Fx 8350 appreciation thread

Fx 8350 appreciation thread

Attached: 1462288.jpg (280x280, 11K)

Other urls found in this thread:

support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/13776/windows-use-snipping-tool-to-capture-screenshots
twitter.com/AnonBabble

it was and is a good chip

Aged like fine wine desu

AMD was right about MOAR COARS

>5ghz 8 core cpu
>loses to dual core i3 in single thread

In mutlithread the 9590 matches a stock 2700k...

bulldozer was shit and it will always be shit and the only thing it was ever good at was obscure multi-threaded linux workloads, but even then it didn't really outclass intel in any metric.

Attached: fx really sucks.jpg (636x549, 219K)

>overpaying for a binned chip
Laughing it up with my 8320.

>Muh frequency
>Muh GTAV

Literal piece of shit that was garbage for gaming
thank fuck AMD got it together with the Zen 2 chips.

How come AMD is still selling this, and why is it still selling?

How come this could clock higher than anything Intel or AMD has on offer now? Is it like an architectural thing?

Yes it was clocking really high and I appreciate that despite doing hardly any work within those clock cycles. As good as Pentium 4.

For games maybe. Otherwise, it's more than capable for daily use. It doesn't even break a sweat doing most anything.

Selling better than the 9700? It's always in the Top 20 when I look. Sometimes in the Top 10 even..

Attached: Untitled.png (498x1103, 338K)

#metoo, high (you) five
Actually thinking of hunting down some cheap 8300/8320/8350 as there's no real point to go cutting edge with my use cases.

I give it Pentium 4 Seal of Approval. I think AMD just really wanted a Netburst of their own.

Probably mentally challenged drones who see AMD+8 cores+price tag and click BUY automatically

I could've bought a Bulldozer on launch in 2011 and used it for four years, but instead I've bought a Sandy Bridge and am still using it.

Hasn’t it proven to be better than Sandy Bridge *both* in single core and multi core, after full mitigations?

I probably would've gone for 8300 too if my mobo was better and I had a better PSU since my current one is like 10 years old.
Replacing the whole mobo+ram+CPU (and PSU) for some new platform is just too much money for me.

>four years
You mean for a week, then you'd return it and buy Sandy anyway

Or they don't want to buy into a new ecosystem.

>if my mobo was better
Ye same issue here, my board supposedly only supports 95W FX CPUs, so I'm kinda worried that even though 8300 is 95W it'd still be pushing it for the VRMs. On the other hand I'm certain it would run even 125W 8350 since it has support for x6 Phenoms... but man those VRMs are few and tiny

burns in FX-9590

Attached: Capture.png (733x597, 42K)

If I slap a decent GPU on a 8320 will it make an OK gaming rig?

I doubt it can handly decently anything above 1050Ti - maybe 1060

I've got a FX 8300/8GB DDR3 system in my basement along with a few other older systems.

My daily driver is this baby: See Pic

Attached: Speccy.jpg (894x588, 239K)

Okay, I find it questionable why you'd stick to Phenom II when you have a proper 8300? Sure back when it came out it was more of a sidegrade, but today FX is clearly superior with its more up-to-date instruction set.

My mobo supports up to 140W supposedly (M5A97 R2.0) but I wouldn't trust it anyway.

Single core performance. I play older games. They ran a lot better with the Phenom than the FX. The really only demanding task I do that uses all cores is video encoding. Which is only occasional thing. Hell if I needed to do just video work I could dust off the FX system. It's still intact.

Mines still alive at 4.4 on a 970 gigabyte board. It's certainly not the best cpu but I had a lot of fun learning the basics of OCing with it, trying different thermal pastes and shit. It's going to be retired soon though. I bought it in 2016 for stupid cheap, and it held its own.

Attached: 1557161728657.gif (250x274, 980K)

>They ran a lot better with the Phenom than the FX.
Eh... but if you force it to use 1 core per module it's about the same if not slightly better IPC on FX side, and then FX can clock higher so it clearly wins.

I was thinking of something like a RX 570, I want to use the 16GB of DDR3 RAM I have on that system for a little while longer and upgrade to ryzen 2 later'

>>test

FX was and always will be a subpar CPU

>force it to use 1 core per module

Microsloth finally pushed out a scheduler update that automates this

1060/580 would do fine

I want a 8320E for a lower power Libre CPU if boards get Coreboot support in the future.

I'm not sure I'd trust something from M$ to work correctly. If you want to be sure of single core performance, just go to bios and force it, if you need full multithreading performance, just reenable it.

It's great for gaming. Have yet to see a single game that doesn't run on 1080p 60fps on high-ultra setting with my 8350 and 1060

Yeah a 570/580/1050Ti/1650/1060 would be good I guess, although I still think 580/1060 would be pushing it

>
Here's mine. I love my little beast. Yeah, he's old, but still a work horse for my shop.

Attached: IMG_20190713_120322.jpg (4032x3024, 3.62M)

Since when the fuck is there a 9700 non-k?

R20 scores.

Attached: IMG_20190713_120819.jpg (4032x3024, 3.6M)

Why don't you bump the core clock above 4.0? You have the aio for it.

Can it even handle Cuphead without stutter?

Just replaced my 8320 with a 3700X

It had a good run

support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/13776/windows-use-snipping-tool-to-capture-screenshots

good ol reliable
reporting for duty

Attached: ss.png (1035x400, 170K)

DON'T TELL HIM >:(

We'll be saying the same thing about Ryzen once the dust settles and the shills stop getting paid.

>water cooler
>stock clock speed

user

Thank you for your contribution to the thread, rabbi

Are AIOs even any good for OC? AFAIR they were more about volume rather than temperatures vs good air cooler, for OC one should use a bigger water cooling setup.

