8k3a 2812 bios is FAST, It appears to have CPU fast decode enabled !

[retrospooty]

It was posted in this thread AGP Tearing...again?!?!

I just got 2819/2629 at 190x10 turbo @ 93% efficiency... and 13028 3dmarks.... This to me says CPU fast command decode is enabled (can someone tell me the wpcredit field value to verify it is?) . I cant test higher yet, I have to go to work.

I got 2736/2529 @ 83% at 190x10 turbo with 2719 turbo and 3dm2k1 was unstable


3 things

GET IT .... TEST IT ... POST IT !

[xgman]

Lucky tried it and reported:

1st:
the bios is not too great. Yes 97=73 now but I can't boot at 203
with the ram settings I had before. I even raised the vmem to 3.04v and still no good. I have it at 193 and the scores at 203 with the 2619 were better. They also removed some dram settings in this bios. No biggies though. So far I see nothing great about it. Sort of like the 2312 bios that all. I'll fool around with it some more.


and then,

2nd:
I am able to MAX out my Samsung completely now at 192 except for 2-2-2 6 1T .05ns and get better mem scores then the setting at 203 2-3-2 1T 1.5ns

Will try 5 in a little while. Not bad so far. This is not an overclockers bios really if you're into pure high fsb's.

[Random Nonsense]

Ill give it a whirl on my 8K3A when its up and running, probably a few days to a week or so.

[retrospooty]

Yes 97=73 now but I can't boot at 203 with the ram settings I had before...

Isnt that to be expected ? If FCD is enabled you should get better performance at a lower speed... I do , way better... Plus I can go to 190, where 185 was my limit before with 2312. 2719 was able to go alot higher but the performance didnt quite match the speed. I had to go to work, so I couldnt really test my limit of speed, I'm sure I can go higher .

Is 97=73 in wpcredit how we verify it is in fact enabled ?

[retrospooty]

Originally posted by LORD
Where did you find 97=73 in WPCREDIT?

ya... where.. I'm not home now so I cant look to verify.

[LORD]

Where was 97 = 73.


http://www.arcomnet.net.au/~lord/WPCREDIT97=73_.jpg

[Mr T]

Since my processor is still locked ultimate FSB isn't important, but raw horsepower is. Whatever they did got me an additional 300 3dmarks. Yeah I know 3dmark isn't the ultimate test, but it is what I use to get a good feel, before and after a system change. It is the biggest jump in 3dmarks I have seen in a long while, with everything in the system the same.

Edit
From 11328-11620 in 3dmark
XP1600 Agoia at 171 fsb (256meg of Samsung DDR 2700).
Ti4400 at 315-635

[retrospooty]

Originally posted by Mr T
Since my processor is still locked ultimate FSB isn't important, but raw horsepower is. Whatever they did got me an additional 300 3dmarks. Yeah I know 3dmark isn't the ultimate test, but it is what I use to get a good feel, before and after a system change. It is the biggest jump in 3dmarks I have seen in a long while, with everything in the system the same.

300 points is pretty cool for a bios. What were you using before 2812 ?

[retrospooty]

Originally posted by LORD
Where was 97 = 73.


http://www.arcomnet.net.au/~lord/WPCREDIT97=73_.jpg

Im not sure , it was in XGman's post, but it wasnt his data.

[Mr T]

I was using 2719 before. 2719 cost me about 50 points from 2619.

[LORD]

Originally posted by retrospooty


Im not sure , it was in XGman's post, but it wasnt his data.

Oh right.

[retrospooty]

I dont know how to tell if CPU FCD is enabled... but by the scores and the bandwidth efficiency it seems clear that it is enabled.

[LORD]

Agreed. Either way definitely an improvement. This board should have had performance like this all along.

Now to get better quality ram.........

[cobase]

My board isn't any faster now, it craps out even earlier when I crank the FSB up.

[Nemes1S]

Nice! For me Fast CPU Decoding is ENABLED with FSBs higher than 166...

I'll bench it right now and compare results (Q3, Sandra and 3DMark) with 2312. I'll keep you informed...

[retrospooty]

Originally posted by Nemes1S
Nice! For me Fast CPU Decoding is ENABLED with FSBs higher than 166...

I'll bench it right now and compare results (Q3, Sandra and 3DMark) with 2312. I'll keep you informed...

cool, thanks. I'll do the same when I get home later.

[Nemes1S]

Well, at 166 MHz (I should have tested higher FSBs, but it will be enough to see if new BIOS performs on par with 2312, any other version I tried before could not match it even at 166 MHz) the results are the following (2312 / 2812):

Q3 Fastest: 409'6 / 409,2

Q3 Custom: 352,5 / 351,7

Sandra CPU bandwith with MMX/SSE optimizations + buffering: 2503 / 2506

Sandra FPU bandwith with MMX/SSE optimizations + buffering: 2380 / 2380

Sandra CPU bandwith without MMX/SSE optimizations and buffering: 1060 / 1064

Sandra CPU bandwith without MMX/SSE optimizations and buffering: 1127 / 1132

3DMark default: 7818 / 8113 -> wow!


In Sandra and Q3 results are virtually the same, differences are completely within error margin. But in 3DMark difference is pretty noticeable, Mr T posted similar result in his system. So it looks like Epox has tweaked some AGP settings...

I'll keep this BIOS, performance is on par o better than 2312 and is newer, so I suppose it will be a bit more stable and have less bugs, also newer HPT BIOS is welcome...

My system:
8K3A+ 1.2, XP1700+ @ 1753 MHz (10.5 x 166), Samsung 512 MB PC2700 Stick @ CAS2 2-5-2 1T, MSI GF3 with Det. 29.40, WinXP Pro

[retrospooty]

Originally posted by Nemes1S
Well, at 166 MHz (I should have tested higher FSBs, but it will be enough to see if new BIOS performs on par with 2312, any other version I tried before could not match it even at 166 MHz) the results are the following (2312 / 2812):

Q3 Fastest: 409'6 / 409,2

Q3 Custom: 352,5 / 351,7

Sandra CPU bandwith with MMX/SSE optimizations + buffering: 2503 / 2506

Sandra FPU bandwith with MMX/SSE optimizations + buffering: 2380 / 2380

Sandra CPU bandwith without MMX/SSE optimizations and buffering: 1060 / 1064

Sandra CPU bandwith without MMX/SSE optimizations and buffering: 1127 / 1132

3DMark default: 7818 / 8113 -> wow!


In Sandra and Q3 results are virtually the same, differences are completely within error margin. But in 3DMark difference is pretty noticeable, Mr T posted similar result in his system. So it looks like Epox has tweaked some AGP settings...

I'll keep this BIOS, performance is on par o better than 2312 and is newer, so I suppose it will be a bit more stable and have less bugs, also newer HPT BIOS is welcome...

My system:
8K3A+ 1.2, XP1700+ @ 1753 MHz (10.5 x 166), Samsung 512 MB PC2700 Stick @ CAS2 2-5-2 1T, MSI GF3 with Det. 29.40, WinXP Pro

cool, its nice to know they finally did it.

[dabhpr]

Just d/l'd it and tried the 2812 BIOS...

Getting memory scores a little better than the 2312 BIOS!

Now seeing 2962/2738 at 195 MHZ FSB (390 DDR).

Good job, EPOX!:-D

[retrospooty]

Originally posted by dabhpr
Just d/l'd it and tried the 2812 BIOS...

Getting memory scores a little better than the 2312 BIOS!

Now seeing 2962/2738 at 195 MHZ FSB (390 DDR).

Good job, EPOX!:-D

cool, what timings and voltage is your ram set at ?