AMD FX 4350: My first FX build!

[Athlonite]

Yea the thing about FX processors it brings out the cooling mad man in some people. The crazier you get, the better the chip flies. lol.

I did TEC experiements back then too. So much fun. Ran the FX chip on 2 cores and was able to maintain forzen temps for light benching or what have you.
But look at that voltage vs clock speed though. Crazy the effects of chilling in the negative temps.
View attachment 115668

You should be able to get that NB Frequency up to atleast the same as the HT frequency so 2600MHz each for a better boost to memory read/write throughput

 

[Deleted member 185158]

You should be able to get that NB Frequency up to atleast the same as the HT frequency so 2600MHz each for a better boost to memory read/write throughput

I could never get my NB on any AM3+ board anywhere near the 4Ghz HT clocks I was able to produce...... But I agree try to get NB as high as possible.

Wow, I didn't know so many of my good buddies where at this forum regularly. Why didn't you guys mention this place to me a long time ago? lol. Good to see ya fellas.

Let me dig up some more eye candies. I really loved the AM2-AM3+ era of processing.

Quad core FX vs all your guys's 8 core FX chips. what sweet comparisons lol.
So instead......

980BE clocked up real nice after a de-lid. Get your FX chip to catch this beast!!! Muhahahaa!!!!

https://valid.x86.fr/show_oc.php?id=2415230

For the Heck of it 9590 Wprime 1024M on liquid @ 5.4ghz de-lidded.

 

[Athlonite]

You may need to add a few mV to the HT and NB to get it stable at 2600MHz but it should be doable but don't go higher than 1.4V though

 

[storm-chaser]

You may need to add a few mV to the HT and NB to get it stable at 2600MHz but it should be doable but don't go higher than 1.4V though

I have the NB dialed in at 2.6Ghz with a voltage of 1.275. Any higher and I cant get it stable no matter what voltage I use.
Seems that's about right for FX chips in general... 2600mhz is the sweet spot. It's just a shame NB performance doesn't scale with FX like it did with the higher end phenom II chips. Most often you could go 3Ghz on a Deneb or Thuban.

 

[eidairaman1]

I have the NB dialed in at 2.6Ghz with a voltage of 1.275. Any higher and I cant get it stable no matter what voltage I use.
Seems that's about right for FX chips in general... 2600mhz is the sweet spot. It's just a shame NB performance doesn't scale with FX like it did with the higher end phenom II chips. Most often you could go 3Ghz on a Deneb or Thuban.

Put active cooling on the NB and SB, maybe water.

Im only multiplier OC'd at the moment.

 

[storm-chaser]

Here is a 5.0Ghz run with the new Cinebench R15 "extreme" edition:

Versus my Q9650 @ 4.275Ghz (air cooled)

 

[Durvelle27]

Here is a 5.0Ghz run with the new Cinebench R15 "extreme" edition:
View attachment 115968

Versus my Q9650 @ 4.275Ghz (air cooled)
View attachment 115972

Got smoked by a Core 2 Quad

My old scores

 

[lexluthermiester]

Here is a 5.0Ghz run with the new Cinebench R15 "extreme" edition:
View attachment 115968

Versus my Q9650 @ 4.275Ghz (air cooled)
View attachment 115972

Ok, my 189 and 213 doesn't seem so bad anymore..

 

[Mr.Scott]

Got smoked by a Core 2 Quad

My old scores

Nice.
What cooling?

 

[Durvelle27]

Nice.
What cooling?

Custom Loop

FX was definitely a fun clocker

This was my upgrade path from the last FX




AMD Ryzen 7 1700X @3.9GHz Daily. Ryzen is definitely no clocker not like AMDs last CPUs sadly. I think i had the most fun with the FX and the Xeon as it was a pain in the ass to clock it which required modified BIOs to gain full features.

^
^
Intel Xeon X5650 @4.6GHz Daily

^
^
Intel i7-4770 @4.1GHzDaily

^
^
FX 8350 @5.4GHz Daily

^
^
FX 8320 @4.8GHz

 

[storm-chaser]

Did something a little different with this build. Swapped in the CPU to a Biostar A880GZ mainboard and Mushkin SSD. Also went from liquid to air cooling via a CoolerMaster Hyper 212.
4.9 is defintely the sweet spot with this build. Running some benchmarks and she gets pretty hot, but stays under 155 or thereabouts.

 

[RealNeil]

Wow! The Cinebench Extreme bench really taxes your PC.

 

[storm-chaser]

Yeah talk about heat! I had to dial the rig down to 4.8Ghz and 1.5 vcore to finish the extreme Cinebench benchmark:

 

[Bones]

Yeah talk about heat! I had to dial the rig down to 4.8Ghz and 1.5 vcore to finish the extreme Cinebench benchmark:
View attachment 116256

Guess that means when I finally go for a run I'll be running things sub-zero when I do.
Good stuff here guys.

 

[Redwoodz]

Good fun tinkering with AMD chips.

 

[Deleted member 185158]

Good fun tinkering with AMD chips.

That 1100T is a beast!

 

[Jism]

Could someone explain the differences in between a 4350 and a 8350 ? One has 4 cores/threads and the other 4 cores and 8 threads. Does this mean the 4350 does not share the resources with another core inside a module?

 

[cat1092]

You could had got a brand new FX-8350 on Newegg for $59.99 + tax shipped, I picked up a 2nd last week with the promo (via email signup only). Also have the 8370, although more expensive for not much gain. It's said to be a 'binned' 8350, if so, I can't tell, other than the $40 more out of my pocket. My first FX-8350 was $99.99, so saved $40 on the last.

The FX-8350 uses no more power, other than maybe full load, of which most doesn't do all the time.

Of course, feel free do you what you want, it's your money & build and you must be happy with it, not us. Yet I can tell that the latest FX's (other than the 9xxx series, I believe there was 2-3 at the most, Newegg even had one of those on promo. But that is indeed a lot of power hog for little gain, other than having a combo PC/room warmer.

Am toying around on this Phenom II x4 965 build just completed, I kind of like the CPU, was compared to the 1st gen of the Intel 'i' series. For it day, has a lot of L3 cache (6MB), wasn't long after, the AM3 series ran into a brick wall. It's still kind of hard for me to believe how the Phenom II x6 1100T has held it's value (still over $100 at the lower end). Much more so than the more Core 2 Quad 9650, of which I also have one, plus the Q9550, although in OEM builds, so can't take advantage of the OC potential. it's dropped big in price over the last year. I'd love to have that 1100T, but not at $100, especially when the FX-8350 beats it hands down. I suppose it's became a collectors item, can't think of any other reason why pricing is so high.

Here's the Phenom II x4 965 build, trying to figure out how to get the RAM to run in dual channel mode on this MB. Maybe I should remove one stick, boot so it registers, then add the other. First time I've seen this, will try another set to ensure my MB isn't bad (don't think so), this is my 3rd of the same model, the ASRock 970M Pro3 is the best 970 mATX on the market. Newegg recently restocked it at $65, it was going for nearly $180 on Amazon (used).

http://speccy.piriform.com/results/5XqZ0gNxeR3rWuJvxMKmB48
Good Luck with your build & have fun!

Cat

 

[Redwoodz]

You could had got a brand new FX-8350 on Newegg for $59.99 + tax shipped, I picked up a 2nd last week with the promo (via email signup only). Also have the 8370, although more expensive for not much gain. It's said to be a 'binned' 8350, if so, I can't tell, other than the $40 more out of my pocket. My first FX-8350 was $99.99, so saved $40 on the last.

The FX-8350 uses no more power, other than maybe full load, of which most doesn't do all the time.

Of course, feel free do you what you want, it's your money & build and you must be happy with it, not us. Yet I can tell that the latest FX's (other than the 9xxx series, I believe there was 2-3 at the most, Newegg even had one of those on promo. But that is indeed a lot of power hog for little gain, other than having a combo PC/room warmer.

Am toying around on this Phenom II x4 965 build just completed, I kind of like the CPU, was compared to the 1st gen of the Intel 'i' series. For it day, has a lot of L3 cache (6MB), wasn't long after, the AM3 series ran into a brick wall. It's still kind of hard for me to believe how the Phenom II x6 1100T has held it's value (still over $100 at the lower end). Much more so than the more Core 2 Quad 9650, of which I also have one, plus the Q9550, although in OEM builds, so can't take advantage of the OC potential. it's dropped big in price over the last year. I'd love to have that 1100T, but not at $100, especially when the FX-8350 beats it hands down. I suppose it's became a collectors item, can't think of any other reason why pricing is so high.

Here's the Phenom II x4 965 build, trying to figure out how to get the RAM to run in dual channel mode on this MB. Maybe I should remove one stick, boot so it registers, then add the other. First time I've seen this, will try another set to ensure my MB isn't bad (don't think so), this is my 3rd of the same model, the ASRock 970M Pro3 is the best 970 mATX on the market. Newegg recently restocked it at $65, it was going for nearly $180 on Amazon (used).

http://speccy.piriform.com/results/5XqZ0gNxeR3rWuJvxMKmB48
Good Luck with your build & have fun!

Cat

Check your motherboard manual...looks like you have RAM sticks in slots #1 and #2. Should be slots #2 and 4 or 1 and 3 for dual channel.

 

[Wavetrex]

Wow! The Cinebench Extreme bench really taxes your PC.

View attachment 116249

Added this score but it's too low for your clocks, something is slowing down CB.

Average calculated "IPC" in my table for this gen is between 14.5 and 15, and yours results in just 12.
You could easily get score 400 with that CPU at 4.9+ Ghz.

https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/cinebench-extreme-edition-mod-scores.252293/post-3988997

 

[RealNeil]

I shut down about half of my background processes and got a better score.
I won't stop all of my security solutions while my PC is online.

