• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

FX6100 to a FX8320

edwarhys

edwarhys

edwarhys

Associate
Joined
14 Jan 2014
Posts
436
Location
Stoke on Trent
Straight away i'm going to say for gaming don't bother if the FX6100 is overclocked above 4Ghz.

For video rendering - yes the upgrade is worth the dollar.


So i had an FX-6100 overclocked to 4.42Ghz with a Sapphire R9 290 Tri-X (1120Mhz GPU Clock - 1350Mhz Memory Clock)

And now i have an FX-8320 at stock clocks 3.5Ghz (Turbo 4Ghz)

My results for Unigine Valley Benchmark 1.0 as followed :





Thought someone might find this handy.

Please note the 8320 results are using newer GPU drivers
 
Yeah man way to go, run two completely GPU dependent tests :D

Something like Cinebench would have been better.
 
ALXAndy said:
Yeah man way to go, run two completely GPU dependent tests :D

Something like Cinebench would have been better.
Click to expand...

Slow clap for you man....

what I'm trying to prove/talk about is a lot of people say get the 8320 so you have less bottleneck
 
edwarhys said:
Slow clap for you man....

what I'm trying to prove/talk about is a lot of people say get the 8320 so you have less bottleneck
Click to expand...

You're running a test that does not touch the CPU at all. IE I can score the same score in that benchmark with a Pentium as opposed to a 3970x.

There is no bottleneck of the CPU when an application is purely GPU bound.
 
mx0range said:
i went from an fx6200 to fx8320 and it does make for an improvement. besides, running an fx8320 @ stock is silly :p
Click to expand...

i only have an Cooler Master 212 EVO - Temp when under 100% load is 53C and i don't want it going higher even thought i know it will be okay with a small OC
 
not sure what the OP is trying to say, just run same test
stock i5 4690k, on a power color 290 (1040/ 1350) so lower clock than users
I get
av 61.9
score 2589
min 28.9
max 117.9
 
an 8 core at 3.5 v a six core at 4.4, basically same computing power
if heaven is multi threaded his 8 core may be staying at 3.5
so he needs to oc the 8 core, then try it again

'temp when under 100% load is 53C ' = large thermal margin to play with
 
As others have said, you are not going to notice a difference in those benchmarks as they are almost entirely GPU.

Also I shouldn't imagine there is a huge difference with a single card setup anyway. It generally only when you have a dual card setup that a bottleneck occurs or becomes a problem.

As other have said. Try other benchmarks like fire strike (Which is free). This will give much more useful data.

You have a lot of head room for overclocking with the 8core and most would agree you need to OC these chips to get value out of them. You should easily be able to get it to 4-4.4 after that heat can be a limiting factor. The motherboard could be a limiting factor though. Which board are you running?
 
Last edited:
edwarhys said:
i only have an Cooler Master 212 EVO - Temp when under 100% load is 53C and i don't want it going higher even thought i know it will be okay with a small OC
Click to expand...

with my chip, i could just turn off turbo and up the multi so all cores were 4ghz without any need to up the voltage.. might even of gone higher, cant remember now but it didnt take much extra voltage for 4.4ghz
 
Thanks for the help everyone , instead of just pointing out the obvious and taking the pee

well i'm not going to swap the FX6100 back in an OC to re test, but i will run stock test on the FX8320 to see how it goes then OC that

-------

Might be building an HTPC with some old parts
 
edwarhys said:
Thanks for the help everyone , instead of just pointing out the obvious and taking the pee

well i'm not going to swap the FX6100 back in an OC to re test, but i will run stock test on the FX8320 to see how it goes then OC that

-------

Might be building an HTPC with some old parts
Click to expand...

I wasn't taking the pee I was joking, hence the :D But yes, Valley and Heaven and a few others will not put any stress on the CPU.

It's a decent upgrade. You've got 15% better single core performance and two extra cores.
 
ALXAndy said:
I wasn't taking the pee I was joking, hence the :D But yes, Valley and Heaven and a few others will not put any stress on the CPU.

It's a decent upgrade. You've got 15% better single core performance and two extra cores.
Click to expand...

Okay, sorry for thinking you was, no harm done .... crying in corner lol
 
mx0range said:
with my chip, i could just turn off turbo and up the multi so all cores were 4ghz without any need to up the voltage.. might even of gone higher, cant remember now but it didnt take much extra voltage for 4.4ghz
Click to expand...

Just done that now, thanks

Pinned to 4.02Ghz :D
 
lude1962 said:
an 8 core at 3.5 v a six core at 4.4, basically same computing power
if heaven is multi threaded his 8 core may be staying at 3.5
so he needs to oc the 8 core, then try it again

'temp when under 100% load is 53C ' = large thermal margin to play with
Click to expand...

Agree here. Ed can you clock the FX to nearer clockspeed and compare?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom