F5F Stay Refreshed Power Users Overclocking My oc fx 8320 good?

My oc fx 8320 good?

My oc fx 8320 good?

Pages (2): Previous 1 2
K
216
02-05-2017, 09:23 AM
#11
Thanks everyone, I configured around 4.2ghz and won't go higher. I noticed someone else using the same motherboard with 4.4ghz, so I set the voltage to 1.39. After running prime95 for about 15 minutes, it ran smoothly without any crashes or blue screens. Probably fine, though I'm not sure.
K
Kawaiichan1776
02-05-2017, 09:23 AM #11

Thanks everyone, I configured around 4.2ghz and won't go higher. I noticed someone else using the same motherboard with 4.4ghz, so I set the voltage to 1.39. After running prime95 for about 15 minutes, it ran smoothly without any crashes or blue screens. Probably fine, though I'm not sure.

S
SpaceEV
Junior Member
37
02-11-2017, 06:09 PM
#12
I'm going to be completely honest, turn off your OC right away. My setup was an M5A97 R2.0 with a stable clock speed of 8320 up to 4.42ghz for about six hours across every CPU test I could find. It quickly drained the life out of my motherboard after roughly one year of use. With a 970 chipset, I pushed it hard using the same CPU as you, just a bit faster than you on your 780 chipset. To manage the heat, I installed large heat sinks everywhere possible on the motherboard.
S
SpaceEV
02-11-2017, 06:09 PM #12

I'm going to be completely honest, turn off your OC right away. My setup was an M5A97 R2.0 with a stable clock speed of 8320 up to 4.42ghz for about six hours across every CPU test I could find. It quickly drained the life out of my motherboard after roughly one year of use. With a 970 chipset, I pushed it hard using the same CPU as you, just a bit faster than you on your 780 chipset. To manage the heat, I installed large heat sinks everywhere possible on the motherboard.

M
mousse2006
Member
157
02-11-2017, 07:25 PM
#13
but if i set at 3.8ghz or 3.9ghz? it will damage the system?
M
mousse2006
02-11-2017, 07:25 PM #13

but if i set at 3.8ghz or 3.9ghz? it will damage the system?

H
HerrgiantV2
Member
68
02-11-2017, 07:42 PM
#14
If I were in your position, I'd aim for a setting around 3.7 or 3.8 and reduce the voltage as much as possible while keeping stability. Voltage is likely the main reason for damage to your board. Those chipsets weren't built to handle much more than a 6xxx series CPU. In my experience, if I were giving advice on chipset compatibility, I'd suggest moderate overclocking for 4xxx CPUs or stock 6xxx CPUs. For an 8xxx CPU, the 970 would be suitable for light overclocking while the 990 is better for pushing performance. I currently have a M5A99 EVO R2 in my rig and am using it heavily for daily tasks.
H
HerrgiantV2
02-11-2017, 07:42 PM #14

If I were in your position, I'd aim for a setting around 3.7 or 3.8 and reduce the voltage as much as possible while keeping stability. Voltage is likely the main reason for damage to your board. Those chipsets weren't built to handle much more than a 6xxx series CPU. In my experience, if I were giving advice on chipset compatibility, I'd suggest moderate overclocking for 4xxx CPUs or stock 6xxx CPUs. For an 8xxx CPU, the 970 would be suitable for light overclocking while the 990 is better for pushing performance. I currently have a M5A99 EVO R2 in my rig and am using it heavily for daily tasks.

S
senbonzakura13
Senior Member
372
02-13-2017, 05:05 AM
#15
Ok thxx
S
senbonzakura13
02-13-2017, 05:05 AM #15

Ok thxx

C
Creeperkilll
Member
201
02-14-2017, 06:35 PM
#16
Here’s your message rewritten with the same structure and length:

Best of luck, I truly hope it holds out for you. I have a friend who is running an 8350 with a low chipset and has noticed performance dropping due to board fatigue at stock settings. He is now undervolting in an attempt to slow the decay and extend its life. That’s why I’m suggesting you do it from the beginning, as a bit of luck could help you avoid the long-term damage from overclocking lower chipset capacity.

In reality, the benefits from overclocking any FX chip are limited unless you push it too far because of the architecture. Setting yours halfway between base and turbo won’t really hurt performance much and will likely give you more playtime and satisfaction for your money.
C
Creeperkilll
02-14-2017, 06:35 PM #16

Here’s your message rewritten with the same structure and length:

Best of luck, I truly hope it holds out for you. I have a friend who is running an 8350 with a low chipset and has noticed performance dropping due to board fatigue at stock settings. He is now undervolting in an attempt to slow the decay and extend its life. That’s why I’m suggesting you do it from the beginning, as a bit of luck could help you avoid the long-term damage from overclocking lower chipset capacity.

In reality, the benefits from overclocking any FX chip are limited unless you push it too far because of the architecture. Setting yours halfway between base and turbo won’t really hurt performance much and will likely give you more playtime and satisfaction for your money.

M
MarissaGames
Member
216
02-14-2017, 09:12 PM
#17
There are two main types of hardware failures: physical and software-related. The FX series is rapidly approaching both challenges. Currently, many games can't run on the FX due to core counts or speeds, simply because they lack certain instruction sets that these games rely heavily on. This situation will likely worsen as games become more advanced and demand greater performance. Previously, AVX and AVX 2 were not considered; now they provide better processing power and are increasingly adopted in newer titles, replacing outdated instructions. The FX's performance is only about two-thirds of a modern Intel i5-3570k's IPC, and its capacity has dropped significantly compared to current Intel or Ryzen CPUs. Modern games leverage advanced technology, while the FX remains outdated. The gap between slow and fast systems has narrowed—no longer a race against the rabbit, it's now a battle against the rocket sled.
M
MarissaGames
02-14-2017, 09:12 PM #17

There are two main types of hardware failures: physical and software-related. The FX series is rapidly approaching both challenges. Currently, many games can't run on the FX due to core counts or speeds, simply because they lack certain instruction sets that these games rely heavily on. This situation will likely worsen as games become more advanced and demand greater performance. Previously, AVX and AVX 2 were not considered; now they provide better processing power and are increasingly adopted in newer titles, replacing outdated instructions. The FX's performance is only about two-thirds of a modern Intel i5-3570k's IPC, and its capacity has dropped significantly compared to current Intel or Ryzen CPUs. Modern games leverage advanced technology, while the FX remains outdated. The gap between slow and fast systems has narrowed—no longer a race against the rabbit, it's now a battle against the rocket sled.

C
charlieold8
Member
164
02-14-2017, 09:54 PM
#18
And in certain situations, it resembles attempting to push a nail with just a small amount of water.
C
charlieold8
02-14-2017, 09:54 PM #18

And in certain situations, it resembles attempting to push a nail with just a small amount of water.

Pages (2): Previous 1 2