fx 8350 still oke?????
fx 8350 still oke?????
Hello everyone, here are my questions about this CPU.
I have an FX 8350 running at 4.2ghz. The issues I'm facing are:
1 is this CPU still sufficient for gaming most of the time?
2 will it cause a bottleneck with my GPU Msi R9 390?
3 will overclocking it to 4.4ghz provide more performance? On Intel, that extra 200mhz won't make much difference, is it better on AMD?
Right now I can't reach higher than 4.4ghz because I'm cooling it with a Master TX 3 cooler.
On an MSI 970 board, it requires 1.45v to run.
1) Generally yes, but varies. Some games perform poorly on FX CPUs while others handle them fine. Newer titles usually manage okay.
2) It depends on the specific game.
3) Likely not a big issue; returns slow down near 4.5. Wouldn't go beyond that unless using a high-end board and better cooling.
1) Yes, generally. A few games with poor optimization can have issues on FX CPUs, while others perform quite well. Most recent titles handle them fairly okay.
2) It really depends on the specific game.
3) Likely not a big change; returns start to fade around 4.5. I wouldn't go beyond that unless you're using a high-end board and have a better cooler.
It's quite remarkable how the FX-8350 can match or even surpass some of the latest Intel i7 processors in terms of performance during benchmarking and gaming tasks at higher resolutions such as 1440p and mostly 4K. Given that you're using or planning to use an R9 390, it's unlikely you'll be playing at lower resolutions like 1080p or 720p. However, if you're aiming for 1080p or 720p gaming, the FX-8350 may not outperform newer Intel chips significantly.
If you wish to take your setup further, you can attempt overclocking without major issues. Just note that your MSI 970 Gaming is recognized as a problematic overclocker and can experience VRM overheating at higher voltages. You might be able to reach speeds around 4.4 or 4.5Ghz if you're fortunate. Overclocking should improve performance in games optimized for eight cores and at higher resolutions, though gains are usually limited to frame rate reductions—maximum FPS may only increase by a few frames per second at most.
Keep in mind that newer titles often utilize more cores, making the FX-8350 a solid choice in such scenarios.
For further insights, you can review these sources:
http://www.tweaktown.com/tweakipedia/58/...index.html
http://www.technologyx.com/featured/amd-...howdown/4/
If you need additional evidence, simply search for "AMD vs Intel 4k" and you'll find numerous benchmarks supporting this comparison.
1- Fx-8350 does fine for the far majority of the games in the market. However,
in Dx11
, an i5, or sometimes even the i3, can outperform the Fx-8350 just by a little if you're using a top end GPU such as the 980ti / Fury X. Otherwise, the bottleneck almost always occurs on the GPU.
2- The R9-390 pairs very well with the Fx-8350. I have my Fx-6300 with a R9 290 can run on ultra 1080p/~50-60fps on games such as Fallout 4, BF 4, and witcher 3. In very specific titles your Fx-8350 will struggle, they are Total War, GTA V, Day Z, ARMA, and give or take some odd games.
3- Yes, higher overclock = better performance in games, given that you have unlimited GPU power.
There isn't a diminishing return at 4.5 Ghz as claimed by dudeman.
As you can see for yourself, the performance gained in overclocking on a CPU bounded title is proportional and linear. However, you do have a exponential increase in voltage, therefore, heat as well.
@Gustavo,
That's misleading, the i7 4770k is way ahead of the Fx-8350. However, what you're seeing is the lack of GPU power to sustain 4k in games at the moment, thus, games are bottlenecked by the GPU at above 1080p resolutions.
Furthermore, the MSI 970 Gaming is one of the best mobo for overclocking the Fx-8 cores out of all the 970 boards.
Benjiwenji :
@Gustavo,
Your comparison seems to be off. The i7 4770k is significantly superior to the Fx-8350. What you're observing actually stems from insufficient GPU power to maintain 4K performance in games right now, which causes games to be limited by the GPU when resolutions exceed 1080p. Additionally, the MSI 970 Gaming stands out as one of the top choices for overclocking the Fx-8 cores among all 970 models.
I wasn't suggesting that an i7 4770k is inferior to an FX-8350; rather, I highlighted several tests indicating that an 8350 can deliver comparable or even better performance than the 4770k when gaming at 1440p or 4K—though not always consistently. As you can see in the links I've shared and others online, these comparisons focus on CPU performance using identical GPUs and swapping CPUs only, with benchmarks to evaluate combinations like i7 4770k + GTX980 versus 8350 + GTX980. It's clear from these tests that the i7 4770k generally outperforms in terms of FPS across various scenarios.
