Overclock.net › Forums › General Hardware › General Processor Discussions › Did I screwed it up going for FX 8350?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Did I screwed it up going for FX 8350?

post #1 of 28
Thread Starter 
I wanted to make the best RIG Possible last month when I was updating my machine from scratch, I always used AMD so I was neglecting to get an intel i7 4930K processor, thinking that games don't need that much processor and it would make no difference... Nah, I was biased.

My machine is as it follows:

Processor: Water Cooled FX 8350 OCed 4.4GHz
RAM: 16GB 1866MHz RAM
Storage: Two SSD 1TB Samsung Evo 840
Power Supply: Thermaltake Smart 850W
Graphics: R9 290 XFX Black Edition OCed to 1150/1500
Motherboard: MSI 990FXA-GD80

And another crapload of stuff and peripherals

Now, in many cpu physics test, like 3Dmark and catzilla, my processor find itself drawn to the ground, pulling only 15 FPS on the catzilla physics test, while all others test are fine at 80-100 FPS, it's just the CPU Physics test.

Also, this video card is capable of moving battlefield 4 at a solid 90-100 FPS with deeps min FPS of 65-70 FPS and max of 200 FPS, but when I play MMO Games I find the performance very laughable.

World of Warcraft is my preferred MMO and I get 40 FPS on Shrine of the seven stars, and even deeps to 25 FPS in 40 man World raids... No need to say the graphics in these kind of games are nothing special, is all this because of my processor? Or it happen with intel processors too? Or is it just the game that's horribly coded?

Also, MOBAs like Smite runs 10 times worse than Battlefield 4, considering they have 100 times worse graphics its quite shocking, smite runs at 150 FPS Cap at the beginning and in the middle of intense fights it can drop to 40 FPS.

These games use only 10-15% of my GPU, I checked it on GPU-Z, GOU usage stay really low, is this my processor fault, DirectX ? Wth is wrong!!!

PD: I already changed OS, Clean format from Windows 7 to Windows 8 x64 that I'm right now, updated drivers, I'm on the latest catalyst beta, temps are super fine,GPU VRMs never exceed 86c after 3 hours of BF4, I got awesome airflow and 7 fans, GPU Core Temps never exceed 82c, and I got all power saving features off from the bios, CPU temps are 45c after 1 hour of prime95, OC is rock Stable, causing no Issue and I got my RAM cooled by a RAM Fan, plus I got a spot cool on the CPU VRMs that btw never exceed 65c with 1.49v loads, believe me, I got no throttling issues,

But I still don't know what to do! Wy these games runs like garbage while all others games like Battlefied 4, Crysis 3 Metro/last light all run fine.

You can add Cod ghost to the list of games that run horrible, but I'm not quite sure if it's because of my PC or more because the game is just bad.
Edited by Dargonplay - 4/1/14 at 11:31am
post #2 of 28
For any older game like many mmo or in games that are not optimised for muli core cpu the amd 8350 was not the correct cpu choice. 8350 is a very capable cpu in the correct circumstances and the ones you have listed except bf4 are not the correct circumstances.
post #3 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dargonplay View Post

I wanted to make the best RIG Possible last month when I was updating my machine from scratch, I always used AMD so I was neglecting to get an intel i7 4930K processor, thinking that games don't need that much processor and it would make no difference... Nah, I was biased.

My machine is as it follows:

Processor: Water Cooled FX 8350 OCed 4.4GHz
RAM: 16GB 1866MHz RAM
Storage: Two SSD 1TB Samsung Evo 840
Power Supply: Thermaltake Smart 850W
Graphics: R9 290 XFX Black Edition OCed to 1150/1500
Motherboard: MSI 990FXA-GD80

And another crapload of stuff and peripherals

Now, in many cpu physics test, like 3Dmark and catzilla, my processor find itself drawn to the ground, pulling only 15 FPS on the catzilla physics test, while all others test are fine at 80-100 FPS, it's just the CPU Physics test.

Also, this video card is capable of moving battlefield 4 at a solid 90-100 FPS with deeps min FPS of 65-70 FPS and max of 200 FPS, but when I play MMO Games I find the performance very laughable.