Check your motherboard manual...looks like you have RAM sticks in slots #1 and #2. Should be slots #2 and 4 or 1 and 3 for dual channel.

You're correct. He's running his RAM in single channel mode.

 

[storm-chaser]

Made a couple small changes, or tweaks, if you will. I went from DDR3 1600 to 1866, so a bit of an overclock on the RAM. Still able to run stable at CL7.

VRMs are really fighting for their life. When benchmarking the Cinebench extreme edition, they are almost to hot to touch, despite the fact I have an additional Hyper 212 fan pulling cold air in pointed directly on them. Under normal use however, they seem fine. 4.9Ghz for most tasks they don't seem to have any trouble. Just when I push it to the limit is where I have to be careful.

Also note, this motherboard has a 3+1 power phase. That means I'm pushing more than 150w through a board only rated at 125W. On top of that, this is all being done with an antiquated Antec SL-400 PSU. Nothing has gone boom yet *Holds breath*!!!

Also I'm finding the Biostar A880GZ is a far superior piece than my Biostar TA970. That board is junk, slow and all around delivers lackluster performance. Definitely going to be looking for a new AM3+ Motherboard soon for my next project. Stay way from the TA970! That's my advice.

Could someone explain the differences in between a 4350 and a 8350 ? One has 4 cores/threads and the other 4 cores and 8 threads. Does this mean the 4350 does not share the resources with another core inside a module?

FX4350 has the same architecture as the 8350, both used shared resources for each two cores. So technically, the FX4350 is a 2 module / 4 thread piece. Whereas, the FX8350 is a 4 module / 8 thread piece. Easiest way to understand what AMD did with the FX chips in this respect is to think of "hyperthreading" and then invert the equation. Once you do that, you get an FX chip. I've also heard the FX4350 is actually an AMD 8350 that didn't make the grade... i.e there are 4 dormant cores on board that cannot be unlocked, but that helps keep things cool at higher clock rates.

You could had got a brand new FX-8350 on Newegg for $59.99 + tax shipped, I picked up a 2nd last week with the promo (via email signup only). Also have the 8370, although more expensive for not much gain. It's said to be a 'binned' 8350, if so, I can't tell, other than the $40 more out of my pocket. My first FX-8350 was $99.99, so saved $40 on the last.

The FX-8350 uses no more power, other than maybe full load, of which most doesn't do all the time.

Of course, feel free do you what you want, it's your money & build and you must be happy with it, not us. Yet I can tell that the latest FX's (other than the 9xxx series, I believe there was 2-3 at the most, Newegg even had one of those on promo. But that is indeed a lot of power hog for little gain, other than having a combo PC/room warmer.

Am toying around on this Phenom II x4 965 build just completed, I kind of like the CPU, was compared to the 1st gen of the Intel 'i' series. For it day, has a lot of L3 cache (6MB), wasn't long after, the AM3 series ran into a brick wall. It's still kind of hard for me to believe how the Phenom II x6 1100T has held it's value (still over $100 at the lower end). Much more so than the more Core 2 Quad 9650, of which I also have one, plus the Q9550, although in OEM builds, so can't take advantage of the OC potential. it's dropped big in price over the last year. I'd love to have that 1100T, but not at $100, especially when the FX-8350 beats it hands down. I suppose it's became a collectors item, can't think of any other reason why pricing is so high.

Here's the Phenom II x4 965 build, trying to figure out how to get the RAM to run in dual channel mode on this MB. Maybe I should remove one stick, boot so it registers, then add the other. First time I've seen this, will try another set to ensure my MB isn't bad (don't think so), this is my 3rd of the same model, the ASRock 970M Pro3 is the best 970 mATX on the market. Newegg recently restocked it at $65, it was going for nearly $180 on Amazon (used).

http://speccy.piriform.com/results/5XqZ0gNxeR3rWuJvxMKmB48
Good Luck with your build & have fun!

Cat

Thanks Cat. I too am amazed at how well the 1100T has held it's value. Its still my go to processor and for daily use hangs in there pretty well with even the latest technology. It's a shame AMD didn't take the Phenom II and do a die shrink, perhaps add a little more cache and maybe a couple more cores. That would have made for a stout processor. It's just unfortunate the entire FX line failed so miserably when competing against Intel or even the high end Thubans (Thubans will smoke an FX in IPC). Instead, AMD chose failure over success. Why, perhaps we will never know.

I chose this processor (FX4350) because my motherboard doesn't have the overclocking headroom for use with an eight core chip. So I can still get the virtues of Bulldozer without all the heat! lol When I get bored with this CPU I will likely put it back on eBay and recoup most of my losses.

 

[EarthDog]

Is this the cinebench thread now or storms fx?

 

[storm-chaser]

Is this the cinebench thread now or storms fx?

Good question.. lol

Enjoy some pictures of the build, or at least this iteration of it. Sorry about the poor image quality, my phone sucks in low light.

 

[Deleted member 185158]

Wait that's not a Pentium inside!! Love the old school case XD