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

[gpuerrilla]

What voltages are you pushing for these clocks guys?

 

[cwgk91]

@Th0nt - For my 4.82, Im using 1.42v with ultra-high LLC - pushes voltage up to approx 1.44v under prime.

If CPU-z is saying that its 4.9 then I think its probs at 4.9. Have you got CPU Overdrive enabled? I personally don't have it enabled and have no problems there

 

[ll-Nightfly-ll]

I don't have overdrive enabled in the desktop program and have the "CPU Turbo" set to manual in the BIOS. But I doubt it is sticking at 4.9 with those temps. When I was rocking 4.8-9ghz I was pushing around 60C on the socket and CPU when under load and this is way under that which leads me to believe its sticking at the 4.5ghz mark :S

Th0nt - Me too, mine maxes out at 1.440 with LLC set to ultra but hovers just below that when not being pushed

 

[cwgk91]

Have you got all the power saving states disabled in the bios? Cool and quiet, c1e state etc. I also think that my turbo mode is set to auto, not sure what difference that makes though

 

[gpuerrilla]

I also think that my turbo mode is set to auto, not sure what difference that makes though

I turned mine off. It's small things like this setting that if successful we need to keep tabs on.

I am Realbench stable at this setting (264x18) but have bumped the voltage up to 1.488 to be sure. I got a couple of game application errors but have got distracted on other work projects so I need to revisit it.

 

[cwgk91]

May have a fiddle (got the next couple of days off) to see how much voltage i need to get 5Ghz stable. Did find a big increase in cinebench scores (went from 774 to 798 - so close!) and got another 400 marks in firestrike which I thought was pretty good. Only problem was couldn't get it to finish a 30 minute realbench due to temps

 

[ll-Nightfly-ll]

I've kept all my power saving options on as I would assume that's the point of going for this type of overclock - to power/cycle down when the chip isn't being used and go b**ls to the wall when under stress.

Will have more of a play this weekend I think as BF4 is giving me jip and I just can't get it to run after the last update so have found plenty of free time on my hands as of late!

 

[cwgk91]

I think the power saving options may be your problem then (certainly that will be why cinebench is classing it as 'only' 4.4Ghz methinks). The asus ROG guide says to turn them all off.

BF4 is being a bit of a pain overall, especially when trying to use Mantle. Works so well when it works though...

 

[ll-Nightfly-ll]

But without the power saving options this type of overclock would lose its appeal and I could just run my "all out" 4.8ghz over clock all the time instead. I'm going to revert everything back to stock and run the benches tonight and monitor how it reports it in overdrive and cpu-z when it's under stress

 

[Avenged7Fold]

Will be performing a series of Power consumption comparisons between overclocks. I think this power hungry fx stuff is over played. Sure compared to other CPU's its power hungry but unless you are rendering or folding all the time, it makes less of a difference than you think. Cheap boards not designed for (which also pre-date) 8 core fx chips fail ad throttle due to the power draw but imo this is mainly the fault of the motherboard and the buyer matching the wrong components up rather than the CPU.

Will do one at varying clocks and voltage, varying loads which compare stress tests to real life game loads and finally temperature vs power consumption. Much lower temperatures from watercooling or high end air cooling will lower the resistances a fair bit when comparing to stock coolers, maybe we will see a half decent drop?

Hopefully i will get this finished and polished up by next week.

 

[ll-Nightfly-ll]

That would be quite an interesting read if you could put that together Avenged.

I'm not too worried about the power consumption as from what I can gather I'd be forking out an extra 20 quid per year by running higher clocks and I'm not that hard up that I can absorb those kinda costs

My thoughts are that when my PC is on either gaming or is only there as a network centre to stream to my PC in another room (music, video etc) so it's either massive usage or pretty much bu**er all. That's why this type of alternating clock depending on usage would be appealing to me but it's not the be all and end all.

I was happy with my 4.8ghz stable as I'm on air still (Silver Arrow SB-E Extreme) so don't think I have much more head room without going custom loop. (Which will be this summer if all goes to plan!) My problem is that I'm a tinkerer and I just want something to pass the time while Dice continue to ruin my one game I actually like to play online! hah

 

[cwgk91]

Sounds like a really good test, thanks very much!

