

Using an ohmmeter, flip the chip over and measure from a sense
pin to the nearest VSS (GND) pin. If both sense pins read 1K ohms,
you haven't been defrauded. If FSB_Sense[0] is open circuit, you
have a 2500+ with a new label stuck on it.

That is the best test I can come up with.

To help you visually, go here:

http://www.ocinside.de/go_e.html?/html/workshop/pinmod/amd_pinmod.html

Select "PCB View" "AMD Barton" and set the FSB to 200MHz. PCB
view is like viewing the bottom of the motherboard, and it is the
same view you see when looking at the bottom of the CPU chip.
The pattern you see on the screen would correspond to what those
two 1K resistors are attempting to do - bridge AG31 to AH32 and
bridge AH30 to AH32. Use that pattern to help guide where to measure
with the ohmmeter.

Use antistatic precautions when working on the CPU.

HTH,
Paul

It would be nice, instead of going to this much trouble,
if you could rely on the BIOS to read the FSB_sense pins.
But I'm not sure the "Auto" setting in the BIOS always
does the right thing. If might read the 00 value from
the pins, conclude it doesn't know what that means, and
then force the pins to 01 instead. If the BIOS played
fair, and didn't meddle with the pin value, then you could
rely on the BIOS Auto setting, coming up at 1833MHz, as
proof of a fraud.

The fraud I postulate above, is simple label tampering. A
more complicated fraud, including the label change, would be
modifying one bridge, to change a 2500+ 01 code to a 00 code.
A visual check of the surface of the processor might uncover
that kind of fraud, but the people who do this kind of stuff
are probably pretty well set up to do it, as with the amount
of money they would be making, they could afford some pretty
fancy equipment.

Are there any scratch marks near the label ?

Paul

 

[Erik Harris]

Do you have PC3200 ram and have it set to 100% so it runs in sync of the
FSB? Not sure if that has anything to do with your problem but these
boards generally don't like running in async mode.

I've actually got PC4000 RAM, and yes, it's running in sync.

Turns out that I was defrauded, either by mWave.com, or by mWave.com's
supplier. I got help from the nice folks on the AMD support forum. All the
details are here: <http://forums.amd.com/index.php?showtopic=21632>

--
Erik Harris n$wsr$ader@$harrishom$.com
AIM: KngFuJoe http://www.eharrishome.com
Chinese-Indonesian MA Club http://cimac.eharrishome.com

The above email address is obfuscated to try to prevent SPAM.
Replace each dollar sign with an "e" for the correct address.

 

[Erik Harris]

but that seems unlikely... though u need to find out. also the way to check
is on the chip itself it will give you the details to assure you if its 3200
or not.

The chip itself doesn't give those details. A _sticker_ on the chip gives
you those details, and stickers are very easily faked, as mine was. The
sticker told me that the chip was a 3200+. BIOS recognized it as a 3200+,
and automatically tried to run it at 200x11. But it was a 2500+, as someone
on the AMD Support Forums (<http://forums.amd.com/index.php?showtopic=21632>)
determined by seeing a closed L12 bridge in a photo I posted of my chip. For
what it's worth, I bought this fraudulent chip from MultiWave (mwave.com).

If not for that person's help, I'd have kept going to try to find the
problem, and eventually narrowed it down to a "faulty" CPU, when it was just
a CPU that couldn't be overclocked to 3200+, even though most of the 2500+
chips could be. I suspect that trying to run it that fast may have damaged
the chip, because I can't get it to be reliable under any speed. Even at
133x11, I need to reset my computer 2-4 times to get it to boot up. Once it
boots up, it seems stable, but getting it running is a challenge.

I'll have a replacement chip, from a different vendor (NewEgg), on Tuesday,
or Wednesday if I'm less lucky (paid for overnight shipping, but NewEgg
doesn't guarantee that they'll actually send it out promptly, unless I pay
them an extra $3, in which case they'll "do their best" to ship it out
promptly). As soon as I have the new chip, this garbage 2500+ is going back
to mWave, totally at their expense (that took a lot of effort, too).