The MSI 970 is among the best in its category, but it doesn't excel in overclocking. The VRMs on this board have drawn criticism for overheating and instability, even during modest overclocks. It would be wise to ensure proper cooling—either by adding a fan or installing a heatsink if pushing beyond 1.45v.
Regarding overclocking specifically, it's not as straightforward as some might think. The 9590 was categorized for 5.0Ghz performance. A direct comparison between stock and overclocked CPUs should yield more meaningful results than just stock versus underclocked. I'm currently running an 8350 at 4.7Ghz on one of my systems, which only improved FPS by 1-2 average frames in most games (1080p). In some more demanding titles, I've managed a modest gain of about 5 average frames, but that's the extent. My main motivation for overclocking has been video rendering, which has shown notable improvements with a 500Mhz boost (from 4.2 to 4.7).
I know, I have read the links previously. Yet, as GPUs get better, the 4770k will pull much further ahead of the Fx-8350 in 4k. Polaris and Pascal might just do the trick. Running 4k benchmarks to evaluate CPU performance is almost equivalent to running CPU benchmarks using a 750ti, where you will get the same performance between an Athlon 860k and i7-4770k because of the GPU bottleneck. It is unrealistic, too, to point to 4k gaming when making a case for the 8350, since most gamers interested in the 8350 are on a budge. About the 970 Gaming, it is the board to get if you want to overclock an Fx-8core with any 970 boards. It's either the 970 Gaming, UD3P, or 970 pro gaming/aura. Obviously the 990 boards are ideal, but the 970 Gaming will do the trick just fine. If you disagree, then you can make your case on this thread. Lastly, about overclocking CPU. You don't see the proportional increase in overclocked Fx-8350 in FPS on Fallout4 and Dark Souls is because you don't have unlimited GPU power. It is the same principle on why you get diminishing return on CPU overclock using a GTX 960. At some point, no matter how fast your CPU is, your GTX 960 just can't putout anymore. There is a reason why I said unlimited GPU power as a condition and used GTA V to represent a known CPU bottleneck scenario. I don't mean to sound harsh as I would love to see RED team do well. I argue that there is a market for the FX CPUs on budget work stations and 1080p/60 gaming. However, I am just realistic about it. Rather than going with the 4k argument, you're better off going the Dx12 route. http://wccftech.com/hitman-pc-directx-12-benchmarks/
No, but you gradually require bigger voltage boosts and start struggling against VRM + CPU heat when using those faster speeds...for only a slight performance gain. 4.5 works well with most FX chips; going over 100 MHz becomes tougher without significant extra benefits.
It's quite interesting how the FX-8350 can match or even surpass some of the latest Intel i7 processors in terms of performance during benchmarking or gaming tasks at higher resolutions such as 1440p and mostly 4k. Given that you're using or planning to use an R9 390, it seems unlikely you'll be playing at lower resolutions like 1080p or 720p. However, if you decide to play at 1080p or 720p, the FX-8350 may not outperform newer Intel chips significantly.
If you aim for even better results, you can attempt overclocking, though be cautious—your MSI 970 Gaming is known to struggle with high voltages and often causes VRM overheating. You might manage to reach speeds around 4.4 or 4.5Ghz if you're fortunate. Overclocking could improve performance in games optimized for eight cores and higher resolutions, but expect only minor gains, mainly in frame rates dropping by about 1 or 2 frames.
Keep in mind that newer titles often utilize more cores, making the FX-8350 a solid choice. For further evidence, you can review the following links:
http://www.tweaktown.com/tweakipedia/58/...index.html
http://www.technologyx.com/featured/amd-...howdown/4/
If you need more data, simply search for "AMD vs Intel 4k" and you'll find numerous benchmarks supporting this claim.
Thank you for your response. At the moment, I play at 1080p, to be honest. I understand the MSI motherboard isn't a top-tier overclocker, which is why I'm hesitant to push it beyond 4.3 or 4.4. It feels a bit disappointing since it would need around 1.45v to hit 4.4 and 1.4v for 4.3Ghz.
You start needing bigger voltage boosts and face tougher VRM + CPU heat issues with higher speeds—only a small gain in performance is worth it. For most FX chips, 4.5 GHz is feasible; going over by 100 MHz becomes much harder without significant extra benefits. I’d suggest around 1.5 volts for this setup, especially at 4.5 GHz even with an AIO cooler—it wouldn’t feel safe. Most likely, 4.3 GHz with 1.4 volts and the cooler would be safer right now.