Overclock.net banner
Cancel
Create thread New Forums

what is the AMD FX 8350 NB overclocking sweetspot

Jump to Latest
1 - 20 of 29 Posts

rickcooperjr

· Registered
Joined
·
2,118 Posts
Discussion starter · #1 ·
yes I have a amd fx 8350 I have overclocked to 4.6ghz x8 I leave it here due to better stability temperature is not the issue or power draw I like to keep my volts low in this case 1.368v for 4.6ghz x8. I am now working on the NB now due to past experience with amd cpu's NB seems to be biggest improvement is this still the case at sec I got mine upto 2400mhz. I am still waiting on my other ram to arrive to go that route I also want to point out I am using cool laboratories liquid metal ultra everything is copper so I am good there lol.

I will be running 16gb 4x 4gb sticks of 1866mhz corsair dominator platinum ram.

here is a cpuz of my setup
http://valid.canardpc.com/2771830
 
Save
Reply Quote Rep+ Rep+
Discussion starter · #2 ·
I also want to point out this isn't my main rig it is already setup and running with system specs listed in my signature this is a testbed rig that will soon be sold to my soon to be brother in law hince why I am after best possible performance / stability he wont like a unstable setup lol. I also want to say almost everything within it is identical to my main rig making a duplicate but I had issues with mine with the NB overclock couldn't get it 100% at 2600mhz but could 2400mhz which is why I started this thread lol.
 
Save
Reply Quote Rep+ Rep+
Discussion starter · #4 ·
Ok well with just a bump of 200mhz I seen a noticeable diffrerence in speed with a ssd of course and my main rig has the same ram and everything at 1866mhz on all 4 sticks it was more responsive if you get my meening and in almost every case scored higher in stuff like 3dmark vantage / 06 by around 200 points for a 200mhz boost to NB.
 
Save
Reply Quote Rep+ Rep+
Discussion starter · #5 ·
I am aware I got lucky with my cpu being capable of handling 4 sticks of 1866mhz ram at 1866mhz and manual timings of 9-10-9-27 and voltage of 1.525v. I am very aware many of these the memory controller cant handle it lol but I got lucky lol. I am fully expecting this second rig not to be capable of it and might have to bump it back to 1600mhz and tighten timings a bit I opened this post / thread to get the common sweet spot on NB settings it is very hard to find any info on the NB overclocking and such for these cpu's.
 
Save
Reply Quote Rep+ Rep+
Discussion starter · #7 ·
I just did that and some script popped up *** is that all about lol .
 
Save
Reply Quote Rep+ Rep+
#8 ·
2400 to 2600 is about right for the CPU/NB and you also want to set the HT Link speed to match. For some reason, you get the best performance when they're both set about to 2500. There is a thread on here somewhere that has benches with different CPU/NB and HT Link scaling and each around 2500 was where it seemed to work best.
 
  • Rep+
Reactions: dava4444
Save
Reply Quote Rep+ Rep+
#9 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacLeod View Post

2400 to 2600 is about right for the CPU/NB and you also want to set the HT Link speed to match. For some reason, you get the best performance when they're both set about to 2500. There is a thread on here somewhere that has benches with different CPU/NB and HT Link scaling and each around 2500 was where it seemed to work best.
Click to expand...
This may or may not be the thread you are referring to, however, all in all, this thread was pretty damned stellar in helping me revamp my OC and kick the crap out of my "old" OC. Don't let the "Bulldozer" title fool you, this worked incredibly well on my FX-8350, using CHV-Z mobo. Hope this helps you as much as it helped me!
smile.gif


http://www.overclock.net/t/1140459/bulldozer-overclocking-guide-performance-scaling-charts-max-ocs-ln2-results-coming
 
#10 ·
Yes, that is the thread I was talking about. Extremely valuable information in that one right there. And I agree that you can use the same steps you use for Bulldozer with Piledriver. Their architectures aren't that different so a lot of the tricks you use for BD should work for PD as well.
 
Save
Reply Quote Rep+ Rep+
Discussion starter · #11 ·
http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=2779392 I do believe that was not an issue my overclocking ability cpu wise was just fine I was originaly just asking about the results I was getting with the NB overclock performance the sweetspot for me seems to be 2400mhz NB / 2600mhz HT / with a solid 24/7 100% stable overclock cpu wise of 4.8ghz x8@ 1.428v with all 4 sticks of (4x 4gb) 1866mhz(set to full 1866mhz ) ram@1t and timings of 9-10-8-24 with a TRC timing of 34 with these the above link is just a hell run I did at 1.5v and 5.0ghz with rest of above settings 100% stable according to a prime 95 run for 1hour and a IBT (Intel burn test run of 10 times ) all passed temps got close to my max safe 55c I do not ever liking seeing temps above this.
 
Save
Reply Quote Rep+ Rep+
Discussion starter · #12 ·
by results I was getting with NB overclocking I was referring to the drastic performance increase I got by doing so the NB overclock gave me a drastic performance I could feel not just see in benchmarks.
 
Save
Reply Quote Rep+ Rep+
Discussion starter · #14 ·
Save
Reply Quote Rep+ Rep+
Discussion starter · #15 ·
I have found in past testing anything above 1866mhz is usualy not beneficial performance wise and is often not any faster due to the looser timings and such needed for higher frequency ram beyond 1866mhz.
 