--
Erik Harris n$wsr$ader@$harrishom$.com
AIM: KngFuJoe http://www.eharrishome.com
Chinese-Indonesian MA Club http://cimac.eharrishome.com

The above email address is obfuscated to try to prevent SPAM.
Replace each dollar sign with an "e" for the correct address.

 

[Erik Harris]

I also bought a -E with a OEM 3200+ form MWave, with the represented
to run swell Kingston DDR400 Value Mem. AIR, best I could get the
thing to run was 185 x 11, front & back. Paid the bucks and bought
the Corsair matched pair. The best I can mine to run reliably at is
195 x 11. Got to love them Mwave 3200+ OEMs. I gave up on the
correspondence with the Mwave folks around May as they kept insisting
it was impossible not to get 200x11 with the Kingston and the AMD
3200+ OEM cpu and it was all my fault......

Interesting... Thanks for the note; it's "nice" to see that someone else was
defrauded by mWave. It lends credence to the idea that they're not terribly
honest.

Do you still have the CPU? Do you have pictures of it, or can you look at
it? Take a look at the thread at
<http://forums.amd.com/index.php?showtopic=21632>, where someone kindly
pointed out that my OEM 3200+ is a rebadged 2500+, as evidenced by the fact
that the first L12 bridge is cut. Is this the case on your CPU?

Simply, I want to know if I should report mWave to the Better Business
Bureau. If multiple people are being screwed by them when buying CPU's, it
suggests that I should.

For what it's worth, I got them to refund every cent and pay to ship the CPU
back to them, but it took a great deal of effort and about a 45-minute phone
call.

--
Erik Harris n$wsr$ader@$harrishom$.com
AIM: KngFuJoe http://www.eharrishome.com
Chinese-Indonesian MA Club http://cimac.eharrishome.com

The above email address is obfuscated to try to prevent SPAM.
Replace each dollar sign with an "e" for the correct address.

 

[Paul]

Interesting... Thanks for the note; it's "nice" to see that someone else was
defrauded by mWave. It lends credence to the idea that they're not terribly
honest.

Do you still have the CPU? Do you have pictures of it, or can you look at
it? Take a look at the thread at
<http://forums.amd.com/index.php?showtopic=21632>, where someone kindly
pointed out that my OEM 3200+ is a rebadged 2500+, as evidenced by the fact
that the first L12 bridge is cut. Is this the case on your CPU?

Simply, I want to know if I should report mWave to the Better Business
Bureau. If multiple people are being screwed by them when buying CPU's, it
suggests that I should.

For what it's worth, I got them to refund every cent and pay to ship the CPU
back to them, but it took a great deal of effort and about a 45-minute phone
call.

Maybe better to report them to AMD. See if AMD wants the processor as
evidence. I'm sure the AMD lawyers have nothing better to do than
chase weasels like that. They won't be able to dodge AMD with the
"my supplier did it" excuse. If they want product, they can buy it
straight from AMD, not from some guy in an alley.

Paul

 

[Erik Harris]

It would be nice, instead of going to this much trouble,
if you could rely on the BIOS to read the FSB_sense pins.
But I'm not sure the "Auto" setting in the BIOS always
does the right thing. If might read the 00 value from

My BIOS recognized it as 200x11 by default (but wouldn't actually boot
successfully).

Are there any scratch marks near the label ?

I've got pictures up at http://www.eharrishome.com/CPUPic1.jpg and
http://www.eharrishome.com/CPUPic2.jpg

Someone on the AMD forums (http://forums.amd.com/index.php?showtopic=21632)
saw these pictures and pointed out that the first L12 bridge is cut, as a
2500+ was. Dunno about the other bridge sets and how they match up with a
2500+ or 3200+, but that alone tells me that this CPU was not manufactured as
a 3200+. However, not only was the sticker replaced with a 3200+ sticker,
but the chip was somehow modified (perhaps in the way you detailed in your
message) to make the BIOS automatically attempt to boot up at 200x11 when it
identifies the chip on its own.

Sneaky. MultiWave (or their supplier) got caught in their fraud when they
let this chip go out modified and apparently didn't test it to find out that
it won't actually run at 200x11... Actually, I can't get it to boot reliably
at ANY speed. Just so I have a working PC until I get my replacement CPU
(from NewEgg, hopefully on Tuesday), I've got it clocked down to 133x11, and
even at this speed, I need to hit the reset button 2-4 times before my system
will POST.

MultiWave insists that they're a victim in this, too, but given that someone
else here has also gotten an OEM 3200+ CPU from mWave that won't boot at that
speed, I've gone ahead and written up a review of the company for BizRate,
FatWallet's reseller ratings, ResellerRatings.com, and Pricegrabber.com..
Are there any other vendor rating sites out thre that get lots of usage? I'm
not aware of any others, but if any are anywhere near as popular as the four
I've already posted my rating on, I'd like to "share the wealth" and expose
this issue.

--
Erik Harris n$wsr$ader@$harrishom$.com
AIM: KngFuJoe http://www.eharrishome.com
Chinese-Indonesian MA Club http://cimac.eharrishome.com

The above email address is obfuscated to try to prevent SPAM.
Replace each dollar sign with an "e" for the correct address.

 

[Ron Todd]

Interesting... Thanks for the note; it's "nice" to see that someone else was
defrauded by mWave. It lends credence to the idea that they're not terribly
honest.

I did not say I was defrauded by Mwave. I only say it didn't work the
way I understood it was supposed to, I did not find their responses
satisfactory, and there position is it was my fault. I still disagree
with this but I am not making and issue of it.

Do you still have the CPU? Do you have pictures of it, or can you look at
it? Take a look at the thread at

Yes, I still have it, and it is still running at 195. I pulled the
heat sink and the sticker looked proper.

<http://forums.amd.com/index.php?showtopic=21632>, where someone kindly
pointed out that my OEM 3200+ is a rebadged 2500+, as evidenced by the fact
that the first L12 bridge is cut. Is this the case on your CPU?

I don't know, I would have to pull the thing apart to check. I don't
have the time to do it at the present. Mine is running cool at the
moment, room 82F cpu 125F per ASUS probe. That doesn't sound much
like an over clocked 2500 does it?

I am curious, what did Mwave say when you confirmed the bridge cut
identified it as a 2500+ instead of a 3200+?

 

[Ron Todd]

It would be nice, instead of going to this much trouble,
if you could rely on the BIOS to read the FSB_sense pins.

FWIW, mine auto reads to 200x11 and 200fsb, but with the Kingston
Value RAM, it wouldn't boot. I could stable operation at about
180x11. Switching to the Corsair matched pair, it would boot and run
for about a hour (average) before doing various things such has
spontaneous reboots. With the Corsair it has run nicely at 195 since
June.

 

[Erik Harris]

Maybe better to report them to AMD. See if AMD wants the processor as
evidence. I'm sure the AMD lawyers have nothing better to do than
chase weasels like that. They won't be able to dodge AMD with the
"my supplier did it" excuse. If they want product, they can buy it
straight from AMD, not from some guy in an alley.

I tried. I couldn't find anything on AMD's website for reporting fraud. I
sent an email to their tech support folks - the web-email interface bombed
out on me with an error, but I got a confirmation message via email, so I
assume they got my message. They haven't responded.

If you know who to contact at AMD regarding fraud, let me know. My ISP's
news server is having trouble with delays (my messages don't appear until
many hours, or even a day after I post them), so if you do know who to
contact, please let me know via email ASAP, not just via the group. I say
ASAP only because I plan on sending this chip back to MultiWave on Wednesday,
since they won't refund my money until they get the chip. If going through
AMD is a viable option, though, I'll send it to them instead of mWave and
just contest mWave's charge on my credit card.

--
Erik Harris n$wsr$ader@$harrishom$.com
AIM: KngFuJoe http://www.eharrishome.com
Chinese-Indonesian MA Club http://cimac.eharrishome.com

The above email address is obfuscated to try to prevent SPAM.
Replace each dollar sign with an "e" for the correct address.

