TR Forums

To the OP and anyone else on a phenom 2 x-4 or thuban 6 core increasing your northbridge frequency to 2600-2800-3000 MHz does increase CPU performance with 2800mhz being about the sweet spot for 5 to 10% increase in performance on many things. Gaming s one of them. If you are interested in trying it google increasing AMD northbridge speed for performance enhancement. If you are goi g to hang onto that nice 1090t you might as well pull as much performance out of it as you can On Top of your 4.1 ghz overclock.

Dunno, cost of cooler shouldn't mean much since, IMO, you should be running a Hyper 212 Evo regardless.

JustAnEngineer wrote:

Closed-loop water cooling doesn't have to be terribly expensive, also thanks to the value-conscious folks at CoolerMaster.
viewtopic.php?f=34&t=89330

The giant air coolers probably provide better cooling, but there are some case configurations where mounting a radiator at the back really opens up the clutter above the CPU socket.

Also, dust! Blowing some compressed air through a rad is far easier than having to dismount your ginormous tower cooler to clean it.

flip-mode wrote:

Dunno, cost of cooler shouldn't mean much since, IMO, you should be running a Hyper 212 Evo regardless.

The only gotcha with the 212 Evo is that it requires a custom motherboard backing plate, so it is a bit inconvenient for retrofits. TX3 can use the existing AMD standard heatsink mounting frame so you can swap it in without removing the motherboard from the case; but I would not recommend the TX3 if you plan to OC.

jihadjoe wrote:

Also, dust! Blowing some compressed air through a rad is far easier than having to dismount your ginormous tower cooler to clean it.

You can blow compressed air through a tower cooler too.

Yep you got it JBI I do not know why jihad though you could not blow compressed air through a air tower? But one thing that is good with the radiators is when I remove my radiator from the mount.....only 2long machined screws hold the pull and push fan to the radiator and I have 2 of the short fat standard fan crews that self tap into the pul fans plastic housing.

I was getting to what's good about a radiator is I can use a very powerful vacume cleaner and brush to get every particle of dust from my radiators fins and the fans without worry of static charging my motherboard to death. But I still ground myself to the case before I ever touch anything inside. The vacume does do a much better jod then 125 psi compressed air from my compressor since I smoke and have 2 danes it can get pretty dang dirty with the sticky dust from the smoke.

As always when I use compressed air to blow out the insider my case I always have a toothpick on hand to keep fans from free spinning from 125psi of air pressure. I also remove both video cards during every cleaning and swap them so they alternate every 4 months or so as primary and slave....it keeps any graphics card civil wars from going on insed my case.
I have to admit on my old ATI 9800 XT/PRO it sure did sound cool letting the fan free spin to 10000+ rpms but once I reinstalled the card my fan was dead as a door nail. So from now on I use a toothpick to keep fans from free spinning and causing problems. The only time I let them spin is when I blow them in reverse, but my finger is constantly on the blades keeping it under 100 rpms and my finger helps loosen the sticky dust bunnies.

vargis14 wrote:

since I smoke and have 2 danes it can get pretty dang dirty with the sticky dust from the smoke.

Just stop smoking, dude. If you don't care about your health - it will at least make it easier to clean your PC. I've seen many PC's from smokers - the tobacco tar can turn dust into very nasty sticky mess pretty quickly. That stuff can also kill the fan's bearings/motor pretty fast.

.

Bensam123 wrote:

Yeah Ati and none of those games really require more then that.

Planetside 2 does unfortunately. It only uses 2 cores and I am bottlenecked by my CPU with an i5-2500K @ 4.5ghz. There is basically no CPU in existence that can run it completely smoothly, even when overclocked.

Even World of Tanks runs noticeably better on my [email protected] than it does on my [email protected], despite only using 1 core. Never underestimate how poorly optimized a lot of games are

Update.

So the lowest voltage I can use with all core loaded with prime95 is

1.112v at 3.5ghz
1.150v at 3.7ghz
1.225v at 4.0ghz
1.265v at 4.2ghz
.... way more possible, but TDP gets crazy.

At first, the default bios fan settings where not optimized, but now I idle at 1300rpm and average 2400rpm on most real world use.
(The behavior of the bios is to keep the CPU at/below 60c)

I will most likely get the following cooler If I decide this chip is worthy of the 20% speedup (4.2ghz base clock) (at some sane noise levels).
http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications ... 5&csid=_61

I disable turbo and use the 1.112v / 3.5ghz setting.
With the case open, the fan max at 3200RPM with prime95 and thats manageable since most app/code dont load the core that aggressively.

I recall reading people setting their FX at 1.4+ volt and ~5GHZ... I just cant imagine the heat this generate!

Well, next up... check power usage between 3.5 and 4.2

Still havent found why if only one core is loaded all cores go to max multiplier...

And I found many other weirdness. Prime95 limited to use core0 & 1. Only core 0 is loaded.
Next have it use 0, 1, 2, 3 .. only core 0 and 2 are loaded. next have it use core 0,1,2,3,4,5 ... core 0,1,2,3,4,5 are used.

Really weird stuff.

Also using AMD overdrive seem to messup timing. I would go in the tool. set the multipler to get 2.8 ghz . I got 9.5fps in a raytrace benchmark
next set the CPU to 4.2ghz... again benchmark report 9.5fps. Yet the temperature / fan skyrocket etc..
Do the same thing with a reboot (using bios) 7.6fps vs 12fps ! exactly what I expected.

This goes along with stories like this:
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/sho ... uperPI-x87)

Also its interesting that I never, ever saw the CPU goes to 4,2ghz using turbo boost. a reason I disabled it. It seem worthless.
Load only one core, temp well below 60c. 3.7ghz was the best reported. never hit 4.2

I guess a lot of mysteries around this chip...

Amusing how people are willing to inconvenience themselves in different ways just to save a few $0.02 Oh well, whatever tickles your fancy...

sschaem wrote:

I recall reading people setting their FX at 1.4+ volt and ~5GHZ... I just cant imagine the heat this generate!

I also seem to recall reading that the CPU draws in excess of 200W in this scenario. So I can imagine the heat it puts out, and I don't particularly want to go there!

JohnC wrote:

Amusing how people are willing to inconvenience themselves in different ways just to save a few $0.02 Oh well, whatever tickles your fancy...

It's the thrill of the chase...

clone wrote:

You can add 30% more perf for $150 (AMD) and an extra 15% for $500 (Intel).

The benchmarks linked in this thread show more than 15% benefit, and the cost is less than $500.

Option 1: $0 Keep your Phenom II X6 1090T.
Option 2: $145 Switch to an FX-8320.
Option 3: $335 Switch to a Core i5-4670K and Z87 motherboard.
Option 4: $435 Switch to a Core i7-4770K and Z87 motherboard.
Option 5: $780 Switch to a Core i7-3930K and X79 motherboard.

clone wrote:

2nd part: Flip Mode their is a huge divide between your recommendation and your choices given your X4 955 with DDR2 while a solid setup was built/upgraded during the years Core 2 & i7 along with DDR 3 were mainstream.

why is it when it's not your money you are so adamant?

The x4 955 measured up well at the time I purchased, and wasn't as much the compromise that the fx chips are today. I'm taking my own advice these days, which is to hold steady with the 955 until I'm ready to move to haswell or whatever comes next. But the 955 is doing everything I need at the moment.

just brew it! wrote:

flip-mode wrote:

Dunno, cost of cooler shouldn't mean much since, IMO, you should be running a Hyper 212 Evo regardless.

The only gotcha with the 212 Evo is that it requires a custom motherboard backing plate, so it is a bit inconvenient for retrofits. TX3 can use the existing AMD standard heatsink mounting frame so you can swap it in without removing the motherboard from the case; but I would not recommend the TX3 if you plan to OC.

jihadjoe wrote:

Also, dust! Blowing some compressed air through a rad is far easier than having to dismount your ginormous tower cooler to clean it.

You can blow compressed air through a tower cooler too.

Oh yeah, the tx3 is great and a better choice if just running at stock.

For what its worth,

So far I see that this system uses 33.5W per module at 3.5ghz/1.112v, but a whopping 53.5W (per module) at 4.2ghz/1.265v
Just an old point of reference: my Q6600 uses about 31.5W per 'core' at 3.2ghz / 1.288v

I dont have enough data point to draw an efficiency curve, but that 20% speed boost cost 60% more power to achieve.

sschaem wrote:

For what its worth,

So far I see that this system uses 33.5W per module at 3.5ghz/1.112v, but a whopping 53.5W (per module) at 4.2ghz/1.265v
Just an old point of reference: my Q6600 uses about 31.5W per 'core' at 3.2ghz / 1.288v

I dont have enough data point to draw an efficiency curve, but that 20% speed boost cost 60% more power to achieve.

Sounds about right. Power usage should go up roughly linearly with clock speed, and roughly proportional to the square of core voltage. Running the numbers, you should be seeing roughly 55% power usage increase at 4.2GHz/1.265V relative to 3.5GHz/1.112V.

It is unfortunate that it took that much more voltage to get it stable at 4.2GHz.

.. I guess all the good FX chip where binned to be Centurions...

Well, winter is around the corner, during those few months I'm ok using power just to generate heat.

More lasagna in the oven, and more overclocking !

side note: Intel VTune is $899, but CodeXL / Code Analyst is free for AMD processors. One big thing that drew me into recycling this 1090T server HW.
(Beside having access to SSE4.x & AVX)

.

End User wrote:

Bensam123 wrote:

We may end up in a scenario where a 8350 is equal or better then a 4770k in games if they become better multithreaded (like BF3).

A 8350 can't even beat a i5-760 in BF3:

My dad can beat up your dad.





Also, I can personally confirm that the above results from Gamegpu may not be accurate. I've played 64 person metros WHILE STREAMING and get 60-100fps, usually around 75ish. I don't know what it would be like using a 3570k, but there is almost a linear distribution of workloads across all 8 cores (including streaming).

travbrad wrote:

Bensam123 wrote:

Yeah Ati and none of those games really require more then that.

Planetside 2 does unfortunately. It only uses 2 cores and I am bottlenecked by my CPU with an i5-2500K @ 4.5ghz. There is basically no CPU in existence that can run it completely smoothly, even when overclocked.

Even World of Tanks runs noticeably better on my [email protected] than it does on my [email protected], despite only using 1 core. Never underestimate how poorly optimized a lot of games are

Planetside 2 is a steaming PoS when it comes to performance. I played with with both a 3570k and a 8350, you're looking at maybe a extra 5-10fps in the game with a 3570k. Percentages always make things look better then they really are. Coincidentally, the developers are working hard at 'optimizing' the game currently in time for the PS4 launch. Which means we should (hopefully) see very meaty improvements in multithreaded performance. Since the PS4 and Xbone are 8 core chips, this will directly translate to Vishera and any other chips.

Hence my earlier statement about the dichotomy of video games is changing and the entire view of the field will be shifting due to the hardware that will arrive in consoles. Oh, it also uses more then two threads if you watch the distribution of it in resource monitor or take the time to look at the thread count. There are almost no games that run on JUST two threads or less. They may not be evenly balanced, but they most definitely spin off into more, which Windows then distributes around the cores in whatever way it sees fit.

clone wrote:

Flip Mode wrote:

The x4 955 measured up well at the time I purchased, and wasn't as much the compromise that the fx chips are today.

the 955 is doing everything I need at the moment.

I agree 100% until you claim Intel is the only route to go, I'm not saying Intel is a bad route but where is this "compromise" that's to be had by saving $500? ($450 JustAnEngineer )

if what you have is fine for everything out today, why is their a singular need for more performance at any price? (especially when software demands are growing at a glacial pace and the future is multithreaded to be handled by more and simpler cores)

It's simply what I'd do if I was in that position and it is what I'm doing in the position I'm in. And getting a new motherboard has some benefits too so it's not just additional CPU performance that is being gained - the additional cost gets you an additional piece of hardware to play with and mobos can be just as or even more fun than CPUs. That's just me, and I won't begrudge anyone who has a different opinion. For the record I'd go with the $350-ish option of 4670k + mobo.

clone wrote:

JustAnEngineer wrote:

The cost is less than $500.

Do you personally choose & recommend the cheapest motherboards you can find from any company or do you buy trusted parts along with something with the right features? Also, add in taxes and shipping (+ coin from replaced CPU sale if he goes FX 8320) and $500 is fine. If you'd like I'll say $450. Where is this "compromise" that's to be had by saving $500? ($450 JustAnEngineer )

The prices that I listed include shipping and taxes. They are from the exact same trusted source as the processor linked in the first message of this thread. The motherboard bundles are from top tier manufacturers with all appropriate features for overclocking. You're certainly welcome to pay more to buy a blinged-out version from some boutique PC assembler with your own money. I usually stick with Newegg or Amazon. Hint: Newegg frequently offers combination discounts for purchasing CPU and motherboard together.

You seem to be having difficulty understanding how to make incremental comparisons.
Option 1 costs nothing. Option 2 is slightly faster and costs $145. Option 3 is significantly faster than that and costs $335. Option 4 is faster still and costs $435.
The difference between option 2 and option 4 isn't $500. It's $435-$145 = $290.

Bensam123 wrote:

I've played 64 person metros WHILE STREAMING and get 60-100fps, usually around 75ish.

The results depend on many different things, dude. Such as different in-game level - for example, my "average" on 64-player Operation Metro is 115FPS (according to FRAPS benchmark which I ran during whole gaming round), but on 64-player "Ziba Tower" it is around 100FPS ("Ziba Tower" is a CQ map with more "destructible" environments). Also depends on a video card. So you cannot compare your own results to the results of the benchmark unless you have same exact (or very close to it) hardware and play on same exact map with same exact number of people

Also, on your stream I've seen your FPS drop to less than 50. Which is close to min FPS of that Russian site's benchmark

.

clone wrote:

spend $145 to get 30% (23% according to PC world) more performance or $350 [fixed] to get another 15%.

Disagreements on cost and additional performance aside (entry level Z87 motherboard is $100), the fact that one gets a new mobo for one's additional outlay is just as "exciting" - if not more exciting - than the CPU upgrade. Firstly, it gives you a new piece of hardware to play with. Secondly, going from AMD to Intel means you get better SATA performance, better USB performance. Upgrading from an AMD 970 chipset to an Intel z87 seems at least as exciting as any CPU upgrade.

Is OP even still around at this point?

flip-mode wrote:

Secondly, going from AMD to Intel means you get better SATA performance, better USB performance.

Well, to be objective you do not have to use AMD's crappy solutions - on some Asus mobos for AMD CPUs you can instead use a superior ASMedia USB 3.0 controller or Intel's NIC (which is actually pretty amusing)

.

flip-mode wrote:

is just as "exciting" - if not more exciting

clone wrote:

notably boring

Aww... People are trying to determine whose subjective opinion is more

clone wrote:

objective

How cute!

.

clone wrote:

their is room

It is "there", not "their". How's that for an objective criticism?

P.S: As for "staying on topic" - the discussion about subjective advantages of Intel vs. AMD choices is pretty pointless and I just treat it as such. The ONLY objective thing the original poster should do is to ignore unreliable pretty bar graphs and actually purchase whatever CPU he was thinking about, try it out in his specific environment (using specific apps/games which he uses with specific settings) and see if the performance increase was worth it, if not - he should return the CPU for refund or (if it is not possible to return it) sell it or give it away to someone else. There is no need to "make an elephant out of a fly", figuratively speaking.

Good post, John. Part of what often happens is that many folks can't simply state their own opinion, they also have to put down the opinions of others.

clone wrote:

what?.... buying the cheapest toilet available is not and has never been an exciting proposition, especially when it's sole purpose is to replace one that works fine already. to your credit those ""'s were wisely used in that comment.

How is it not inconsistent to say "get the cheap cpu" and also "don't get a cheap mobo"?

And, his CPU works fine already (which continues to be my first recommendation), so by the same logic not to replace the mobo, don't replace the CPU.

And, I must say, the FX 8320 is viewed by many enthusiasts as "the cheapest toilet available". In the end, we all just have opinions, and none of us should try to make what is ultimately his/her own opinion seem more legitimate than anyone else's.

2nd part Flip Mode you have no real world experience with the motherboards discussed to justify that comment at all.... the only "exciting" upgrade is the one that hasn't been discussed which is to go from a platter drive to an SSD.

See, given the past history between you and me, this type of comment will go nowhere but bad places - let's not make this personal and let's not try to disqualify one another from the conversation. In spite of what I think is an undignified remark, I must say that I never have real world experience with a mobo until I buy one, but I definitely can read specs and reviews and form my own opinions on any number of motherboards - and that's something I commonly do every time I get ready to buy a motherboard.

replacing mobo's, cpu's and ram has been notably boring for the past 5 years because software has fallen so far behind.

Opinions vary; mobos are pretty interesting things, IMO.