FX 8120

Lordgrayone · 22 Mar 2012 at 19:29

gareth170 said:
amd 8120/8150 max safety temp is 61c

So the 61c max temp is socket temp and not core then?

gareth170 · 22 Mar 2012 at 19:38

Lordgrayone said:
So the 61c max temp is socket temp and not core then?

the core temp reading are wrong.. that why you need to monitor the cpu temp

it's been like this with previous cpus also.

email from amd

Dear Gareth,

Response and Service Request History:

Correct, as long as you are within the voltage and temperature guidelines you are ok. The temperature that should be monitored is the overall CPU temperature, not the core temp.

In order to update this service request, please respond, leaving the service request reference intact.

Best regards,

Jesse

AMD Global Customer Care

Lordgrayone · 22 Mar 2012 at 19:54

Interesting, so AMD have basically said that the overheat protection does not work because the temperature readings are wrong?

gareth170 · 22 Mar 2012 at 20:06

Lordgrayone said:
Interesting, so AMD have basically said that the overheat protection does not work because the temperature readings are wrong?

no

i think the overheat protection goes by the bios reading which is the cpu reading but im not sure at what temp the overheat protection kicks in.

Lordgrayone · 22 Mar 2012 at 21:05

61c on the cores in HWmonitor overheat protection kicks in which is the only reason i asked which i should go by.
i found out while trying to push for 5GHZ :eek:

gareth170 · 22 Mar 2012 at 22:23

Lordgrayone said:
61c on the cores in HWmonitor overheat protection kicks in which is the only reason i asked which i should go by.
i found out while trying to push for 5GHZ

but the core reading are about 15c~ below what they should be...

core temp should be higher than cpu temp.

PCZ · 23 Mar 2012 at 00:55

60c is very low for BD.
A highly clocked BD chip dissipates hundres of watts when running programs such as IBT/P85.
Trying to stay under 60c as reported by HWmonitor will seriously constrain any overclocking attempt.

BD chips are power hungry and run hot.
They are not Phenoms.

MNA24
To maintain stability at 4.6 Ghz you need a board with strong VRMs
That is on the edge of stability of most BD chips and the vcore needs to be quite high.

You need to run CPUz when running load tests to get an idea of the vcore being used.
What is set in BIOS is not the vcore used under load.
LLC settings come into play here and the better quality boards will not drop the volts under load.
Some have aggressive LLC and will increase vcore under load.

As has been suggested an ASUS Sabretooth is a good board, i use one myself with an 8150

When you have cores erroring out under P95 you need more vcore.
If you up the vcore and the errors keep happening then you have exceeded the maximun stable frequency for your CPU.

To the OP.
You are living in cloud cuckoo land if you think your 8120 is in any way a match for a Sandy.
Take it from someone who owns and uses both.

The Halk · 23 Mar 2012 at 01:11

This thread is sort of like a troll thread. The original poster wants validation that he's spent his money well. He won't listen to other people's responses and he'll shut down anyone who doesn't agree. There's very little point engaging him in a discussion about it, since he's not looking for one - he's looking to score points in an argument.

gareth170 · 23 Mar 2012 at 01:27

PCZ said:
60c is very low for BD.
A highly clocked BD chip dissipates hundres of watts when running programs such as IBT/P85.
Trying to stay under 60c as reported by HWmonitor will seriously constrain any overclocking attempt.

Max Temps (C) 61'C

http://products.amd.com/en-us/Deskt...2=&f3=&f4=&f5=&f6=&f7=&f8=&f9=&f10=&f11=&f12=

http://products.amd.com/en-us/Deskt...2=&f3=&f4=&f5=&f6=&f7=&f8=&f9=&f10=&f11=&f12=

PCZ · 23 Mar 2012 at 01:33

Gareth
You are beginning to sound like a broken record.

I will try to explain again.
BD chips draw large amounts of current and consequently get hot.
They get much hotter than the old Phenoms.

You have gotten bad info,
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to realise that.

MaxP779 · 23 Mar 2012 at 08:42

BD is AMDs pentium 4. Lousy performance in all but a few niche things, power hog as well.

Also it dosent come with integrated graphics which is a huge plus for sandy. Discrete GPU broke? No problem, switch to integrated and troubleshoot from there, with BD you are boned without a replacement card. Not to mention the quicksync feature some people may find very useful.