@Nightfly - just because mine doesnt downthrottle doesnt mean its using full whack all the time - my idle temps are still 20C, so its not going hell for leather 24/7, just stays at max clock all the time

 

[ll-Nightfly-ll]

I suppose you're right, obviously the clocks aren't going all out as I wouldn't be idling at the sub 30C temps I get. If that is the case then what benefit could this FSB+boost type of overclock actually offer if anything?

 

[jimbaw]

i'd be really interested to read that! thanks for taking the time to do it

 

[Davedree]

Will be performing a series of Power consumption comparisons between overclocks. I think this power hungry fx stuff is over played. Sure compared to other CPU's its power hungry but unless you are rendering or folding all the time, it makes less of a difference than you think. Cheap boards not designed for (which also pre-date) 8 core fx chips fail ad throttle due to the power draw but imo this is mainly the fault of the motherboard and the buyer matching the wrong components up rather than the CPU.

Will do one at varying clocks and voltage, varying loads which compare stress tests to real life game loads and finally temperature vs power consumption. Much lower temperatures from watercooling or high end air cooling will lower the resistances a fair bit when comparing to stock coolers, maybe we will see a half decent drop?

Hopefully i will get this finished and polished up by next week.

As you know there's lot's of factors which change the result of total power consumption and idle. There's no reason with modern cpu's and motherboards that support offset voltage increments, that you can't overclock with power saving features and allowing the cpu to idle at low speeds and low voltages until the cpu is required to work. People used to state that cool and quiet and c1e etc would cause overclocking stablility issues or reduce your max potential overclock or reduce performance. That theory only remotely applies to Phenom due to the way the cores were individually clocked per its usage requirement. Vista at the time caused issues with the clocking of the phenom cores, due to task scheduling problems. Phenom only had 2 pstates. Full or half speed.

Phenom II/Llano didn't suffer suffer from this problem as all cores were clocked at a fixed speed, the reason being these cpu's including the fx series use 4 P-states. Max, p2, p3 min


Offset overclocking is the best way to overclock in my opinion, I did it for my 3.6 ghz x4 620, 4.2 ghz b55, and my current fx8320 and I7 2600k.
Gigabyte has been doing this voltage increment in the bios as standard since the am2+ days.

Also if you enable turbo then usually .20v will be added to to v-core. If you left all voltage settings stock and then disabled turbo, you should see the v-core drop by .20v depending on the chispset and motherboard though.

I like how prime95 is used to represent the power draw of chips,
usually we see how inefficient fx8 is on it's power draw to Intel, But there's a few factors which can change that viewpoint, that is actual workoad throughput per wattage. Look at handbrake encoding hd to hd for an example of this

Firstly Amd are massively inefficient at refining voltages for their cpu's and gpu's ie the 1.25v boost voltage, the usual vid of an fx43,63,83 dependent on llc but turbo on is usually around 1.40v-/+, as i mentioned before this is to allow the average joe to turbo at the stock turbo setting of the cpu with excessive voltage. Instead of 1.40v for an fx8320 [email protected] full load you could manually undervolt and manually set the multi to around 1.18-1.22v, saving heat and power. But depending on how good your silicon is.

Another factor that changes the results of consumption/performance is that with turbo enabled on an fx chip you could have a full load turbo or half load turbo. If you refine the voltages yourself and turn off turbo then you'll have a much more refined overclock.

From my findings theres a huge difference in temps and v-core between a prime95 stable overclock and gaming.
This is why overclocking and claiming clocks is a moot point for some people.

On the subject of watercooling the biggest mistake people can make is not having any airflow over the cpu/vrm area, when a waterblock is used, The stock cpu or an aftermarket cooler usually blows a good volume of air around the socket area, reducing temps etc.

 

[jrwagh333]

I know that this is an overclocking thread but I think I will get the best answers here.

My current setup is:
CPU: AMD 1090t 3.5Ghz
RAM: 8GB DDR2 900mhz
GPU: GTX 680 - +160 Core, +460 Memory

I play a lot of BF4 and some times FPS drops below 30fps and most of my settings are on Medium. I have done a lot of research and feel that it could be a RAM issue.

So I have been thinking about upgrading. Getting a CrossHair V Mobo, some 1600mhz RAM and an AMDfx 8320.

Do you think I will see much improvement?
Also, with all the new components going in, I may need to re-install Windows.
I'm currently using Win7 but I did read that going to Win8.1 could yield some more performance improvements on an AMD-FX CPU because it introduced some new instruction sets.

Any info on this would be appreciated.

