• 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.

AMD not adhering to 125W spec with FX8350?

Avenged7Fold said:
I am not at all surprised having owned several 8 core fx chips and tested them on a variety of motherboards. Every week there is a few people saying that their extreme 3 coupled with an 8350 is not using the multiplier set in the bios and instead a much lower one. Then you see a string of replies to tell them to update bios, check CPU temperature or change the stock heat sink but every time its actually just the VRMs throttling the clock.

I don't believe that motherboard manufacturers have implemented the throttling to combat AMD's FX chips power drain but rather most of the boards where people are finding their stuff throttled were originally made for am3 CPU's and VRMs on boards which were released pre-FX still could throttle the clock but rarely did since their power drain was more modest. Extreme 3 only has 4+1 power phasing and though outdated, it was a good motherboard. It was however made to take phenom CPU's and was only just about capable of taking a 6 core phenom with a moderate overclock, without a huge CPU air cooler nearby to help the airflow around the VRMs. People buy the extreme 3 now because it is cheap and was previously known as a good board and also Asrocks flagship amd board but find that it cant even take the high power fx chips.

Moral of the story: Dont go budget motherboard if you don't go budget CPU!

I have avoided Asrock motherboards in combination of high power fx chips purely because of their previous issues of sketchy VRM quality with some of their lower end boards. I wouldn't buy the higher end boards from them because much better boards can be had for the same price from Gigabyte or Asus. The Fatal1ty may have 12+2 power phasing but i'm doubtful its VRMs are as resilient as Asus' price equivalent board The Sabertooth. Apparently quite some effort did go into improving the power management on Asrock boards so it'd be nice to see a comparison between a Crosshair formula Z and an Extreme 9.
Click to expand...

humbug said:
It been said before, TDP is not power draw.

ASRock are just as bad as MSI in using cheap components.
Click to expand...

My Fatal1ty board is going strong! It clocked my FX-4170 past 4.8Ghz and my FX-8350 past 4.4Ghz. With both chips I hit a thermal limit rather than stability. VRMS on the board didnt even get hot, I will admit they were warm, but not hot!
 
OliverDavis said:
My Fatal1ty board is going strong! It clocked my FX-4170 past 4.8Ghz and my FX-8350 past 4.4Ghz. With both chips I hit a thermal limit rather than stability. VRMS on the board didnt even get hot, I will admit they were warm, but not hot!
Click to expand...

Fatal1ty board's are much better, but i'm talking more along the lines of a mid line board, like the Asus M5A97-Pro which I believe has 6 + 2 Phase Digital VRM's

Good enough for a mid overclock on the FX-8350 on what is an inexpensive board.
 
Also, what about the chip on turbo?

Surely they pull more power on turbo and with turbo enabled you need a higher voltage to cope with vdroop. Vdroop is not the problem here, power is, but the chips could be undervolted if you turn some of those extra settings off.

I am fairly sure, that if you drop off cool&quiet, turbo, C1 etc and lower the voltage these chips would run fine at 4Ghz.

But it still bothers me, why do people think that if they have £220 for CPU+Mobo they go for FX-8350 and then a £50 AM3+ Mobo that just abouts supports the CPU. If I was budget restricted and have £220 for CPU+Mobo I would go with a FX-8320 for £120, spend another £100 on Mobo. Why do people pay the extra £40 for the FX-8350 over the FX-8320 and then get a crap Mobo and complain when it doesnt work. Balance your machines people!

Anyway, in an ideal world, there would not be this problem as anyone going with the top level AMD CPU would surely get a top level Mobo. When MSI released the motherboards that struggle with the FX-8350, they probably thought no one in their right mind would be getting one of their cheap motherboards for such a chip and instead may just be upgrading from an FX-4300 to the FX-8350 and using the board as an interim. The BIOS update in my eyes is just something to keep you content while you save for the decent motherboard you should have bought with the chip.

Its like me going, I am going to replace the brakes and tyres on my car. I have £800 to spend. So £100 on ebay brakes and £700 on Pirellis. Then wondering why my car is not stopping to the tyres rated potential forgetting I crapped out on brakes. Yes the brakes are technically compatible with the car, so are the tyres. But that does not mean the car will stop as good as the tyres are rated for.
 
Last edited:
humbug said:
A computer is only as strong as its weakest component ^^^^ I agree

FX-4350: £50 - £60 Mobo / FX-6350: £70 - £90 Mobo / FX-8350: £100 + Mobo
Click to expand...

Exactly! People do this and then also skimp on PSU. Yes the cheap components will work and are therefor compatible. But it does not mean they will work well.

Yes MSI have skimped on VRMs, but they do what they are supposed to do, give power to the CPU and the CPU fits and works in the motherboard, so it IS compatible and MSI are correct in saying that. Just for best performance you need decent parts.

Just like putting Fuel Saver in your Ferrari and wondering why it will not produce the 460bhp its rated at. The fuel works.

I think everyone is overthinking it. Does it fit in the motherboard? Yes. Does it work? Yes. Then MSI have done nothing wrong. They have supplied a board that works. Yes its a piece of crap, what do you expect for a cheap board?

P.S. Sorry for the car metaphors, I find them easy to use for explanation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom