F5F Stay Refreshed Hardware Desktop Comparing Phenom II X4 955 and FX-8320 models.

Comparing Phenom II X4 955 and FX-8320 models.

Comparing Phenom II X4 955 and FX-8320 models.

J
JureCar11
Junior Member
47
09-09-2016, 06:44 PM
#1
I currently host a personal Minecraft Java server on a Phenom II X4 955. I recently acquired an FX-8320 with a compatible motherboard, and since AM3 CPUs fit AM3+ sockets, I'm uncertain which one to choose. For MC Java single-thread performance is crucial, and I'm unsure which model performs better here. Online benchmarks haven't provided much clarity, so I reached out to you. Both CPUs will run on a Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD3 or the 990FX Ultra Durable 3, if that clarifies things. I'm presently using what appears to be a Hyper 212 with push/pull 80mm fans; it keeps my X4 955 cool, maintaining temperatures just under 60°C during full Cinebench R23. Thank you! Feel free to ask if you need more details.
J
JureCar11
09-09-2016, 06:44 PM #1

I currently host a personal Minecraft Java server on a Phenom II X4 955. I recently acquired an FX-8320 with a compatible motherboard, and since AM3 CPUs fit AM3+ sockets, I'm uncertain which one to choose. For MC Java single-thread performance is crucial, and I'm unsure which model performs better here. Online benchmarks haven't provided much clarity, so I reached out to you. Both CPUs will run on a Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD3 or the 990FX Ultra Durable 3, if that clarifies things. I'm presently using what appears to be a Hyper 212 with push/pull 80mm fans; it keeps my X4 955 cool, maintaining temperatures just under 60°C during full Cinebench R23. Thank you! Feel free to ask if you need more details.

D
Demonsss91
Posting Freak
767
09-09-2016, 06:44 PM
#2
The 955 clearly stands out for its superior performance. If maximum efficiency requires multiple cores, the 8320 is a viable option. Consider testing both models but I think the 955 offers better value for this task. The 8320 is fine if you're just experimenting, but it won't hurt to try it.
D
Demonsss91
09-09-2016, 06:44 PM #2

The 955 clearly stands out for its superior performance. If maximum efficiency requires multiple cores, the 8320 is a viable option. Consider testing both models but I think the 955 offers better value for this task. The 8320 is fine if you're just experimenting, but it won't hurt to try it.

C
Cam_
Junior Member
18
09-09-2016, 06:44 PM
#3
I understand the concerns about Bull-loser CPUs, but the 8320 likely performs worse than the 955 in single-core tasks. It's newer, uses a smaller process node, runs at a higher frequency, and includes significantly more cache.
C
Cam_
09-09-2016, 06:44 PM #3

I understand the concerns about Bull-loser CPUs, but the 8320 likely performs worse than the 955 in single-core tasks. It's newer, uses a smaller process node, runs at a higher frequency, and includes significantly more cache.

M
Matke04
Posting Freak
825
09-09-2016, 06:44 PM
#4
I plan to store the new components in an antistatic bag until I have free time, then experiment with overclocking to explore the limits. I'm also interested in testing how high my X4 955 can go—reached around 4.4 GHz, but I'm unsure if that's due to power issues or hardware constraints. Additionally, I'll be upgrading my RAM because faster speeds are better!
M
Matke04
09-09-2016, 06:44 PM #4

I plan to store the new components in an antistatic bag until I have free time, then experiment with overclocking to explore the limits. I'm also interested in testing how high my X4 955 can go—reached around 4.4 GHz, but I'm unsure if that's due to power issues or hardware constraints. Additionally, I'll be upgrading my RAM because faster speeds are better!

C
Chiller9592
Senior Member
670
09-09-2016, 06:44 PM
#5
Limitation. Phenom II wasn't a 5ghz chip; it ran around 4.2ghz if stable, which is decent. 4.4ghz seems like the highest it could go, though. Stability is questionable. If you want something faster, consider going to a lower voltage + higher power setting. These units aren't affected by cold bugs—I've tested several with full power and liquid nitrogen (Beerzerker is reliable). Dry ice is affordable and easy to find at stores like Meijer, just ask the service desk. A 4ghz Phenom II matches the IPC of a 5ghz FX chip closely, about 1000mhz difference. The FX-8320 would be better for that core count, but a 1090T or 1100T would be ideal if you use it regularly. If you already have Ryzen processors, you likely won't need this upgrade.
C
Chiller9592
09-09-2016, 06:44 PM #5

Limitation. Phenom II wasn't a 5ghz chip; it ran around 4.2ghz if stable, which is decent. 4.4ghz seems like the highest it could go, though. Stability is questionable. If you want something faster, consider going to a lower voltage + higher power setting. These units aren't affected by cold bugs—I've tested several with full power and liquid nitrogen (Beerzerker is reliable). Dry ice is affordable and easy to find at stores like Meijer, just ask the service desk. A 4ghz Phenom II matches the IPC of a 5ghz FX chip closely, about 1000mhz difference. The FX-8320 would be better for that core count, but a 1090T or 1100T would be ideal if you use it regularly. If you already have Ryzen processors, you likely won't need this upgrade.