AlexZ wrote on 2026-04-15, 09:22:

We will see whether it works at 2.4Ghz without voltage adjustment.

It depends on the operating system.
For example, my Turion runs perfectly at 2.2 GHz on its native voltage, which the motherboard sets correctly.
But as soon as the OS driver loads (whether the one built into Windows XP or the separate AMD Cool-n-Quiet driver for Windows 2000), the voltage is set to 1.45V.
Just like a standard Venice, not even 1.3V like the low-power Venice.

That is weird because I do have the AMD Cool&Quiet driver installed in Windows XP (power profile set to always on) and voltage is set to 1.4V, see screenshots. The driver doesn't cause any problems. I didn't try Linux to see what voltage would be reported there. Gigabyte BIOS just reports OK voltage.

AlexZ wrote on 2026-04-16, 07:34:

That is weird because I do have the AMD Cool&Quiet driver installed in Windows XP (power profile set to always on) and voltage is set to 1.4V, see screenshots. The driver doesn't cause any problems. I didn't try Linux to see what voltage would be reported there. Gigabyte BIOS just reports OK voltage.

If I’m not mistaken, my Turion runs at 1.2V.
But 1.35V here https://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/K8/AMD-Turion% … ML30BKX5LD.html
It doesn’t really matter, even at 1.35V – the difference is still two voltage adjustment steps for the Athlon 64.
Similarly, I can’t check this in the BIOS either, because it says ‘Vcore – OK’ ~wbr Gigabyte.
But I’m absolutely certain about how Windows 2000 behaves, because I was unpleasantly surprised by the increased noise and heat after installing the AMD Cool’n’Quiet driver.

So there were indeed no fun and no reasons in ocing mobile CPUs on socket 754; I see, I see... 😁
well done, mate.
Btw disable CnQ and don't use the XP drivers for it, you don't want voltage and frequency scaling when you OC and OV, it's a mobile CPU so you can manually scale it with an utility, just my two cents ofc.

I can add for your reference that my system in Win98SE (Newark at 2933 (11x266) and DDR at 533) in default 1024x768 3dmark01 benchmark scores 20440 on a GF FX 5900 ultra (stock frequencies), which is respectable for my use case.

Edit:
Nvidia Detonator 53.04
Nforce3 Unified Drivers 4.20

Madowax wrote on 2026-04-17, 04:48:

So there were indeed no fun and no reasons in ocing mobile CPUs on socket 754; I see, I see... 😁
well done, mate.

Hmm, for example, my second S754 system, the JetWay K8T8AS, identifies all the Venice cores as Semprons, and, doesn’t enable Cool’n’Quiet on them at all. 😀

My Turion 64 ML-37 arrived so I gave it a quick test. I got it from local laptop spare parts shop, not as cheap as previous ML-34 but not crazy expensive either.

I received 20x20mm copper shims with 0.5mm thickness so I used one on CPU die, with thermal paste on both the die and upper side of the copper shim. Thermaltake MaxOrb EX (full copper) went on top and the mounting screw wasn't tightened all the way, about 1mm remained. Mounting pressure is very good and the issue with bad die contact is gone.

• we have up to 10x CPU multiplier in BIOS
• same as ML-34 at 2.2Ghz Async Latency value 6ns doesn't work so we have to use 7ns. It doesn't reboot but memtest fails within a minute.
• at 2.2Ghz the CPU seems to be running so cool CPUID HWMonitor is unable to take a good reading and reports 18'C. Aida64 shows 2 sensors and one of them reports remperature this low, another one reports more reasonable 25'C when idle. With Super PI 32M running the temperature is 30/29'C on each sensor. Prime95 manages to heat it up to 31/29'C. Not sure if it's a sensor defect or the CPU really runs this cool.
• same as ML-34 Command Rate 1T isn't stable with 2 memory sticks at 2403Mhz CPU, 267Mhz base, 9x multiplier, HT 801 (3x), 400 memory. Super PI 32M fails within a minute.
• at 2.6Ghz and conservative memory timings it does boot into Windows XP but it eventually bluescreens. Quick 5 minute memtest passes. Probably higher voltage than 1.4V is needed, maybe ML-40.

It is clear that getting Turion 64 to run at 2.4Ghz requires Command Rate 2T and more voltage for higher frequency. In my opinion not worth chasing, just get s939 (Toledo) or AM2 (Windsor).

