• 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.

***official amd 83x0 overclocking thread***

They are also fun to overclock and in real world games are not performing poorly as some (minority) are making out. You will tend to find they are benchmark boys or justifying the intel purchase through sheep flock syndrome.

I have seen a handful of users jump to intel claiming better 'overall' performance which while I take it onboard when they are pressed the science behind the inadequacies it tends to be a placebo improvement. It is more often going to be caused by driver versions, settings and lack of software tweaking persistence. There will be the odd game or two that clearly favours intel but it was probably designed and compiled for that or is pretty old hat commanding single thread performance.

When I first played on this system I looked at PS2, Trine 2, Crysis 3, BF4 and even an old game Blood Bowl Legendary Edition. Maybe it is something I am not looking for but I can honestly say they have played well and been a smooth experience from the CPU side of things.

If I had experienced choppy gameplay, bottlenecking or nosediving then I would have been posting on here asking of others had seen similar.

The FX line isn't perfect, it wont beat intels in the majority of manufactured tests but for what most people want and at £100 (8320) it is a great choice to have.
 
Th0nt said:
They are also fun to overclock and in real world games are not performing poorly as some (minority) are making out. You will tend to find they are benchmark boys or justifying the intel purchase through sheep flock syndrome.

I have seen a handful of users jump to intel claiming better 'overall' performance which while I take it onboard when they are pressed the science behind the inadequacies it tends to be a placebo improvement. It is more often going to be caused by driver versions, settings and lack of software tweaking persistence. There will be the odd game or two that clearly favours intel but it was probably designed and compiled for that or is pretty old hat commanding single thread performance.

When I first played on this system I looked at PS2, Trine 2, Crysis 3, BF4 and even an old game Blood Bowl Legendary Edition. Maybe it is something I am not looking for but I can honestly say they have played well and been a smooth experience from the CPU side of things.

If I had experienced choppy gameplay, bottlenecking or nosediving then I would have been posting on here asking of others had seen similar.

The FX line isn't perfect, it wont beat intels in the majority of manufactured tests but for what most people want and at £100 (8320) it is a great choice to have.
Click to expand...

The problem with the fx83 is that it needs to be in the 4.8ghz or above range to really start showing gains over a phenom II x4, thuban x6 at 4.2ghz 2600+ cpu-nb. At these clocks you most def need a good air cooler, or water, (not a crappy h60 h80, a good motherboard and case and cooling over the vrm area. From my experience so far in fc3 my fx8320 is olding back my clocked 7950 even at 4.8ghz in comparison to my stock i7 2600k. Using process explorer I can see a big difference between gpu utilisation, the 2600k holds the gpu at 99_℅, the fx8 is all over the place. The game using the fx8 feels choppy in comparison to the Intel.

In bf3 the same situation in multi player occurs, the fx8320 really holds back utilization of the gpu, the Intel shosws far greater usage of the gpu, however at stock the 2600k does drop a little, however clock the 2600k and the drops are cured. I am not biased and if you want evidence to prove my word then I can provide it. It does come down to what games you play, and over time I imagine the fx8 will scale in the perfect environment.

Tombraider bench for example showed no difference what so ever between the 2600k or the fx8 gpu was 99℅ for both systems.

When i am handbrake encoding hardrive to harddrive, even at 4.8ghz the 2600k can't keep up with the 4.8ghz fx8. Ripping a DVD or blu-ray you are limited by transfer speed of the optical drive. The fx8/fx6 are great work horses but at their stock half, full throttle speeds they really do perform badly.

Just wondered what gpu you are using thont
 
Last edited:
Davedree said:
The problem with the fx83 is that it needs to be in the 4.8ghz or above range to really start showing gains over a phenom II x4, thuban x6 at 4.2ghz 2600+ cpu-nb. At these clocks you most def need a good air cooler, or water, (not a crappy h60 h80, a good motherboard and case and cooling over the vrm area. From my experience so far in fc3 my fx8320 is olding back my clocked 7950 even at 4.8ghz in comparison to my stock i7 2600k. Using process explorer I can see a big difference between gpu utilisation, the 2600k holds the gpu at 99_℅, the fx8 is all over the place. The game using the fx8 feels choppy in comparison to the Intel.

In bf3 the same situation in multi player occurs, the fx8320 really holds back utilization of the gpu, the Intel shosws far greater usage of the gpu, however at stock the 2600k does drop a little, however clock the 2600k and the drops are cured. I am not biased and if you want evidence to prove my word then I can provide it. It does come down to what games you play, and over time I imagine the fx8 will scale in the perfect environment.

Tombraider bench for example showed no difference what so ever between the 2600k or the fx8 gpu was 99℅ for both systems.