 

[gpuerrilla]

Will be performing a series of Power consumption comparisons between overclocks. I think this power hungry fx stuff is over played. Sure compared to other CPU's its power hungry but unless you are rendering or folding all the time, it makes less of a difference than you think. Cheap boards not designed for (which also pre-date) 8 core fx chips fail ad throttle due to the power draw but imo this is mainly the fault of the motherboard and the buyer matching the wrong components up rather than the CPU.

Will do one at varying clocks and voltage, varying loads which compare stress tests to real life game loads and finally temperature vs power consumption. Much lower temperatures from watercooling or high end air cooling will lower the resistances a fair bit when comparing to stock coolers, maybe we will see a half decent drop?

Hopefully i will get this finished and polished up by next week.

Agree A7F, look forward to this.

 

[cwgk91]

I know that this is an overclocking thread but I think I will get the best answers here.

My current setup is:
CPU: AMD 1090t 3.5Ghz
RAM: 8GB DDR2 900mhz
GPU: GTX 680 - +160 Core, +460 Memory

I play a lot of BF4 and some times FPS drops below 30fps and most of my settings are on Medium. I have done a lot of research and feel that it could be a RAM issue.

So I have been thinking about upgrading. Getting a CrossHair V Mobo, some 1600mhz RAM and an AMDfx 8320.

Do you think I will see much improvement?
Also, with all the new components going in, I may need to re-install Windows.
I'm currently using Win7 but I did read that going to Win8.1 could yield some more performance improvements on an AMD-FX CPU because it introduced some new instruction sets.

Any info on this would be appreciated.

I'm afraid that I've been out of the pc game a while, so the only processors I know are the fx series and the intel series. I would assume that the newer architecture and the extra two cores would be a good improvement, on top of the fact that you can get the 83xx to 4.5Ghz+. I'd also suggest slightly higher clocked ram than 1600Mhz. Using some 2133Mhz stuff at the mo and thats doing brilliantly. With the setup in my sig im getting 90+fps in bf4

I use win8.1 for the same reason and it works brilliantly

 

[JonSmith]

According to these charts you could expect up to a 50% improvement with an 8 core FX over a 6 core phenom:

http://www.bf4blog.com/battlefield-4-retail-gpu-cpu-benchmarks/

There's also evidence to suggest that in cases where you are CPU limited then higher speed memory can improve performance. Using DDR2 will be holding you back in BF4 (perhaps less so in other titles):

http://www.corsair.com/en-us/blog/2013/october/battlefield-4-loves-high-speed-memory

I think you'd find a fair improvement. I just bought an FX-8320 and clocked it to 4.4GHz at stock volts with nothing but the multiplier on an M5a97 EVO R2.0 motherboard and it's a huge improvement over my 980be in many tasks.

 

[ll-Nightfly-ll]

I know that this is an overclocking thread but I think I will get the best answers here.

My current setup is:
CPU: AMD 1090t 3.5Ghz
RAM: 8GB DDR2 900mhz
GPU: GTX 680 - +160 Core, +460 Memory

I play a lot of BF4 and some times FPS drops below 30fps and most of my settings are on Medium. I have done a lot of research and feel that it could be a RAM issue.

So I have been thinking about upgrading. Getting a CrossHair V Mobo, some 1600mhz RAM and an AMDfx 8320.

Do you think I will see much improvement?
Also, with all the new components going in, I may need to re-install Windows.
I'm currently using Win7 but I did read that going to Win8.1 could yield some more performance improvements on an AMD-FX CPU because it introduced some new instruction sets.

Any info on this would be appreciated.

Unfortunately I think you'd probably be better pointing the finger toward the game at this moment in time. Don't get me wrong, upgrading would give you a benefit as the benchmarks show but this game just isn't the best all round. I'm running and 8350 overclocked to 4.8ghz, a 7970 matrix platinum and 8gb of RAM hovering around the 1500mhz mark and since the latest "patch" I keep keeping frame drops and CPU spikes.

I even bit the bullet and formatted both my SSDs (One for OS and the other for games an programs) and upgraded to Win 8.1 from 7 Ultimate and I'm still getting problems.

My friends who I play with also suffer the same symptoms to varying degrees and one quick search into google or battlelog and you'll see we're not alone. I've run out of options and I know my rig should be more than capable of playing this game so I'm pretty much stumped. I'm holding out that the patch that will come with the Naval Strike DLC will maybe address the problem but I'm pessimistic to say the least.