Save
Reply Quote Rep+ Rep+
#16 ·
shoot, i have 8370 @ 4.82 w/ 8GB dominator platinum 1866 running @ 2133 10-11-10-30-40 (NB @2200) and running gta V I get a decent boost running my ram @2133 vs 1866! it feels way smoother. but for some reason i can't get my NB even to 2300 w/out having problems. and i have had it in a asrock 990 ex4 and now in asus sabertooth 990 r2 and motherboard made no difference. so it must be my NB. but hey i'm happy w/ it. can game @ 5GHz w/ her but not prime stable. (at least in the summer).

PS. seen earlier in this thread about having NB and HT @ 2500?? well BD/PD's HT is 2600 stock. It should be run at no less. I think thats why a lot of early reviews didn't get as good of performance because everyone was clocking HT/NB @ 2000 like it was a phenom!!!
 
#17 ·
I have had my FX 9590 for almost 4 years now and NB overclock will help in CPU and memory calculations but the HT should not exceed the NB. I know this was a stock setting Asus originally did with the Crosshair V Formula but it is incorrect. It is okay however to have a higher NB frequency than the HT Speed. Having a higher HT than NB causes instability issues and reduces your CPU's potential performance. To give you an idea why you don't want a higher HT is because every instruction that goes through the FX first hits your HTs and from your HTs goes through your cache and floating points then to your NB which sends and receives memory instruction. If your HT is higher than your NB you create a bottleneck in the CPU itself which reduces your processing and memory performance.
 
#18 ·
i
Quote:
Originally Posted by x86overclock View Post

I have had my FX 9590 for almost 4 years now and NB overclock will help in CPU and memory calculations but the HT should not exceed the NB. I know this was a stock setting Asus originally did with the Crosshair V Formula but it is incorrect. It is okay however to have a higher NB frequency than the HT Speed. Having a higher HT than NB causes instability issues and reduces your CPU's potential performance. To give you an idea why you don't want a higher HT is because every instruction that goes through the FX first hits your HTs and from your HTs goes through your cache and floating points then to your NB which sends and receives memory instruction. If your HT is higher than your NB you create a bottleneck in the CPU itself which reduces your processing and memory performance.
Click to expand...
i call bull sh1z. stock ht on all FX chips is 2600 stock nb is 2200. i lose performance lowering ht and straight crash when trying to push the nb on my 8370. now on phenom i would agree w/ you totally. and actually the HT is the buss that the cores/modules/cache communicate/share data. basically it is used as a multiprocessor interconnect. its may actually your NB that's making you crash, its only stable because it's not being pushed as hard w/ a low HT speed??
 
#19 ·
I call you have no idea what you are talking about. Asus fixed th stock NB clocks and HT clocks when they released the Crosshair Formula-Z series. The Crosshair V Formula had the NB @ 2.2 and the HT @ 2.6 which was faulty and caused system bottlenecks. the Z series has the NB @ 2.4 and the HT at 2.2. You can read the official AMD FX overclocking guide and it explains why it is important to not have your HT exceed your NB.You can download the official AMD FX overclocking guide herehttps://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.amd.com/Documents/AMD_FX_Performance_Tuning_Guide.pdf&ved=0ahUKEwj8r-7h5eHUAhXK7iYKHfWeDbcQFggqMAE&usg=AFQjCNG16z6LqFF0PK8dF4Vh9ZCDmrZ3GA and your welcome
 
#20 ·
qtip-va said:
i
Quote:
Originally Posted by x86overclock 


I have had my FX 9590 for almost 4 years now and NB overclock will help in CPU and memory calculations but the HT should not exceed the NB. I know this was a stock setting Asus originally did with the Crosshair V Formula but it is incorrect. It is okay however to have a higher NB frequency than the HT Speed. Having a higher HT than NB causes instability issues and reduces your CPU's potential performance. To give you an idea why you don't want a higher HT is because every instruction that goes through the FX first hits your HTs and from your HTs goes through your cache and floating points then to your NB which sends and receives memory instruction. If your HT is higher than your NB you create a bottleneck in the CPU itself which reduces your processing and memory performance.





i call bull sh1z. stock ht on all FX chips is 2600 stock nb is 2200. i lose performance lowering ht and straight crash when trying to push the nb on my 8370. now on phenom i would agree w/ you totally. and actually the HT is the buss that the cores/modules/cache communicate/share data. basically it is used as a multiprocessor interconnect. its may actually your NB that's making you crash, its only stable because it's not being pushed as hard w/ a low HT speed??
Click to expand...
I call you have no idea what you are talking about. Asus fixed th stock NB clocks and HT clocks when they released the Crosshair Formula-Z series. The Crosshair V Formula had the NB @ 2.2 and the HT @ 2.6 which was faulty and caused system bottlenecks. the Z series has the NB @ 2.4 and the HT at 2.2. You can read the official AMD FX overclocking guide and it explains why it is important to not have your HT exceed your NB.You can download the official AMD FX overclocking guide herehttps://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.amd.com/Documents/AMD_FX_Performance_Tuning_Guide.pdf&ved=0ahUKEwj8r-7h5eHUAhXK7iYKHfWeDbcQFggqMAE&usg=AFQjCNG16z6LqFF0PK8dF4Vh9ZCDmrZ3GA and your welcome
2 / 2
 
1 - 20 of 29 Posts
About this Discussion
28 Replies
10 Participants
Last post:
Alastair
Overclock.net
posts
28M
members
562K
Since
2004
The premier forum for overclocking experts and enthusiasts. Discuss hardware optimization, custom builds, benchmarking, cooling solutions, and pushing the boundaries of computing performance. From beginner guides to extreme overclocking, join our technical community to master system tuning.
Full Forum Listing
Explore Our Forums
Intel CPUs Hardware News NVIDIA PC Gaming Water Cooling