AMD FX-8300 TDP95w - AMD is doing good with Vishera!

[PcCI2iminal]

AMD FX-8300 TDP 95W









THE UNBOXING (portuguese)


THE LITTLE BEAST


a really quick test


Should be a monster under LN2

the real vcore is 1.3v



CPU- FX8300 retail box
MB- Gigabyte 990FXA-UD3
RAM- G.SKILL TridentX 2666
CPU Cooler- Cooler Master TPC 812
VGA- GTX650 Zotac
PSU- Corsair AX1200i
Temperatura Ambiente- 20c


Happy New Year Guys !!!!!

[AMDforME]

Yes AMD is most definitely doing well with Vishera/PD. It's unfortunate that the world wide economic picture is so bleak that the PC industry sales are down significantly and unlikely to see much gain over the next four or more years. This makes it difficult to continue R&D and delivery of new products in a timely fashion. The problem is not just the PC industry unfortunately, it affects many industries.

[Buckeye]

So you hit 5.0ghz with that stock air cooler ?

[Lastviking]

So you hit 5.0ghz with that stock air cooler ?

CPU Cooler- Cooler Master TPC 812

[Zeus]

Seems nice but the million dollar question is: does it clock better than FX8350 of FX8320?

[FlanK3r]

this I want too...multithread performance in stock simlar as 8150 (in games better) and great OC I think. As Stilt said....

Zeus: better than 8320 I think. 8350 seems really better than 8320 about 100 MHz. The Stilt said, this 95W FX are good as good FX-8350s 125W

[Barr3l Rid3r]

this I want too...multithread performance in stock simlar as 8150 (in games better) and great OC I think. As Stilt said....

Zeus: better than 8320 I think. 8350 seems really better than 8320 about 100 MHz. The Stilt said, this 95W FX are good as good FX-8350s 125W

mine 8350 clocks 120mhz better than my gold 8120 (5.17Ghz), 8320 get less clock around 5.08Ghz... but better performance than 5.17Ghz 8120.. the only wrong part in the binning should be the 8120... not binned at all, one couldn't pass 4.2Ghz no matter what, and the other got 5.2Ghz...


We all wanna now if this 95W cpu is a different piece of the 8350 or the same part... 5Ghz stable on air at 1.42v should be great

[AMDforME]

The FX-8300 is reported to have the same retail price as the FX-8350. The actual retail selling price seems to vary on the FX-8350 considerably so it might also on the FX-8300. The FX-8320 is still the best deal IMO. It seems to OC well and often very close to the FX-8350, probably because of the mature 32nm process.

http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/29...top-eight-core

[Ivanlabrie]

I thought most 8350's oced better, they don't cost oh so much more vs the 8320 anyway...If these are priced at 8350 level perhaps they are low clocked 8350s with the same bin or a specially lower vid binned 8350?

[tbone8ty]

what were the volts for the 5033mhz run?

[stangracin3]

what were the volts for the 5033mhz run?

im gonna take a guess and say it wasn't 1.104 like cpu-z thinks

[Titan7171]

what were the volts for the 5033mhz run?

Says 1.3 under the pic

[Jethro]

So will we be seeing lower wattage quad and 6core parts now to perhaps? I hope so!

[PcCI2iminal]

a little update guys





the room temp is 20c and its easy to run heavy tasks at 5Ghz @1.42v
but the Gigabyte board is not 100% stable and its not overheating or incorrect clock settings,my system(OCed or default clock) is randomly freezing and shutting down

[AMDforME]

I thought most 8350's oced better, they don't cost oh so much more vs the 8320 anyway...If these are priced at 8350 level perhaps they are low clocked 8350s with the same bin or a specially lower vid binned 8350?

We simply don't know if the 8320's OC as well as the 8350's but many people are willing to give up ~100 MHz. for the ~$40. difference in price. That's why I said the 8320 is the best deal, i.e. the best bang for the buck. The prices in other countries may be significantly different than in the U.S. and that may change the POV on which model FX processor to purchase.

[Lastviking]

We simply don't know if the 8320's OC as well as the 8350's but many people are willing to give up ~100 MHz. for the ~$40. difference in price. That's why I said the 8320 is the best deal, i.e. the best bang for the buck. The prices in other countries may be significantly different than in the U.S. and that may change the POV on which model FX processor to purchase.

8350 + 8300 clocks about 100-200mhZ beter than 8320 so i would say that 8350 or 8300 is still a beter deal...20-40$ from that mhZ is still not much.

