Triple-core Phenoms have fourth core enabled

Good old Biostar :D I currently run a 5000x2 BE at over 3GHz in a Biostar TF7025-M2 but I think I'll go for a TA780G asap then TRI this (pun intended) for MORE free bang per buck than the usual overclocking!

I think there must be a big reason why they make Tri-core CPU's. My money is on a Quad-core with one core that doesn't work properly. The CPU's design allows for one core to be switched off, they aren't going to be doing it for fun or to save money. If the quad core yield was 100% I don't think the tri-core would have been born, it's purely recycling.

CPU manufacturers are very well known for selling chips well underclocked after the process matures for a while. Why not sell capable quad core chips that are just disabled down to triple core to meet quotas? I'm sure it's not 100% foolproof at this stage of the game, but after a while the quad core reject rate isn't going to be able to keep up with the tri core demand and some fully functional quads will have to get into the channel. Now that Biostar has this feature people will be wanting this board just to be ready.

I still have 6800 card that has enabled "full GT" shaders even though it was "LE" card.

Sure, they start off as "recycling", but eventualy you sell more of the cheaper CPUs so sometimes even good CPUs will be branded as X3 instead of X4.

But is anything for certain? Certainly not. You can enable extra core, and test extensively, and if Prime and several heavy benches don't break or throw up errors - you're good to go. At least for a while.

So yes, it's good thing if you're lucky. If not, you get the exact same X3 that you've payed for anyway.

Same as overclocking, not eveyone get their E7/8xxx CPUs to 4GHz+...

But good to know, at least some people will have use from this, for sure :)

P.S. I already see people buying several X3 CPUs and selling those that are certified to work fine with all 4 cores for a bit extra, and yet less than real X4 models :D Or leaving those for themselves, and selling rest for normal price :)

With the 4th core enabled - the power consumption is likely to rise. If the CPU is NOT overclocked then you will probably get away with it (but at a higher drain than the chips that qualify as X4) but the room for overclocking is likely to be greatly reduced.

Yup: It could simply be that the fourth core pushes the chip over the 95W power ceiling that AMD has set for these chips.

Of course, there might also be hidden flaws in the core that don't show up with a simple benchmark run, but corrupt your data anyway...you pays your money & you takes your chances.

AMD will now start poking tiny holes in the disabled processor.

Ok you turn on the 4 th core which as some are saying is flaky.If you go back and turn off the setting how does the bios know which core to shut off or something to that effect since I'm not an engineer.

Nice news - Anyway that sounds like when Intel disables part of the cache on its Quad core CPU's (only that you can't turn that on via BIOS) and like Nvidia with the Stream Processors crap 280 (240SP) vs 260 (216SP's). Ok but AMD does it better jeje - 1 extra core - Sweeeettttt

In 2003 2,4,8,16 cores where discussed. Then 3 core practicality hit. CELL is 9 cores(8+1). Cores Arn't Same near 6 years passing & some cores may function seperately at same time, type of serialized useage. So thought Quad be TOP Dog, due to effieciencies. Yet, more Powerful world exist & it seems REAL top End will be 12 cores. 2+1 x 4.(Four Power Numero, comparisson to controller inside to one of two cores till cache fires or whatever, back & forth with cores & ?/T azement U.S.A. Pregno Drashek

I'm just a regular desktop / gaming user, so I don't have much use for 4 cores. I think 3 cores is about all I need to run my primary task, maybe a background task or two, and manage the OS. So if AMD is willing to pretend the 4th core isn't there and sell the chip to me at a lower price, I'm all for it!

The only thing that would be better, I suppose, would be if AMD optimized a design for a 3 core processor. That's not likely to happen, since they design for the server / HPC market then sell the same chips to the home and commercial markets.

While having 3-core processors may be because there is a defective core, it may also be to use surplus 4-core processors that don't sell as well, as "3-core" processors at a lower--more attractive--price point.

"It seems that the current batch of AM3 X3 tri core processors has a surprise for many. With a simple setting in most AMI based boards, the Phenom II AM3 X3 710 processor's disabled 4th core can be enabled. "
Last I checked my Asus M3A78-EM had AMIBIOS on it. Perhaps I should look deeper into this.

@Scott
Are you telling us that if you could change a single setting in the BIOS to unlock a fourth core you wouldn't? Even though it will cost you nothing more?

There is usually a reason why they would disable the something as usefuk as a third core...

Like with the good old X800's!

Bios flash and suddenly you get yourself an XT PE...

(Just google it, if you don't know about the good old days of unlocking GPU's!)

Just try to overclock it and the pipes wouldn't go that high! (Still talking X800's compared to an XE PE and not the Phenom)

I bet the third core has a bad overclock when compared to stock/overclock on the other cores.

(..For those that don't know .. They usually need at least a 20% overclock on standard parts before they pass testing!)

:-)

At a guess here... If your not going to overclock by much then the extra core won't matter in terms of temps or life.

.. If your overclocking with water or something better... Then that one core might bring your OC down! (Get a better X4 CPU!)

I will never complain on getting an extra core though.... Especially for the PRICE!!

I bought an X800 for that reason and still don't regret it to this day!

Just for the record... My X800 is still running.. Still unlocked!!

.. My firewall system will never use its full potential though :-(

:-D

As I said.. Just my 1p.... And you can't complain about extra for free!

Could anyone confirm if this is not a hoax?

I had an X800 and bios flashed it to 16 pipes. OCed the core from 400 to 520 without any problems. The GDDR took a nice boost too but I don't recall it offhand. Those were the days.

If the fourth core simply won't OC as well as the others it's a good thing for the AMD Overdrive. You could push the original 3 (assuming you can identify them) through the roof with clockspeeds and leave the fourth at stock. I haven't yet had a chance to mess with Overdrive personally but hear stuff like that's possible.

What if some tri-core CPUs are really defective quad cores? Just because the computer boots up and CPU utilities detect the 4th core, does that guarantee it's good? Perhaps there's some TLB bug hidden in the disabled core that will only surface when the core is stressed.

If you're the unlucky one to have a really defective 4th core, perhaps your system wouldn't even boot the next time you restart it.

I bought the 720 BE when it became available on the "Egg" Thursday, the 12th (arrived Wedsday the 18th) and not being familiar with Phenom CPU's enabling more BIOS options happened to have 4 cores running for about an hour scratching my head in bewilderment. I posted a desktop screenshot showing it over at TechPowerUp! not more than an hour and a half of closing the hood on my gaming box. It works and it's for real. I have run 3DMARK Vantage with it running at 3 GHz and undervolted at 2.5vcore stable. Cool-N-Quiet is disabled with the 4th core running and monitoring utils like CPU-z are confused as to what it is ("X4 20 Processor"). Remember the old Celeron 300a taking the enthusiast world by storm? Doggy doodoo compared to this!

Uhh, that's 1.5vcore.

One core can be disabled not only because of a defect or a higher TDP but also because it cannot be stable at the same frequency as the other three but since they can be clocked individually it should not be a problem to find the stable frequency.

What about the phenom based dual cores? Will this enable the 2 disabled cores or just one?

My personal belief is that these are x3 simply becuase not all chips come off the line correctly. AMD figure "disable a core, stick a 30% discount on it and sell it" - which is great for the consumers, who buy them up at a hell of a rate.

Suddenly all the crappy damaged chips are sold, and are coming off the line slower than they're being sold. AMD figure it's better to keep up supply and put some fully working x4 chips in there too, with a core disabled.

So yeah, some people may enable the core and find their system crashes instantly, others will have gotten an x4 for £40 less than retail.