 

[Erik Harris]

I did not say I was defrauded by Mwave. I only say it didn't work the
way I understood it was supposed to, I did not find their responses
satisfactory, and there position is it was my fault. I still disagree
with this but I am not making and issue of it.

Sorry, you're right, you didn't say you were defrauded by mWave.. I said it
based on the fact that your symptoms pretty much match mine, and match that
of a chip overclocked beyond its ability. I should have "someone else may
have been defrauded by mWave." Either way, the words are mine, not yours. I
didn't mean to put words in your mouth.

Yes, I still have it, and it is still running at 195. I pulled the
heat sink and the sticker looked proper.

My sticker looks proper, too. The CPU's sticker was replaced with one that
is "correct." The CPU was also modified to make my BIOS "recognize" it as a
200x11 chip when it's not.

I don't know, I would have to pull the thing apart to check. I don't
have the time to do it at the present. Mine is running cool at the
moment, room 82F cpu 125F per ASUS probe. That doesn't sound much
like an over clocked 2500 does it?

Actually, it does. The majority of unlocked 2500+ chips are more than
capable of running at 200x11. It turns out that the one they tried to pawn
off on me isn't, though. Keep in mind that all Barton chips are the same
when they're first made. Whether it's a 2500+ or a 3200+, it started off as
exactly the same thing and produced exactly the same way. The difference?
The 2500+ chip was tested successfully at a lower speed. That does NOT mean
that it was unsuccessfully tested at a higher speed (though it may have
been), because they need to produce X number of chips at each speed. If they
already have their quota of 3200+ chips, the rest are going to be sold at
lower speeds - even if they can run just as well at the higher speeds.

You should only need to pull the heat sink off to look at the bridges, just
like you did to look at the sticker, unless your chip has a sticker covering
the bridges, as some of them do (mine had no sticker at all there, so the
bridges were clearly visible).

Another thing you can do to test this out is change the speed in BIOS - not
just the FSB, but the multiplier. A legit 3200+ processor will NOT let you
change the multiplier. Mine did, because it's a 2500+ that was made before
AMD started locking their chips (week 39 or 2003, or something like that).
Having a locked multiplier doesn't guarantee anything either, though. The
2500+ and 3200+ both have a standard multiplier of 11, making it possible to
make a 2500+ masquerade as a 3200+ even when locked (since the bus speed
isn't locked, just the multiplier).

I am curious, what did Mwave say when you confirmed the bridge cut
identified it as a 2500+ instead of a 3200+?

They claimed to be a victim of this mistake a well. The manager I spoke to
insisted that this was a production mistake on AMD's part. When I pressed
him on the possibility of an unscrupulous supplier, he said that MultiWave
gets all of their AMD processors "from official AMD channels." I did note
that he didn't say that they get them directly from AMD. He didn't have
anything in particular to say about the fact that the L12 bridge told me
conclusively that this was produced as a 2500+ chip.

The CSR I spoke to didn't care WHAT I said. I insisted on getting my money
back, and not paying them a penny. She insisted that I had to pay the
original $8 shipping. I told her I'd take my case to the BBB. I even said
"look, if you give me too much of a hard time, I can just contest this charge
with my credit card company. That way, you won't get a cent OR your CPU
back." Even then, she said she couldn't refund my shipping. Her manager
could, though, and he did, with the caveat that he wouldn't refund my money
under the assumption that mWave was at fault. I told him that I accepted the
possibility that they may have received a modified CPU from their supplier.
He interrupted me saying "not mat have, did!" before I could point out that
it doesn't matter who was at fault, because as the vendor, they are
responsible for what they sell (at least insofar as fraud is concerned - I
won't blame the vendor for a DOA product; that's different).

To the CSR's credit, she was firm, but she remained polite and professional
the whole time. I assume that she didn't have the authorization to drop the
shipping charge, but it's also possible that she was just afraid that if she
did, she'd get in trouble, even if she could do it.

--
Erik Harris n$wsr$ader@$harrishom$.com
AIM: KngFuJoe http://www.eharrishome.com
Chinese-Indonesian MA Club http://cimac.eharrishome.com

The above email address is obfuscated to try to prevent SPAM.
Replace each dollar sign with an "e" for the correct address.