When i am handbrake encoding hardrive to harddrive, even at 4.8ghz the 2600k can't keep up with the 4.8ghz fx8. Ripping a DVD or blu-ray you are limited by transfer speed of the optical drive. The fx8/fx6 are great work horses but at their stock half, full throttle speeds they really do perform badly.

Just wondered what gpu you are using thont
Click to expand...

Well said and I agree with your points, I did forget to mention having a decent Mobo and cooler. I chose the Sabertooth 990FX r2 and got a refurbished H100 in a decent case.

My current GPU is a 290X as I had to RMA the 7990, upon initial build I was running crossfire 7770 from my last system.
 
I contacted AMD about the voltage for this chip and the maximum temps the information they supplied is below:

Normal core voltage around 0.8250v-1.425v
Maximum core temperature is 70°c

This said I have mine running at [email protected] using the multi only.
Going from this thread I might give the FSB a try and reduce my multi to 20?
 
DMF1986 said:
I contacted AMD about the voltage for this chip and the maximum temps the information they supplied is below:

Normal core voltage around 0.8250v-1.425v
Maximum core temperature is 70°c

This said I have mine running at [email protected] using the multi only.
Going from this thread I might give the FSB a try and reduce my multi to 20?
Click to expand...

I think its fine as long as you can keep the temps low enough. Though I assume that the warranty becomes void if you exceed those limits. Mine is running at 1.45V 24/7 and hasn't played up so far... the FSB does appear to lower the voltage requirements slightly on mine, though on some sites it says that it gives greater performance while increasing requirements...
 
cwgk91 said:
I think its fine as long as you can keep the temps low enough. Though I assume that the warranty becomes void if you exceed those limits. Mine is running at 1.45V 24/7 and hasn't played up so far... the FSB does appear to lower the voltage requirements slightly on mine, though on some sites it says that it gives greater performance while increasing requirements...
Click to expand...

What are your other voltage settings?
CPU/NB

FSB clock
multi
HT
NB
 
Bus Freq - 260, Multi - 18.5
CPU/NB Freq - 2340
HT Link - 2340
LL Calib - Ultra High
Current 130%, phase control Optimised & same for CPU/NB
CPU Voltage - 1.45V, all others set to auto - CPU/NB whilst on auto is reporting 1.250V

Edit: with that I am currently getting 54C during Realbench and 56C during an hour of prime using the Fathom AIO cooler. For some reason it really doesn't like taking LL calibration any lower than ultra high
 
It is quite a high bus freq I appear to have got. Quite a lot of people only appear to have got around 230, so its worth trying out the method I have quoted in the other thread you have made, all kudos from which go to ALXAndy (Thank you!)
 
Th0nt said:
Well said and I agree with your points, I did forget to mention having a decent Mobo and cooler. I chose the Sabertooth 990FX r2 and got a refurbished H100 in a decent case.

My current GPU is a 290X as I had to RMA the 7990, upon initial build I was running crossfire 7770 from my last system.
Click to expand...

Thanks rare someone agrees on here :) great board you have too . Forgot to mention that inbf3 although the gpu usage is lower than 2600k, the game still runs smooth unlike fc3 where you can def tell the fx8 isn't right.
I don't really plan to upgrade from my 7950, have had ati cards since the 4870, nvidia before that. It'd be a hard choice between a 290 and a 780 for me if I was to upgrade.

I bought this fx8 with my work bonus money, to see how far I could push the 4+1 78lmt usb3 rev 5, and to have some fun overclocking like I used to with my older amd systems. For £158 and excluding the things ialready own like cooler, etc.... I really am suprised by the punch the system provides for the money it cost. Also this mboard really needs to be recommended for budget builds, it can take some abuse for £38.
 
Hey guys, just tried lowering my LLC to High rather than ultra-high in order to reduce temps and am currently running P95 (seems stable so far, yay! - of course, as I type, that pesky core 6 has thrown an error...) and noticed that my Vcore drops to 1.416V down from 1.45V.

From what I gather, LLC is there in order to try to counteract Vdroop, which this clearly isnt doing. However, if my pc appears to be able to run at 1.416V, does that mean that I can try Vcore at 1.416V in the bios with LLC set at ultra-high or extreme to make sure that it doesnt go below this value?
 
Just had a quick fiddle, setting my Vcore at 1.425V with LLC at extreme and ultra-high.

Extreme made my Vcore go up to 1.47V (higher than I was before) while ultra-high made Vcore fluctuate between 1.428V and 1.44V (what it was set to previously), but with a 5C reduction in temps - though was only a very short P95 run!
 
jimbaw said:
I'm going to give that method a go.
So do I just lower my multiplier as low as it goes and up my fsb until it stops loading windows?
Click to expand...

Yep indeed, increase the bus by 5Mhz each time until it won't boot, then go back to the one before that. Then increase multi to desired clock and voltage needed to support that
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom