F5F Stay Refreshed Hardware Desktop Need assistance with AMD FX-9590 optimization? Let me know what you're experiencing!

Need assistance with AMD FX-9590 optimization? Let me know what you're experiencing!

Need assistance with AMD FX-9590 optimization? Let me know what you're experiencing!

Pages (3): Previous 1 2 3
J
JBananaZeb
Junior Member
46
07-19-2016, 08:14 PM
#21
Yessir, thank you! Fast response too. +_+ will buy from this seller again! Start here, work your way up in clocks. 1/2 multi at a time. If it hangs, increase v-core a little. Try to stay between 1.387 (1.40v) to 1.450v and you should be able to manage it a lot better. P-State FID 0x18 - VID 0x0D - IDD 14 (20.00x - 1.387 V)
J
JBananaZeb
07-19-2016, 08:14 PM #21

Yessir, thank you! Fast response too. +_+ will buy from this seller again! Start here, work your way up in clocks. 1/2 multi at a time. If it hangs, increase v-core a little. Try to stay between 1.387 (1.40v) to 1.450v and you should be able to manage it a lot better. P-State FID 0x18 - VID 0x0D - IDD 14 (20.00x - 1.387 V)

S
StrikerYAY
Junior Member
13
07-20-2016, 04:10 AM
#22
The 3850 turbo runs at 4.2ghz with a 4ghz base clock. It makes sense to compare it to the 9590 for these specifications rather than changing the chips. This is just my take—he has the freedom to do whatever he wants. Just adding choices to the board.
S
StrikerYAY
07-20-2016, 04:10 AM #22

The 3850 turbo runs at 4.2ghz with a 4ghz base clock. It makes sense to compare it to the 9590 for these specifications rather than changing the chips. This is just my take—he has the freedom to do whatever he wants. Just adding choices to the board.

E
EuropeanUnion
Senior Member
700
07-20-2016, 05:09 AM
#23
The advertised peak Turbo Boost occurs when 1–2 cores run while the rest stay idle. That’s already around 1.50V for those frequencies. Note that with the FX-8350 paired to an ASUS Crosshair V Formula (non-Z), results may differ. The chip seems set to operate at up to 1.50V. You can gradually increase the voltage from the standard 4.7 GHz configuration by adjusting the CPU ratio. A typical setting is around 23.5, meaning 200 MHz x 23.5 = 4700 MHz. Slowly increase it—24x, 24.5x—and observe the effects. For lower temperatures, try reducing Core Voltage. AMD reportedly modified some FX-8350s by raising the voltage to 1.5V and testing their performance at higher frequencies. If successful, they receive the FX-9590 designation.
E
EuropeanUnion
07-20-2016, 05:09 AM #23

The advertised peak Turbo Boost occurs when 1–2 cores run while the rest stay idle. That’s already around 1.50V for those frequencies. Note that with the FX-8350 paired to an ASUS Crosshair V Formula (non-Z), results may differ. The chip seems set to operate at up to 1.50V. You can gradually increase the voltage from the standard 4.7 GHz configuration by adjusting the CPU ratio. A typical setting is around 23.5, meaning 200 MHz x 23.5 = 4700 MHz. Slowly increase it—24x, 24.5x—and observe the effects. For lower temperatures, try reducing Core Voltage. AMD reportedly modified some FX-8350s by raising the voltage to 1.5V and testing their performance at higher frequencies. If successful, they receive the FX-9590 designation.

B
BHend
Member
76
07-20-2016, 07:59 AM
#24
The focus is on adjusting the speed rather than pushing through 1.5v to reach 5.0 with the chip. A lower voltage of around 1.44v allowed a slightly cooler run. If I kept the voltage at its normal level for the chip, hitting 5.0 proved difficult. The original poster suggests trying different voltages to find what works best without relying on 1.50v. I also support the idea of refining the selection process—top bins were chosen for 9590s, clearly intentional.
B
BHend
07-20-2016, 07:59 AM #24

The focus is on adjusting the speed rather than pushing through 1.5v to reach 5.0 with the chip. A lower voltage of around 1.44v allowed a slightly cooler run. If I kept the voltage at its normal level for the chip, hitting 5.0 proved difficult. The original poster suggests trying different voltages to find what works best without relying on 1.50v. I also support the idea of refining the selection process—top bins were chosen for 9590s, clearly intentional.

B
Benny_Boy679
Member
217
07-21-2016, 10:27 AM
#25
I'm not sure about any new re-branded FX-8350 models. The 9590 was the top leakage chip of its time—ideal for LN2 and responsive to cooling. One of the best chips I've played with is the 8370E, offering a 3.3ghz base and 4.3ghz boost. It performed better than the FX-8350 and was a low leakage design, earning it the "E" for energy efficiency. It's definitely Binned, but I don't remember them switching Sub IDs—changing that would be a huge waste of time and money.
B
Benny_Boy679
07-21-2016, 10:27 AM #25

I'm not sure about any new re-branded FX-8350 models. The 9590 was the top leakage chip of its time—ideal for LN2 and responsive to cooling. One of the best chips I've played with is the 8370E, offering a 3.3ghz base and 4.3ghz boost. It performed better than the FX-8350 and was a low leakage design, earning it the "E" for energy efficiency. It's definitely Binned, but I don't remember them switching Sub IDs—changing that would be a huge waste of time and money.

Pages (3): Previous 1 2 3