 

[Paul]

I tried. I couldn't find anything on AMD's website for reporting fraud. I
sent an email to their tech support folks - the web-email interface bombed
out on me with an error, but I got a confirmation message via email, so I
assume they got my message. They haven't responded.

If you know who to contact at AMD regarding fraud, let me know. My ISP's
news server is having trouble with delays (my messages don't appear until
many hours, or even a day after I post them), so if you do know who to
contact, please let me know via email ASAP, not just via the group. I say
ASAP only because I plan on sending this chip back to MultiWave on Wednesday,
since they won't refund my money until they get the chip. If going through
AMD is a viable option, though, I'll send it to them instead of mWave and
just contest mWave's charge on my credit card.

Well, I searched around, and I guess this kind of thing _never_
happens :-( I guess AMD would like to keep their head in the
sand. All I could find is the contact page - maybe you'll get
some advice there.

http://www.amd.com/us-en/Corporate/AboutAMD/0,,51_52_3592_712,00.html

I could have sworn I read an article about remarked Athlons, but
tonight a few quick searches aren't turning up anything of use.

Paul

 

[Ron Todd]

Sorry, you're right, you didn't say you were defrauded by mWave.. I said it
based on the fact that your symptoms pretty much match mine, and match that
of a chip overclocked beyond its ability. I should have "someone else may
have been defrauded by mWave." Either way, the words are mine, not yours. I
didn't mean to put words in your mouth.



My sticker looks proper, too. The CPU's sticker was replaced with one that
is "correct." The CPU was also modified to make my BIOS "recognize" it as a
200x11 chip when it's not.



Actually, it does. The majority of unlocked 2500+ chips are more than
capable of running at 200x11. It turns out that the one they tried to pawn
off on me isn't, though. Keep in mind that all Barton chips are the same
when they're first made. Whether it's a 2500+ or a 3200+, it started off as
exactly the same thing and produced exactly the same way. The difference?
The 2500+ chip was tested successfully at a lower speed. That does NOT mean
that it was unsuccessfully tested at a higher speed (though it may have
been), because they need to produce X number of chips at each speed. If they
already have their quota of 3200+ chips, the rest are going to be sold at
lower speeds - even if they can run just as well at the higher speeds.

You should only need to pull the heat sink off to look at the bridges, just
like you did to look at the sticker, unless your chip has a sticker covering
the bridges, as some of them do (mine had no sticker at all there, so the
bridges were clearly visible).

Another thing you can do to test this out is change the speed in BIOS - not
just the FSB, but the multiplier. A legit 3200+ processor will NOT let you
change the multiplier. Mine did, because it's a 2500+ that was made before
AMD started locking their chips (week 39 or 2003, or something like that).
Having a locked multiplier doesn't guarantee anything either, though. The
2500+ and 3200+ both have a standard multiplier of 11, making it possible to
make a 2500+ masquerade as a 3200+ even when locked (since the bus speed
isn't locked, just the multiplier).


They claimed to be a victim of this mistake a well. The manager I spoke to
insisted that this was a production mistake on AMD's part. When I pressed
him on the possibility of an unscrupulous supplier, he said that MultiWave
gets all of their AMD processors "from official AMD channels." I did note
that he didn't say that they get them directly from AMD. He didn't have
anything in particular to say about the fact that the L12 bridge told me
conclusively that this was produced as a 2500+ chip.

The CSR I spoke to didn't care WHAT I said. I insisted on getting my money
back, and not paying them a penny. She insisted that I had to pay the
original $8 shipping. I told her I'd take my case to the BBB. I even said
"look, if you give me too much of a hard time, I can just contest this charge
with my credit card company. That way, you won't get a cent OR your CPU
back." Even then, she said she couldn't refund my shipping. Her manager
could, though, and he did, with the caveat that he wouldn't refund my money
under the assumption that mWave was at fault. I told him that I accepted the
possibility that they may have received a modified CPU from their supplier.
He interrupted me saying "not mat have, did!" before I could point out that
it doesn't matter who was at fault, because as the vendor, they are
responsible for what they sell (at least insofar as fraud is concerned - I
won't blame the vendor for a DOA product; that's different).