MNA24 · 23 Mar 2012 at 09:23

Lordgrayone said:
Happy to help if i can, as mmj_uk said it could be your motherboard, i take it you are just O/C via the multi?? and are you doing the OC via the bios?
you should not need 1.5V for 4.6 and i found at those volts the core temps would jump up instantly when loaded causing a crash/shutdown
i`ll check my settings in bios and post up in a sec

EDIT : my settings in bios are 1.456v all cool and quiet ECT are off
Best thing i can suggest is work you way up slowly with volts/multi
as far as i can remember 4.5 did not require much more volts than stock, certainly less than 1.4v for sure

Yeah, im overclocking in the bios. I'm just working the multi and vcore at the moment, which is all im confident to play with. I havent got cool and quiet disabled, could this screw things up? I have turned off turbo boost aswell as that seemed to give odd current readings of the vcore in the bios. I'll give it a go with it cool and quiet disabled later this evening. Anything else is should disable/turn off?

My temperature are doing ok as im only hitting in the area of 48-52 when sat at 1.5v @ 4.6ghz.

Cheers for the info

much appreciated, its all been a guessing game and trawling google so far

gareth170 · 23 Mar 2012 at 11:37

PCZ said:
Gareth
You are beginning to sound like a broken record.

I will try to explain again.
BD chips draw large amounts of current and consequently get hot.
They get much hotter than the old Phenoms.

You have gotten bad info,
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to realise that.

what the **** are going on about. you need to start leaning how to read.....

the guy posted his temps which his temp is at 60c and im saying it is to high as the max safety temp 61c!!!... he needs to keep it at 55c or below for safety ether by back off the oc or get better cooling.

understand

the way your sounding like just because BD get much hotter than Phenoms you think the safety temp must be much higher or doesn't matter about the safety limits

also i've never They don't get hotter than Phenoms or BD chips don't draw large amounts of current

i have had a 8150 u know.

PCZ · 23 Mar 2012 at 23:17

I remember you owned one for a few days,
Actually how can we forget you posted about it enough.

Didn't you struggle to get 4.5Ghz stable because you were scared to raise the vcore because of the temps ?

gareth170 · 23 Mar 2012 at 23:31

PCZ said:
I remember you owned one for a few days,
Actually how can we forget you posted about it enough.

Didn't you struggle to get 4.5Ghz stable because you were scared to raise the vcore because of the temps ?

no

i think u got the wrong person

i had a good clocker chip, did 4.5ghz with 1.25v~ stable

but i sent it back after a day~ because it performed crap

MNA24 · 24 Mar 2012 at 00:01

well i tried with cool and quiet disabled and it didn't make any difference, i think im just going to ride this faildozer until the the GTX780 comes out and ill get myself a tasty ivybridge

Lordgrayone · 24 Mar 2012 at 01:02

MNA24 said:
well i tried with cool and quiet disabled and it didn't make any difference, i think im just going to ride this faildozer until the the GTX780 comes out and ill get myself a tasty ivybridge

Maybe it is just a bad overclocker although i would have thought you could get at least 4.2 out of it as thats the turbo speed.
Did you buy when it came out? seems the early ones require a lot of volts.

I think i may just go Intel next time too

MNA24 · 24 Mar 2012 at 10:40

Lordgrayone said:
Maybe it is just a bad overclocker although i would have thought you could get at least 4.2 out of it as thats the turbo speed.
Did you buy when it came out? seems the early ones require a lot of volts.

I think i may just go Intel next time too

Well I did a little more digging around and there is a lot of talk of my motherboard suffering from Vdroop with overclocks and there are no LLC controls to correct it, im on the latest bios so its not like its been added at a later date to fix the problem.

Here is a 4.2ghz Overclock at idle with 1.475v (in the bios):

Then at load, take note of the Vcore:

So basically the vdroop is knocking the vcore so low that it causes instability hence why im having to use such high voltages to compensate. :mad:

mmj_uk · 24 Mar 2012 at 11:01

Like I said before you'd probably have a lot more success with a Sabertooth, I remember trying to clock a Phenom X6 to 4ghz on a Gigabyte it was constant reboots under load and I kept getting post errors about memory instability, the power delivery seems to be a lot weaker. Asus was rock solid with the same chip.

MNA24 · 24 Mar 2012 at 11:20

mmj_uk said:
Like I said before you'd probably have a lot more success with a Sabertooth, I remember trying to clock a Phenom X6 to 4ghz on a Gigabyte it was constant reboots under load and I kept getting post errors about memory instability, the power delivery seems to be a lot weaker. Asus was rock solid with the same chip.

yeah, I don't think ill go gigabyte with my next mobo. Its a bit of a pain in the ass really that this is happening, I can keep my fingers crossed that some sort of LLC control will come in a future bios update since they stuck it in the UD7 bios. Gigabyte claim they have the current vdroop to "protect" consumers from damaging their FX chips..... :rolleyes: