Shop OBEX P1 Docs P2 Docs Learn Events
130MHz test status. (YMMV) — Parallax Forums

130MHz test status. (YMMV)

davidsaundersdavidsaunders Posts: 1,559
edited 2011-05-25 08:41 in Propeller 1
I am running four P8X32A-D40 Propellers (Dip 40) at 130MHz with a XIN of 8.125MHz and PLL16X, for the purpose of seeing how stable they will run at this speed, in order to improve the likelihood of success I am using a 3.8V supply to the Propellers. This thread is to address the status of this test and any discussion directly related to the test. I must note: YMMV!

The four test Props ran with no sign of trouble for 158 hours, there whas not even any measurable increase in the temputure of the Propellers (at least not by the means I have to measure). This test is concluded as of 9:18 PST today.

The next test is on hold until I get a good working Propeller Loader working on Mac OS 'Classic'. This because I am running Mac OS 8.5.1 (was running Mac OS 9.2.2, changed because Mac OS 8.5.x runs Classizilla [Mozilla for Mac OS 'Classic] better).

Comments

  • prof_brainoprof_braino Posts: 4,313
    edited 2011-05-18 08:41
    P8X32A-D40 Propellers (Dip 40) at 130MHz ... using a 3.8V ... all 4 Props are still running well at room temp.

    I would expect it to need cooling or at least get warm.

    By stable, do you mean able to respond to the proptool, or are you running some computation or I/O?

    What would be a reasonable definition of stable in terms of usable functions? Something like "continuously run the demoboard demo application"?
  • davidsaundersdavidsaunders Posts: 1,559
    edited 2011-05-18 08:49
    In this case My first set of testing is just using 8 COGS to generate 6BPP graphics at 1600x1200, with each cog generating a single bit of a color component, rotating the cogs used for such (6 != 8) every scan line, once this proves it self for an extended time at room temp I will move on to other testing (such as continuously starting stopping cogs, etc.) in all cases there will have to be some form of output in order to verify that the Propeller is running as expected. Once it proves stable for all tests, I will repeat with an ambient temp of 38 degrees Celsius. If it pass all tests Repeat again with an ambient temp of 40 degrees Celsius. If it passes all tests over an extended time in all three conditions, I will consider my testing successful, though will continue to maintain the disclaimer YMMV.
  • davidsaundersdavidsaunders Posts: 1,559
    edited 2011-05-18 18:43
    25 hours and still going. No trouble. They do not even feel warm to the touch.
  • Toby SeckshundToby Seckshund Posts: 2,027
    edited 2011-05-18 22:53
    It would be good to have some faith in the Prop being able to suffer the dirrect supply from a Li battery. Especially with the thread on using the RAM only as a security feature.

    I never upped the clock rate but when I had a Prop on 4.2 Volts it didn't get any warmer than usual, ie not warm at all.
  • Mark_TMark_T Posts: 1,981
    edited 2011-05-19 06:11
    25 hours and still going. No trouble. They do not even feel warm to the touch.

    Are you exercising every instruction type and keeping all cogs active (no significant waits) all the time? Also are you measuring/controlling the temperature - it would be interesting to characterise the highest temperature against clock speed to plot your own version of the relevant datasheet graph. You should document the chip datecodes too as these properties are likely to vary from batch to batch.

    Another thing to test is switching clock from xtal to internal RC oscillators to check this works at these speeds.
  • davidsaundersdavidsaunders Posts: 1,559
    edited 2011-05-19 06:41
    Mark_T:
    I am not quite doing 'every instruction type'. For this first test (to last 1 week with these 4 Propellers), I am having 6 cogs generating video (at 1600x1200) and two cogs generating the line buffer in hub mem that is used by the other 6, every scan line the cogs used for each are rotated up by one (thus giving a even use across cogs). During the blanking periods all COGS are running some simple math to determine the areas to draw for the next frame. Each cog also changes the state of an LED every second (so that I do not have to keep an extra monitor running, all the time [I do check video before updating the status here]).

    The next test will have occasional stopping of 7 cogs with a short delay (thus putting the remaining COG in a wait state) before starting all 7 as quickly as possible, as well as stopping the two cogs not used for the current scan line and rotating forward by 2 COGS each scan line.

    Also once all tests have been past for one week each, I will be repeating them at an ambient temp of 38C for one week each and then at an ambient temp of 40C for one week each, then I will have them in conditions where the ambient temp changes once per hour in a sudo random pattern, ranging from 0C to 45C.