You can get an 83whatever to 4.5 on air. You can get one to 4.7 on water.

Bro by daily

Attached: Clipboard01.png (660x525, 41K)

A 580 would be fine. I had an RX 580 with my Phenom 1090t, and it performs slightly worse than an 8320. You're good. Use that rig as long as you can until Zen 3 comes out, then you can get Zen 2. I bought Zen+ and I'm waiting until DDR5 with AMD before I upgrade. Only thing I'm touching between now and then is a new GPU (looking at you, RX 5700 XT).

But water cooling is too generic of a term. AIO isn't any better than a good air cooler, for a real OC setup you need a custom loop.

Yeah it's ridiculous how cheap Zen/Zen+ CPUs are right now. If the same happens to Zen 2 year from now, oh boy what a deal it will be

WHIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIR

Wonder if they're going to do Zen 2+ or just go straight to Zen 3. If they do Zen 2+, it'll probably be on 7nm EUV and still use DDR4, but I could be wrong. I don't even think DDR5 will be mass produced and sold to the consumer until like 2020.

AMD has no plans for a die shrink until Zen 5. They would gain nothing from doing intel++++++++

Zen3 is going to be a new architecture on the same node

That's actually great news. A node maturity would probably help with clockspeeds and an architecture redesign, I'm hoping, would increase IPC. I'd like to see an all-core of 4.6Ghz stable at a decent voltage in the next gen. I think it's possible, but we'll see.

>AMD has no plans for a die shrink until Zen 5. They would gain nothing from doing intel++++++++
But what you said is kinda contradictory....

It is almost certain AMD is gonna move to 7EUV which is basically 7nm+ simply because it's gonna be compatible with current node, it's gonna be better and it's gonna be in production next year.

Phone for 4 Chan. Got corporate looking at PC's on the network. This is running off my personal hotspot.

Yes. It can handle MHW at 1080p at about 40 50 fps on medium settings with the 970 it has in it.

>it's gonna be better
How so? Clocks? Power usage? Efficiency? Price?

Any Fx 6300-Chads here?

Attached: 1559015597708.png (419x423, 201K)

4.6 currently

Attached: IMG_20190713_132215.jpg (3840x2160, 2.38M)

Yes

Is it stable though? I've clocked mine on air at 4.5 but the second I stress it crashes immediately. If you're also on a 970 board Id love to see your voltages and stuff.

Attached: 1562926102791.png (708x514, 769K)

A little bit of everything, even though the theoretical parameter of 7 and 7EUV are I believe the same, EUV promises higher density without sacrificing yields.

Right now AMD doesn't even use full potential of 7nm because going towards theoretical limits of a node you lose yields. EUV has same limits, but you can move closer to them without losing that much.

Yes. What are your clocks? I don't go past 4.2 since my cooling and VRMs are shit

Just ran a prime 95, 3 workers stopped, illegal sumout?

Attached: IMG_20190713_133121.jpg (3840x2160, 3.51M)

Here's bios screen for oc info

Attached: IMG_20190713_133529.jpg (3840x2160, 2.02M)

From what I remember 1.4+ volts on a 970 board could easily put things in jeopardy? Unless yours has better VRM cooling and stuff, its been a while. Can anyone else confirm this?

Attached: 1562633974835.jpg (300x419, 116K)

3.8 with slight downvolt because my PSU is super old and not the best mobo.

Not entirely sure, no blow up,no over voltage errors, no restarts, no BSODS (yet).

Attached: IMG_20190713_133933.jpg (3840x2160, 2.68M)

I appreciate Jow Forums never memed me into buying one.

That means too low voltage - either CPU or CPU-NB voltage

Running a cinebench run on 4.6

Attached: IMG_20190713_134154.jpg (3840x2160, 2.8M)

Not bad!

Attached: IMG_20190713_134402.jpg (3840x2160, 2.38M)

Shit, and this dude's already above 1.4v. I think maybe he hit the limit . 970a's aren't built for OCing. They CAN do it, but need good airflow and you need to watch your temps, especially on the VRMS. The MSI boards this guy's using seems to at least have better passive cooling than mine...also looks like a better phase option??? I also could be full of shit.

Attached: 1562202430321.jpg (718x719, 61K)

Everyone's already saying it about Ryzen 1

Perhaps I have, I try to push it slightly higher, and it crashes. Not a bad cinebench run though. Now I just need Mobo and CPU upgrade and hope for the best.

Trying a valley benchmark.

Attached: IMG_20190713_135227.jpg (3840x2160, 3M)

Eh, I don't know user, I'm pretty happy with my 2700x. I'm hoping Intel brings something awesome to the table soon. Foveros looks really cool. I think their next chips will be a 14nm refresh but with security vulnerabilities fixed at the hardware level, and a tiny bit more overclocking headroom. Here's hoping!

Damn monitor, had to switch to 1440 x900 for resolution, but still good scores!

Attached: IMG_20190713_135359.jpg (3840x2160, 3.14M)

What do you cool it with?

Ryzen 1 was MUCH closer to Kaby Lake in ST than Vishera/Bulldozer ever were to Sandy Bridge/Ivy Bridge while demolishing equally priced Intel competitors in multithreaded workloads. FX shit was slower in MT AND ST - 2500k was running circles around the 8350 even in MT.

Now, Ryzen 3000 is within 5% of Intel performance in gaymes, equal in productivity ST and so far ahead in productivity MT both in absolute and value-for-money terms that it isn't funny (we're talking about 50%, not meme 5% avg FPS differences that depend on game choices) Zen will be remembered as one of the best CPU uarchs in history, up there with Sandy Bridge, Nehalem, first gen Core 2 and Athlon 64.

i have the Opteron sku of that chip , Operon 3280
its alright