Help overclocking AMD FX8350
Help overclocking AMD FX8350
Details about the key parts:
Processor - AMD FX8350 4.0Ghz/4.2Ghz
Mainboard - Asrock 970 extreme3 R2.0
RAM - 2x HyperX fury 4GB 1600Mhz
Cooling solution - Stock (not advised, I'm trying to test stability before improving cooling)
Power supply - Silverstone strider gold 1200w
Graphics card - Evga GeForce GTX 560ti 1024MB (planning to switch to MSI GTX 970 soon)
My goal is to boost my CPU speed to approximately 4.8/5.0Ghz. I've used AMD overdrive and reached the 4.9Ghz level with stable performance, but I'm struggling to get it to start automatically with this setting. I have captured screenshots of the overclock settings and turned off the overclocking feature when the OS loads (since the Asrock Extreme Tuning Utility isn't consistent for presets and sometimes fails to launch). I attempted to move all the data to the BIOS for overclocking, but it works in Windows but freezes when trying to log in. There seems to be no clear solution. Here are some screenshots of my configuration:
http://imgur.com/a/Z7O9y
Consider testing the NB voltage at 1.25, adjusting CPU/NB voltage to 1.375, and vCore to 1.38
First, your temperature is really high. 69c in your first pic, and I assume it is idle because I didn't see any stress test opened on windows tabs. Your load temperature needs to be under 70c in socket and 62c in core.
Second, careful when OC'ing a Fx 8xxx with your mobo. It is not recommended that your is paired with an 8 core, and definitely not OC'ing it. That is due to your mobo's power phase being only 4+1, which insufficient in supplying the power that the CPU needs for OC'ing.
Last, booting into windows and being stable are two different things. You need to run and pass stress tests (Small FFTs on Prime95, or Intest Burn Test, for 20 minutes) every time you increase multipler or voltage. My guess is that your system is unstable.
Thus, you need to run Small FFTs on Prime 95 for 30mins and monitor AMDOverDrive for temperature levels and core failures. Decrease voltage and multipler as needed and retest every step.
Also, list PSU, GPU, and Cooler.
Benjiwenji:
Initially, your temp is quite high. The first image shows 69c, and it seems you didn’t open any stress tests in the windows tabs. Your load temp should stay below 70c at the socket and 62c in the core.
Second, be cautious when overclocking an Fx 8xx with your motherboard. It’s not advised to pair it with an 8-core chip, and definitely don’t overclock it. This is because your motherboard only supports a power phase of 4+1, which isn’t enough for the CPU’s needs during OC.
Lastly, starting in Windows and maintaining stability are separate issues. You must consistently run stress tests—such as Small FFTs on Prime95 or an Intest Burn Test for 20 minutes—each time you change the multiplier or voltage. Based on my observation, your system appears unstable.
Therefore, perform Small FFTs on Prime95 for 30 minutes and keep an eye on AMDOverDrive for temperature and core issues. Adjust voltage and multiplier as needed and recheck regularly. Also, note the PSU, GPU, and cooler.
The PC recently experienced a stress test while running 3Dmark before freezing for four hours. Additionally, I can’t run Prime95 in Windows; it crashes every time even with AMD overdrive, though it handles gaming better.
This clearly indicates instability. Either the voltage is too high or the system is overheating—reduce voltage and clock speed accordingly.
What are your PSU, GPU, and CPU cooler?
Edited: acknowledged your updated message.
Avoid overclocking the 8350 using a standard cooler; switch to an aftermarket one or lower voltage/clock immediately. Doing so could cause lasting harm to your hardware.
Benjiwenji :
This clearly indicates instability. Either the voltage is too high or the system is overheating—reduce voltage and clock speed accordingly.
What are your PSU, GPU, and CPU cooler?
Edited: never mind, I see your updated post
Do not overclock the 8350 using a standard cooler; switch to an aftermarket one or lower voltage/clock speed right away. You risk permanent damage.
Currently, it runs at 4.7Ghz with the stock cooler, staying under 51°C—seeming warm but safe. This was verified after testing on Prime65 for over two hours without issues. My goal is to check if it can be overclocked and, if possible, invest in a proper watercooling system.
What is your thermal margin in AOD when running Prime95 Small FFTs test? I am sorry, but I do find that hard to believe.
Either way, this,
TheYajrab :
I was running 3Dmark stress test before it froze and was stuck like that for 4 hours. Also I can't run prime95 as Windows just crashes everytime even with AMD overdrive
is a sure sign of instability. Even if your CPU is 51c with stock cooler, which I have doubts, your VRM on mobo could be frying. Your mobo isn't meant to house the Fx 8 cores, and definitely not for OC'ing them.
My AMD Overdrive data is available here.
I also disagree with your claim about my motherboard's limitations. Although it's a budget model priced at £67, other users have successfully overclocked it and achieved good results. This is my first attempt, so I expect some challenges. The board clearly lists 8-core support, yet the BIOS prevents me from overclocking this CPU unless it can handle it.
It's interesting what they promote in specifications. But after some research, I realized your motherboard seems "acceptable" thanks to the good heatsinks on the VRMs. I won't keep insisting that it can't support a 6-core or even an 8-core processor. Still, it only offers a 4+1 power phase configuration. That detail remains unchanged. I'll reference this article:
http://www.overclock.net/a/about-vrms-mo...processors
Quote:
Originally posted by: xd_1771, 3930K, and Pentium4 531 overclocker of Overclock.net
"Failures on motherboards with higher phase counts have been relatively rare if not nonexistent. Most issues with VRMs stem from lower-end boards with 4+1 or 3+1 phases that aren't built for high-power processors, especially those that are overclocked. Smaller systems with fewer phases can be particularly dangerous because each transistor needs to handle more current and heat. This explains why boards from certain manufacturers often fail under stress. However, the brand and its quality control play a big role too. For instance, many 2010 MSI AMD boards with 4+1 phase or similar heatsinks had poor reliability due to improperly rated components and lack of overcurrent protection. But the Biostar TA890FXE, which has a comparable 4+2 power phase, performed well without issues. It offered strong current ratings per transistor and was very stable."
An 8+2 phase setup doesn't automatically mean more power delivery if the VRM's capacity matches that of a 4+1 system; it could still work better in efficiency, stability, and heat dissipation. The situation can be summarized by OCN PSU editor Phaedrus2129:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phaedrus1219
In practice, many VRMs with additional phases can deliver more power. For example, if you need 64A, it's often more economical to use sixteen 8A transistors instead of four 32A ones. Therefore, increasing the number of phases usually reduces costs while boosting power capability (generally). Thus, a VRM with fewer phases tends to be less powerful—though not always—since enhancing power capacity comes at a higher price.
Based on this, I still believe your motherboard isn't designed for heavy overclocking, particularly not at 4.8 GHz."
Benjiwenji:
You might be amazed by what they promote in specifications. But after some research, I discovered your board is "acceptable," mainly because the VRMs have solid heatsinks. I won’t claim it can easily support a 6-core or even an 8-core processor.
Still, it only features a 4+1 power phase setup. That detail remains unchanged. I’ll reference this article:
http://www.overclock.net/a/about-vrms-mo...processors
Quote:
Originally posted by: xd_1771, 3930K, and Pentium4 531 overclocker of Overclock.net
"Failures on motherboards with higher phase counts have been relatively rare if not nonexistent. Most issues with VRMs stem from lower-end boards that lack the capability to manage high-power processors or those pushed into overclocking. Smaller systems with fewer phases can be especially risky, as each transistor needs to handle more current and heat. This explains why boards from certain manufacturers often fail under stress—whether due to design flaws or insufficient protection.
However, the brand and its quality control play a significant role. For instance, many 2010 MSI AMD boards with 4+1 phase or similar features, regardless of heatsink presence, suffered from poor reliability. This was linked to improperly rated components, unrated drivers, and missing over-current protection.
On the other hand, the Biostar TA890FXE, which has a comparable 4+2 power phase, proved more reliable. It offered strong current ratings per transistor and was exceptionally stable.
A system with an 8+2 phase might not necessarily deliver more current than a 4+1 phase if the VRM’s capacity is identical. But it would still operate more efficiently, remain steadier, and generate less heat.
In summary, as explained by OCN PSU editor Phaedrus2129:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phaedrus1219
From a real-world angle, many VRMs with additional phases can indeed supply more power. For example, if you aim for 64A, using sixteen 8A transistors is often more cost-effective than four 32A ones. Thus, increasing the number of phases usually reduces costs while boosting power capability.
Therefore, it seems your board isn’t designed to support the overclocking demands of the FX 8 core, especially not at 4.8 GHz.
I completely agree with you—this board likely wasn’t built for the FX-8350’s needs. At least an ASUS 970 Performance model performed well, and you’ll need a quality cooler before attempting overclocking, as it can overheat quickly. Running it above 60–62°C per core could permanently damage the chip, so it’s best to stay below that threshold."