    Mark_T:
    Do you have some suggestions for test #3. I am still thinking on this one as I do wish to be as thorough as possible.
  • davidsaundersdavidsaunders Posts: 1,559
    edited 2011-05-19 06:50
    38 Hours and everything looks good.
  • davidsaundersdavidsaunders Posts: 1,559
    edited 2011-05-19 09:04
    41 hours......
  • prof_brainoprof_braino Posts: 4,313
    edited 2011-05-19 16:30
    The 114Hhz test on another thread shows a video of the demoboard demo program, to compare to the stock 80Mhx.

    Could you run the regular demoboard demo program, just to compare?
  • Cluso99Cluso99 Posts: 18,069
    edited 2011-05-19 18:53
    Yah! Keep going... :)
  • jmgjmg Posts: 15,185
    edited 2011-05-20 01:48
    So far it has been 41 hours and still going. No trouble. They do not even feel warm to the touch.

    A useful test, when doing this type of hours-on-the-clock run test, is to lower the Vcc until it fails, and record that value.
    This then gives a margin indication, that is more useful than 'still going'
    One would expect that Vcc point, to change with test (ambient+die) temperature.
  • HumanoidoHumanoido Posts: 5,770
    edited 2011-05-20 02:08
    Can you quote the voltage and the power drawn in milliamps by a single chip running a test program in one cog?
  • Mark_TMark_T Posts: 1,981
    edited 2011-05-20 02:38
    Mark_T:
    Do you have some suggestions for test #3. I am still thinking on this one as I do wish to be as thorough as possible.

    Well I think its important to cover every ALU operation as these will each have a potentially different critical path to settle the result.

    Certainly test each hub instruction too, and.

    Possibly test the self-modifying code ability of the next instruction-but-one as that will be a different timing from other register access.

    Test switching from 12MHz internal RC to and from xtal as that's going to possibly provoke clock-jitter.

    If there's already chip test code out there grab it all - the first symptom of failure will be in one instruction or class of instruction where the critical path is longest or its most vulnerable to clock skew. More important to test coverage than soak testing - you aren't stressing the chip thermally so I wouldn't expect slow degradation - timing issues are very repeatable at fixed temperature/supply I think.
  • davidsaundersdavidsaunders Posts: 1,559
    edited 2011-05-20 19:33
    Sorry about the delay in responding (my PC crashed now on a OS 9.22 G3):
    73 hours and going strong.

    No I can not quote the ampers pulled.
    Yes I can run some standard demo board programs, though I repeat I do not have any to capture Video.
  • potatoheadpotatohead Posts: 10,261
    edited 2011-05-20 20:09
    I just searched and could not find it, but I recall a "work the COGS" program being written very early on. I think it was part of the work to do the datasheet, but I'm not clear on that. Anyone else remember this? Maybe Ken can fetch it for us. At the time, I think Paul Baker was heading up some of that datasheet work, but I could be wrong on that too. Might be a good reference.

    Thanks David for testing. Will be interesting to see where it all leads. Sure are fast running Props!
  • davidsaundersdavidsaunders Posts: 1,559
    edited 2011-05-24 09:37
    First test complete.

    The four test Props ran with no sign of trouble for 158 hours, there whas not even any measurable increase in the temputure of the Propellers (at least not by the means I have to measure). This test is concluded as of 9:18 PST today.

    The next test is on hold until I get a good working Propeller Loader working on Mac OS 'Classic'. This because I am running Mac OS 8.5.1 (was running Mac OS 9.2.2, changed because Mac OS 8.5.x runs Classizilla [Mozilla for Mac OS 'Classic] better).
  • Cluso99Cluso99 Posts: 18,069
    edited 2011-05-24 20:40
    Very impressed David :)
  • william chanwilliam chan Posts: 1,326
    edited 2011-05-25 05:41
    Could it be that overclocking the propellers caused your PC to crash?
  • davidsaundersdavidsaunders Posts: 1,559
    edited 2011-05-25 08:05
    William Chan:
    No.
    My Mother Board blew some capacitors. I have no idea what could have caused it.
  • SapiehaSapieha Posts: 2,964
    edited 2011-05-25 08:14
    Hi

    I have many that Motherboards from My time working active with PC's.
    Them aged simply - Most of Electrolitic capacitors DRY in time of use.

    William Chan:
    No.
    My Mother Board blew some capacitors. I have no idea what could have caused it.
  • davidsaundersdavidsaunders Posts: 1,559
    edited 2011-05-25 08:41
    Sapieha:
    I have often wondered about that, as I have had dozens of the newer Mother Boards develop this problem. The thing that does not make much since to me is that my older systems have not had this trouble. I have a working Amiga 1200, a few working C64s, a good Apple IIGS, a good Atari 1040 Mega STE, etc, none has ever blown a cap.
Sign In or Register to comment.