World of Warcraft is my preferred MMO and I get 40 FPS on Shrine of the seven stars, and even deeps to 25 FPS in 40 man World raids... No need to say the graphics in these kind of games are nothing special, is all this because of my processor? Or it happen with intel processors too? Or is it just the game that's horribly coded?

Also, MOBAs like Smite runs 10 times worse than Battlefield 4, considering they have 100 times worse graphics its quite shocking, smite runs at 150 FPS Cap at the beginning and in the middle of intense fights it can drop to 40 FPS.

These games use only 10-15% of my GPU, I checked it on GPU-Z, GOU usage stay really low, is this my processor fault, DirectX ? Wth is wrong!!!

PD: I already changed OS, Clean format from Windows 7 to Windows 8 x64 that I'm right now, updated drivers, I'm on the latest catalyst beta, temps are super fine,GPU VRMs never exceed 86c after 3 hours of BF4, I got awesome airflow and 7 fans, GPU Core Temps never exceed 82c, and I got all power saving features off from the bios, CPU temps are 45c after 1 hour of prime95, OC is rock Stable, causing no Issue and I got my RAM cooled by a RAM Fan, plus I got a spot cool on the cou VRM, believe me, I got no throttling issues,

But I still don't know what to do! Wy these games runs like garbage!

 

If you had mentioned any other game than WoW, I would've said you made a perfectly fine choice. But WoW is primarily a single-threaded program, which somewhat offloads its work to other existing threads (based on how many logical cores you have). The difference between AMD and Intel in that game is quite massive. Because WoW does all calculations client-side, before sending it off to their servers.

 

However, you will get fps drops sometimes with even Intel CPUs in WoW. But that is going to happen far less than with an AMD CPU.

post #4 of 28
An i5 is like twice as fast as a 8350 in WoW and still a good 50% faster than a 9590: http://www.pcgameshardware.de/screenshots/original/2013/09/SC2HotS-pcgh.png

Just an i5 4430 + msi h81m (180+45=225$) would have been a much better buy
post #5 of 28
WoW and MOBAs are indeed old and poorly threaded, a 4670k would've served your needs better.

However, an 8350 at 4.4 shouldn't be that bad... In my experience, most lag like that comes from bad power saving techniques. Smite, for example, might use 50% of one core at a moment, but need 100% the next instant, causing lag before your CPU can speed up. I'm not sure about the FX CPUs, but my 2 AMD processors are really bad about throttling down at bad times.

Try locking the speed and disabling power-saving features in the BIOS, and see if it helps. Tweaking power saving settings helped my AMD Phenom II and A8-3500m immensely, and sped up some games on my 4670k as well.
Bruce
(20 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
4670k Asus Z87 Pro HIS 7950 IceQ X2 2x2gb + 2x4gb DDR3 1333 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
Seagate 1TB 7200RPM OCZ Agility 4 128GB PNY 240GB LG Blu Ray Burner 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
Hyper 212+ with extra fan Windows 10 Education x64 Shimian QH270 @110hz Medieval Dell OEM Keyboard 
PowerCaseMouseAudio
Corsair TX750 V1 Antec 300 Black Illusion  Logitech G400s Xonar ST 
AudioOtherOtherOther
Fostex T50rp with BMF mod Archer T9E Wifi adapter 2x Yate Loon D12SL-12D 120x38mm fans Thermalright TY-143 fan 
  hide details  
Reply
Bruce
(20 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
4670k Asus Z87 Pro HIS 7950 IceQ X2 2x2gb + 2x4gb DDR3 1333 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
Seagate 1TB 7200RPM OCZ Agility 4 128GB PNY 240GB LG Blu Ray Burner 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
Hyper 212+ with extra fan Windows 10 Education x64 Shimian QH270 @110hz Medieval Dell OEM Keyboard 
PowerCaseMouseAudio
Corsair TX750 V1 Antec 300 Black Illusion  Logitech G400s Xonar ST 
AudioOtherOtherOther
Fostex T50rp with BMF mod Archer T9E Wifi adapter 2x Yate Loon D12SL-12D 120x38mm fans Thermalright TY-143 fan 
  hide details  
Reply
post #6 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Faithh View Post

An i5 is like twice as fast as a 8350 in WoW and still a good 50% faster than a 9590: http://www.pcgameshardware.de/screenshots/original/2013/09/SC2HotS-pcgh.png

Just an i5 4430 + msi h81m (180+45=225$) would have been a much better buy

for one game, I'm sure he does more then just play wow.


just be aware of the limitations, single threaded games, intel will be better, multithreaded, they are marginally the same depending on what you compare it to.

also realize that 8core cpus will become "mainstream" and games/programs should be coded to use what you have instead of single threaded programs like old games.

I chose an 8320 because I had a 300 budget for CPU/MOBO/RAM, tell me an intel setup that will net me the performance the 8320 does with the same quality of parts and not a 45$ frisbee on a 200$ cpu., Ive seen many compare it to the 3570k in threads and honestly that cpu alone would of taken the whole budget, and I got my 8320 knowing full well what the pros/cons are, and I'm happy with my buy.

If you didn't have a strict budget, shoulda gone intel, but if you were on a budget, then AMD is a viable option.



pros: 8 cores, cheaper, a pretty safe bet for "future proofing" some would say.
cons: lower single core performance, bit more power usage, maybe a bit more heat depending on chip/cooling, and everyone thinks AM3+ is dead, but I have a secret that isn't gonna stop your cpu from running.tongue.gif



ARMA3 is a game that you'll see intels fly buy amd's and its because of how its coded. ( seriously what were they thinking when they coded it?) doh.gif
Edited by Sadmoto - 4/1/14 at 12:28pm
post #7 of 28
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Faithh View Post

An i5 is like twice as fast as a 8350 in WoW and still a good 50% faster than a 9590: http://www.pcgameshardware.de/screenshots/original/2013/09/SC2HotS-pcgh.png

Just an i5 4430 + msi h81m (180+45=225$) would have been a much better buy
That's a test on super low resolution no AA and other graphical settings, and not even from WoW, it's from Starcraft. I'm not sure if this is applicable, since we all play at 1080p (144Hz non my case, which is why I'm bugged of not getting 120 FPS in such a low graphical game)
post #8 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dargonplay View Post

That's a test on super low resolution no AA and other graphical settings, and not even from WoW, it's from Starcraft. I'm not sure if this is applicable, since we all play at 1080p (144Hz non my case, which is why I'm bugged of not getting 120 FPS in such a low graphical game)

That test was cpu bound enough to give an idea how 25m raids can scale in terms of performance between all those cpu's.

In heavy populated area's/40vs40 pvp battlegrounds/25m raids you'll never have more than 30-35 fps with a 4670k@stock. I cant even reach 30 fps with my 3930K@4.5GHz.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sadmoto View Post

just be aware of the limitations, single threaded games, intel will be better, multithreaded, they are marginally the same depending on what you compare it to.

Single threaded games don't exist. Wow has like 1 main thread, 2nd thats a bit smaller and the 3rd is a lot smaller while all others are minor doing stuff like chat/mana bars/raid bars/network we. Even in games such as Crysis 3 that can atleast push a 3770/8320 to 100% (youtube.com/watch?v=_hcuYiqib9I) the i5 wrecks the 8350 up to 50% http://be.hardware.info/reviews/5109/26/amd-fx-9590--fx-9370-review-amds-rentree-in-de-high-end-markt-benchmarks-hd-7970-crysis-3-1920x1080-medium

Even in battlefield 4 there's a massive difference in a cpu bound scenario between the i5 and the 2008 IPC "octacore", so no theyre not marginally the same. AMD's multithreading performance eg 8350 vs 4300 barely scales lineairly compared to an i5 vs i3 (forget HT).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sadmoto View Post

also realize that 8core cpus will become "mainstream" and games/programs should be coded to use what you have instead of single threaded programs like old games.

O really? I've been hearing this for 3 years long since bulldozer was released >.< Far from happening, we only have one game atm that's taking advantage of 8 cores -> Crysis 3. And no BF4 doesn't, past 6 cores in a cpu limited scenario no gains. All the new console ports, Intel was performing better like Thief, Assassins creed whatever you have.

I'd prefer to see cpu overhead improvements reducing cpu bottlenecking by a fair amount rather than seeing my cpu sitting at its max load. Much less power consumption, less heat and not having a reason to upgrade to a bigger psu (eg if you do already get 99% on both of your gpu's with a 500W for a 770 SLI setup in a game but crashing immediately when running prime95+furmark)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sadmoto View Post

I chose an 8320 because I had a 300 budget for CPU/MOBO/RAM, tell me an intel setup that will net me the performance the 8320 does with the same quality of parts and not a 45$ frisbee on a 200$ cpu.,

300? Don't forget your cooler cost.

Anyways, there's complety no reason to go full atx if you aren't even SLI'ing and complety no reason to get an aftermarkt cooler because the Intel stock cooler is just extremely quiet and cools very well. What's the point of buying more expensive boards for some "extra quality" gimmicks?

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant / Benchmarks

CPU: Intel Core i5-4440 3.1GHz Quad-Core Processor ($179.99 @ Amazon)
Motherboard: MSI H81M-E33 Micro ATX LGA1150 Motherboard ($44.99 @ Micro Center)
Total: $224.98
(Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available.)
(Generated by PCPartPicker 2014-04-01 18:27 EDT-0400)

That would outperform any fx 8350@5GHz in any cpu bound game by a massive margin, so it's definitely the best buy here and AMD "best bang for your buck" is nonexistent. 4670k's(z87+evo212) arent worth it these days if most are struggling getting over 4.2GHz with a minor performance gain and in this case a 8320(cheapest board & no cooler) would make more sense for the price.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sadmoto View Post

pros: 8 cores, cheaper, a pretty safe bet for "future proofing" some would say.
cons: lower single core performance, bit more power usage, maybe a bit more heat depending on chip/cooling, and everyone thinks AM3+ is dead, but I have a secret that isn't gonna stop your cpu from running.tongue.gif

No AMD cpu atm is futureproof, they all are outdated.
post #9 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Faithh View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dargonplay View Post

That's a test on super low resolution no AA and other graphical settings, and not even from WoW, it's from Starcraft. I'm not sure if this is applicable, since we all play at 1080p (144Hz non my case, which is why I'm bugged of not getting 120 FPS in such a low graphical game)

That test was cpu bound enough to give an idea how 25m raids can scale in terms of performance between all those cpu's.

In heavy populated area's/40vs40 pvp battlegrounds/25m raids you'll never have more than 30-35 fps with a 4670k@stock. I cant even reach 30 fps with my 3930K@4.5GHz.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sadmoto View Post

just be aware of the limitations, single threaded games, intel will be better, multithreaded, they are marginally the same depending on what you compare it to.

Single threaded games don't exist. Wow has like 1 main thread, 2nd thats a bit smaller and the 3rd is a lot smaller while all others are minor doing stuff like chat/mana bars/raid bars/network we. Even in games such as Crysis 3 that can atleast push a 3770/8320 to 100% (youtube.com/watch?v=_hcuYiqib9I) the i5 wrecks the 8350 up to 50% http://be.hardware.info/reviews/5109/26/amd-fx-9590--fx-9370-review-amds-rentree-in-de-high-end-markt-benchmarks-hd-7970-crysis-3-1920x1080-medium

Even in battlefield 4 there's a massive difference in a cpu bound scenario between the i5 and the 2008 IPC "octacore", so no theyre not marginally the same. AMD's multithreading performance eg 8350 vs 4300 barely scales lineairly compared to an i5 vs i3 (forget HT).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sadmoto View Post

also realize that 8core cpus will become "mainstream" and games/programs should be coded to use what you have instead of single threaded programs like old games.

O really? I've been hearing this for 3 years long since bulldozer was released >.< Far from happening, we only have one game atm that's taking advantage of 8 cores -> Crysis 3. And no BF4 doesn't, past 6 cores in a cpu limited scenario no gains. All the new console ports, Intel was performing better like Thief, Assassins creed whatever you have.