To the CSR's credit, she was firm, but she remained polite and professional
the whole time. I assume that she didn't have the authorization to drop the
shipping charge, but it's also possible that she was just afraid that if she
did, she'd get in trouble, even if she could do it.

Thank you for the information and clarification. I will have to check
my cpu and find out if I have something other than what I paid for.
The thought of writing all those letters is really unpleasant.

Best of luck and i pray you reach a satisfactory resolution, Ron

 

[Kylesb]

| In article <[email protected]>, Erik Harris
|
| > On Sun, 15 Aug 2004 15:21:28 -0400, (e-mail address removed) (Paul)
wrote:
| >
| > >Maybe better to report them to AMD. See if AMD wants the
processor as
| > >evidence. I'm sure the AMD lawyers have nothing better to do than
| > >chase weasels like that. They won't be able to dodge AMD with the
| > >"my supplier did it" excuse. If they want product, they can buy
it
| > >straight from AMD, not from some guy in an alley.
| >
| > I tried. I couldn't find anything on AMD's website for reporting
fraud. I
| > sent an email to their tech support folks - the web-email
interface bombed
| > out on me with an error, but I got a confirmation message via
email, so I
| > assume they got my message. They haven't responded.
| >
| > If you know who to contact at AMD regarding fraud, let me know.
My ISP's
| > news server is having trouble with delays (my messages don't
appear until
| > many hours, or even a day after I post them), so if you do know
who to
| > contact, please let me know via email ASAP, not just via the
group. I say
| > ASAP only because I plan on sending this chip back to MultiWave on
Wednesday,
| > since they won't refund my money until they get the chip. If
going through
| > AMD is a viable option, though, I'll send it to them instead of
mWave and
| > just contest mWave's charge on my credit card.
|
| Well, I searched around, and I guess this kind of thing _never_
| happens :-( I guess AMD would like to keep their head in the
| sand. All I could find is the contact page - maybe you'll get
| some advice there.
|
|
http://www.amd.com/us-en/Corporate/AboutAMD/0,,51_52_3592_712,00.html
|
| I could have sworn I read an article about remarked Athlons, but
| tonight a few quick searches aren't turning up anything of use.
|
| Paul


I've also seen that article Paul. A lil searching turned up this
article, which is the one I recall reading:

http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/display/20030503024652.html

 

[Erik Harris]

Well, I searched around, and I guess this kind of thing _never_
happens :-( I guess AMD would like to keep their head in the
sand. All I could find is the contact page - maybe you'll get
some advice there.

I ended up calling their tech support, and giving him all of the info,
including the thread on AMD's forums, my invoice number, etc. I found
nothing about contacting their legal department, but he said that he'd
forward the info to them.

Fortunately, AMD didn't want my CPU. If they took it, I wouldn't be able to
get my money back from MultiWave. Also, if they took it, they'd be legally
obligated to give me something in return - probably a 2500+, he said, which
wouldn't help me much.

In MultiWave's defense, when he spoke to his manager to ask if they wanted
the CPU or just the info, he came back saying that his manager was very
surprised that my remarked CPU came from MultiWave, because he (like I)
understood them to be very reputable, and indicated that it's possible that
one of their official distributors is remarking OEM CPU's. Either way, AMD
is going to look into it and determine who is at fault, and who their legal
department should go after.

In contrast to the above, MultiWave's price was pretty much too good to be
true. If they were selling modified chips thinking that they were legit, why
were they undercutting every other reputable dealer by $40? (That's not an
insignificant amount on a $195 chip!) That seemed odd when I bought it, but
I went ahead and did so anyhow, because I believed MultiWave to be reputable,
based on their ratings on the review sites, and based on my own previous
experiences with them.

--
Erik Harris n$wsr$ader@$harrishom$.com
AIM: KngFuJoe http://www.eharrishome.com
Chinese-Indonesian MA Club http://cimac.eharrishome.com

The above email address is obfuscated to try to prevent SPAM.
Replace each dollar sign with an "e" for the correct address.