Dont get me wrong...but if 8320 would have been abit closer then i would say that 8320 would been beter to buy to....but the diffrence looks to much, beter to stay with 8150 instead then or 1090.

[AMDforME]

You can't draw an accurate conclusion based on a sample of one or even a few CPUs. People should buy what makes them happy but it would be foolish to conclude from a small sample that the FX-8300 OC's better than the FX-8320 or as well as the FX-8350. We simply do not have even remotely close to sufficient statistical data to reach an accurate conclusion on the overclockability of these CPUs.

This is why I constantly warn people about broad-brushed statements, especially when it comes to the overclockability of CPUs. While your beliefs *may* be true, they *may* also be false. We simply don't know and should not perpetuate these conclusions based on a few reports.

In addition as most folks know, the overclocability of a CPU is based on the total system including the CPU, mobo, BIOS, PSU, RAM, voltages, settings, etc. What one person considers "stable" might be running benches without crashing, while another person only considers P95 for 24 hours as "stable". Thus their overclocks could be hundreds of MHz. different for the same CPU.

I can run benches at 5.0 GHz. with my FX-8350 but I can't run P95 or OCCT for any length of time without errors...

[tbone8ty]

Someone needs to make a farcry3 benchmark...its destroys my FX-8120

[3lfk1ng]

I agree

Far Cry 3 is a great benchmark since it is really well optimized for CPUs.

Here are some CPU benchmarks:
http://media.bestofmicro.com/9/G/364...PU-scaling.png (Article:http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...rk,3379-7.html)
http://static.techspot.com/articles-...nch/CPU_01.png (Article:http://www.techspot.com/review/615-f...nce/page6.html)
Guru3D's article (http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages...nchmark,7.html)

[demonkevy666]

Why is an I3 3.1ghz up near a I7 Hex core with HT at 4.25ghz ?

Why No Phenom II X6 ?

[Lastviking]

You can't draw an accurate conclusion based on a sample of one or even a few CPUs. People should buy what makes them happy but it would be foolish to conclude from a small sample that the FX-8300 OC's better than the FX-8320 or as well as the FX-8350. We simply do not have even remotely close to sufficient statistical data to reach an accurate conclusion on the overclockability of these CPUs.

This is why I constantly warn people about broad-brushed statements, especially when it comes to the overclockability of CPUs. While your beliefs *may* be true, they *may* also be false. We simply don't know and should not perpetuate these conclusions based on a few reports.

In addition as most folks know, the overclocability of a CPU is based on the total system including the CPU, mobo, BIOS, PSU, RAM, voltages, settings, etc. What one person considers "stable" might be running benches without crashing, while another person only considers P95 for 24 hours as "stable". Thus their overclocks could be hundreds of MHz. different for the same CPU.

I can run benches at 5.0 GHz. with my FX-8350 but I can't run P95 or OCCT for any length of time without errors...

I have been in this game long time(and i always buy more then one when i buy, and thats not only cpus so i know what im talking about), but dont tell people that 8320 are best to chose when you dont know that....many things give impacts but from what we have seen 8230 clocks abit lower...AND YES you may find one golden 8230 that clocks beter than one 8350...But still you will have easyer to find a one that goes higher if you chose 8350 or 8300 from what we have seen.



I think we need to leave this now and go to topic now!(any more of this you are welcome to pm me but nothing more in this thread it will be destoyed then)

PcCI2iminal: have you tested to change voltage to cpu/imc and see if you lose the random crashes.

[informal]

@demonkevy

Because FC3 is so "well optimized"...

[3lfk1ng]

Please feel free to backup your sarcasm with evidence to the contrary.

Far Cry 3 is one of the few games PC gamers have that is not some pathetic half-assed console port. It does an amazing job utilizing PC hardware to the fullest.

[vario]

Please feel free to backup your sarcasm with evidence to the contrary.

Far Cry 3 is one of the few games PC gamers have that is not some pathetic half-assed console port. It does an amazing job utilizing PC hardware to the fullest.

Uhm, its a good port.but still, its a port, it looks worse than first crysis and can hog the hardware more, even that the first crysis was essentially a dual thread title (in essence crysis 1/warhead were not "optimized" for todays hardware) .
Its a proper port, which means its a port with added settings for resolution, higher amounts of the same crappy grass/tress etc with a settable higher view distance ,etc.But talking about utilizing pc hardware to the fullest , i mean come on, ITS A PORT.

[informal]

Thanks vario, a picture is worth a thousand words . Oh my, look at that super utilized OCed 4 cores bringing awesome difference versus 2 cores scenario. Oh wait...