I'd prefer to see cpu overhead improvements reducing cpu bottlenecking by a fair amount rather than seeing my cpu sitting at its max load. Much less power consumption, less heat and not having a reason to upgrade to a bigger psu (eg if you do already get 99% on both of your gpu's with a 500W for a 770 SLI setup in a game but crashing immediately when running prime95+furmark)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sadmoto View Post

I chose an 8320 because I had a 300 budget for CPU/MOBO/RAM, tell me an intel setup that will net me the performance the 8320 does with the same quality of parts and not a 45$ frisbee on a 200$ cpu.,

300? Don't forget your cooler cost.

Anyways, there's complety no reason to go full atx if you aren't even SLI'ing and complety no reason to get an aftermarkt cooler because the Intel stock cooler is just extremely quiet and cools very well. What's the point of buying more expensive boards for some "extra quality" gimmicks?

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant / Benchmarks

CPU: Intel Core i5-4440 3.1GHz Quad-Core Processor ($179.99 @ Amazon)
Motherboard: MSI H81M-E33 Micro ATX LGA1150 Motherboard ($44.99 @ Micro Center)
Total: $224.98
(Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available.)
(Generated by PCPartPicker 2014-04-01 18:27 EDT-0400)

That would outperform any fx 8350@5GHz in any cpu bound game by a massive margin, so it's definitely the best buy here and AMD "best bang for your buck" is nonexistent. 4670k's(z87+evo212) arent worth it these days if most are struggling getting over 4.2GHz with a minor performance gain and in this case a 8320(cheapest board & no cooler) would make more sense for the price.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sadmoto View Post

pros: 8 cores, cheaper, a pretty safe bet for "future proofing" some would say.
cons: lower single core performance, bit more power usage, maybe a bit more heat depending on chip/cooling, and everyone thinks AM3+ is dead, but I have a secret that isn't gonna stop your cpu from running.tongue.gif

No AMD cpu atm is futureproof, they all are outdated.

You're being a bit extreme. An overclocked Piledriver FX is quite good at BF4 MP for the money, and a good OC speeds up a 4670k quite a bit. DX12 will spread out the main thread soon enough, though how much it will benefit a 4670k vs an 8320 is pure speculation.

I got my 4670k + nice Z87 mobo for $220, ya'll need to search CL and hunt deals more biggrin.gif
Bruce
(20 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
4670k Asus Z87 Pro HIS 7950 IceQ X2 2x2gb + 2x4gb DDR3 1333 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
Seagate 1TB 7200RPM OCZ Agility 4 128GB PNY 240GB LG Blu Ray Burner 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
Hyper 212+ with extra fan Windows 10 Education x64 Shimian QH270 @110hz Medieval Dell OEM Keyboard 
PowerCaseMouseAudio
Corsair TX750 V1 Antec 300 Black Illusion  Logitech G400s Xonar ST 
AudioOtherOtherOther
Fostex T50rp with BMF mod Archer T9E Wifi adapter 2x Yate Loon D12SL-12D 120x38mm fans Thermalright TY-143 fan 
  hide details  
Reply
Bruce
(20 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
4670k Asus Z87 Pro HIS 7950 IceQ X2 2x2gb + 2x4gb DDR3 1333 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
Seagate 1TB 7200RPM OCZ Agility 4 128GB PNY 240GB LG Blu Ray Burner 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
Hyper 212+ with extra fan Windows 10 Education x64 Shimian QH270 @110hz Medieval Dell OEM Keyboard 
PowerCaseMouseAudio
Corsair TX750 V1 Antec 300 Black Illusion  Logitech G400s Xonar ST 
AudioOtherOtherOther
Fostex T50rp with BMF mod Archer T9E Wifi adapter 2x Yate Loon D12SL-12D 120x38mm fans Thermalright TY-143 fan 
  hide details  
Reply
post #10 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Faithh View Post