My recommendation would be not to chase Turion 64 ML-37 or faster clocked variants, they are extremely rare, just get ML-34 which are cheap (€10) and run them at 2209Mhz CPU, 260Mhz base, 8.5x multiplier, HT 779 (3x), 400 memory (Command Rate 1T). The CPU is 4% faster than Clawhammer 3400+, consumes less power and has SSE3. My CPU cooler fan runs at 1200 RPM, but you can get a slower one at 800 RPM.

AlexZ wrote on 2026-04-20, 19:18:

[*] at 2.2Ghz the CPU seems to be running so cool CPUID HWMonitor is unable to take a good reading and reports 18'C. Aida64 shows 2 sensors and one of them reports remperature this low, another one reports more reasonable 25'C when idle. With Super PI 32M running the temperature is 30/29'C on each sensor. Prime95 manages to heat it up to 31/29'C. Not sure if it's a sensor defect or the CPU really runs this cool.

The Athlon 64 has two temperature sensors – one is fully internal with a digital interface, and it displays normal readings.
The second is an analogue in-die thermodiod, which is measured by a monitoring chip (Winbond, ITE or similar).
For 90nm CPUs (Venice+), the appropriate coefficients* must be entered in the BIOS.
Some manufacturers released updates with precisely these release notes.
Others ignored them.
Yes, at the upper end of the temperature range, the readings for the thermodiode and the digital sensor converge.
The only drawback is that the fans are controlled by the same monitoring chip that processes the thermodiode.
Therefore, without adjustment, the fan speed is regulated in a very strange way.

* That’s not a table of output-to-input relationships, but the slew rate. Its still need to calculate it from that table.
Many manufacturers couldn’t be bothered to do that.
The fan’s spinning – and that’s that.

It looks like the adjustment is missing in BIOS, it only manifests in low temperatures though.

Turion 64 ML-34@2.2Ghz with with insufficient cooler pressure had 30'C when idle and 50'C in peak load (reached within a few seconds). This proves when temperature rises, it is really reported.
Turion 64 ML-37@2.2Ghz with proper cooler pressure has 24'C when idle and 31'C in peak load. BIOS reports 28'C when idle but it doesn't enter C1 (HLT) like Windows can. ML-37 is also better silicon than ML-34.

I ran Crysis benchmark and got 27.9fps in 1600x1200 with high details except for 4x anti-aliasing quality. Clawhammer 3400+ got about 25fps so we got a small boost here as well. Clawhammer ran with Command Rate 2T, Turion 64 runs 2 double sided DDR400 memory sticks with Command Rate 1T.

Archer57 got 26.7fps in 1920x1080 in s939 Athlon 64 X2 4800+ (2.4Ghz, Toledo) GeForce 8800 GT 1GB. See Re: Socket 939 dual core build. Decisions, decisions.... for results and Re: Socket 939 dual core build. Decisions, decisions.... for system details. GeForce 8800 GT is still underpowered for s939, hence the low score.

It shows that s754 can be surprisingly competitive when paired with an overpowered GPU.

My Socket 754 system comprises of:

* AMD Sempron 64 3400+ processor.
* Asus K8V SE Deluxe (VIA K8T800) Motherboard.
* 1GB DDR400 RAM.
* 256MB PNY Verto Geforce FX 5600 GPU.
* Sound Blaster Audigy 2 ZS sound card for Windows.
* ESS Solo-1 sound card for DOS.
* 80GB + 60GB IDE HDDs from Samsung and Seagate iirc (I have quite a few old IDE drives installed in various systems).
* IDE CD/DVDRW from Samsung.
* Black Jeantech R-2 ATX case (aka GMC/Auzentech R2 Toast).
* Creative Inspire T10 Speakers.
* 20" Dell 2007FPB Monitor.
* Dual booting Windows 98SE & XP.

Not used this system for a while as it's currently boxed away amongst a lot of my other old hardware and vintage consoles... It's a case of having too much stuff and not enough space until someone moves out 😂. I originally had it assembled in one of those Commodore CKin ATX cases from back when the Commodore brand briefly dabbled (and failed) in gaming PCs nearly 20 years ago.

I'll have to dig it up at some point and get it going again. I do remember a thread on here about AGP performance issues using the latest BIOS with VIA chipsets and running Windows 98SE, but I don't think my setup was affected afaik (not that I noticed at the time anyway when switching between 98SE & XP).