In heavy populated area's/40vs40 pvp battlegrounds/25m raids you'll never have more than 30-35 fps with a 4670k@stock. I cant even reach 30 fps with my 3930K@4.5GHz.
Single threaded games don't exist. Wow has like 1 main thread, 2nd thats a bit smaller and the 3rd is a lot smaller while all others are minor doing stuff like chat/mana bars/raid bars/network we. Even in games such as Crysis 3 that can atleast push a 3770/8320 to 100% (youtube.com/watch?v=_hcuYiqib9I) the i5 wrecks the 8350 up to 50% http://be.hardware.info/reviews/5109/26/amd-fx-9590--fx-9370-review-amds-rentree-in-de-high-end-markt-benchmarks-hd-7970-crysis-3-1920x1080-medium

Even in battlefield 4 there's a massive difference in a cpu bound scenario between the i5 and the 2008 IPC "octacore", so no theyre not marginally the same. AMD's multithreading performance eg 8350 vs 4300 barely scales lineairly compared to an i5 vs i3 (forget HT).
O really? I've been hearing this for 3 years long since bulldozer was released >.< Far from happening, we only have one game atm that's taking advantage of 8 cores -> Crysis 3. And no BF4 doesn't, past 6 cores in a cpu limited scenario no gains. All the new console ports, Intel was performing better like Thief, Assassins creed whatever you have.

So in Cry 3 a similarly clocked FX 6300 and Fx 83xx will have the octocore pushing out more frames, any links?
FX Klasse
(25 items)
 
Warrior King
(13 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
AMD FX 8350 SABERTOOTH 990FX R2.0 MSI R9 290X Lightning MSI R9 290X Lightning 
RAMRAMRAMHard Drive
Corsair  Corsair  g.skill sniper gaming series 16gb 2400mhz ddr3 WD 1 TB  
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
WD 320 GB OCZ vertex 3 64GB Samsung 840 Pro 128GB Seagate 250 GB  
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Crucial MX300 525 GB Samsung SH-S223L Cooler Master Glacer 240l Windows 8.1 Pro N 64 bit 
OSMonitorMonitorKeyboard
Windows 10 Pro 64 bit AOC 2462w Lenovo L2261wA Razer Lycosa 
PowerCaseMouseAudio
Antec HCG 750 Rosewill Future corsair vengeance m65 Turtle Beach Montego DDL 
Other
Altec Lansing ADA 995 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 5775c Asus Z97 Deluxe Iris Pro 6200 G. Skill Trident X 2400 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
WD Blue 320 Crucial MX300 525GB Cooler master hyper 212 Windows 10 Pro 
MonitorKeyboardPowerMouse
AOC 24 Steelseries Apex 350 Antec truepower trio 550w Corsair M65 
Mouse Pad
AMD Red Team Swag 
  hide details  
Reply
FX Klasse
(25 items)
 
Warrior King
(13 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
AMD FX 8350 SABERTOOTH 990FX R2.0 MSI R9 290X Lightning MSI R9 290X Lightning 
RAMRAMRAMHard Drive
Corsair  Corsair  g.skill sniper gaming series 16gb 2400mhz ddr3 WD 1 TB  
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
WD 320 GB OCZ vertex 3 64GB Samsung 840 Pro 128GB Seagate 250 GB  
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Crucial MX300 525 GB Samsung SH-S223L Cooler Master Glacer 240l Windows 8.1 Pro N 64 bit 
OSMonitorMonitorKeyboard
Windows 10 Pro 64 bit AOC 2462w Lenovo L2261wA Razer Lycosa 
PowerCaseMouseAudio
Antec HCG 750 Rosewill Future corsair vengeance m65 Turtle Beach Montego DDL 
Other
Altec Lansing ADA 995 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 5775c Asus Z97 Deluxe Iris Pro 6200 G. Skill Trident X 2400 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
WD Blue 320 Crucial MX300 525GB Cooler master hyper 212 Windows 10 Pro 
MonitorKeyboardPowerMouse
AOC 24 Steelseries Apex 350 Antec truepower trio 550w Corsair M65 
Mouse Pad
AMD Red Team Swag 
  hide details  
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Processor Discussions
Overclock.net › Forums › General Hardware › General Processor Discussions › Did I screwed it up going for FX 8350?