Sign-in / Sign-up
Your question
Solved

AMD FX-8350 CPU Scoring 5.9 on WEI (Windows Experience Index)

Tags:
  • Windows
  • CPUs
  • AMD
Last response: in CPUs
April 22, 2014 9:58:07 PM

Greetings, people!

I upgraded my friend's PC with a Gigabyte GA-970A-DS3P motherboard and an AMD FX-8350 CPU. We loaded up Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit and installed the drivers and latest updates. We ran the WEI assessment and the CPU scored 5.9! He tries playing games and they don't perform well at all. All of the other components scored good scores, except the CPU!

Can anyone explain what's happening here! We've tried reinstalling the OS, installing hotfixes related to this issue and still no luck! Any help would be appreciated!

More about : amd 8350 cpu scoring wei windows experience index

a c 308 à CPUs
a c 181 À AMD
April 22, 2014 10:06:07 PM

First off don't use WEI as a benchmark, its useless.

Second, check temps. (RealTemp or similar)
If temps are normal during gaming, then run Prime 95 and monitor your CPU clock rate to see if it throttles. It should be running at 4GHz almost constantly during the prime95 test. (keep a close eye on temps to be safe).

Also provide your full specs?
What games are you having a problem in? What resolution is your monitor?
m
0
l
April 22, 2014 10:37:25 PM

Novuake said:
First off don't use WEI as a benchmark, its useless.

Second, check temps. (RealTemp or similar)
If temps are normal during gaming, then run Prime 95 and monitor your CPU clock rate to see if it throttles. It should be running at 4GHz almost constantly during the prime95 test. (keep a close eye on temps to be safe).

Also provide your full specs?
What games are you having a problem in? What resolution is your monitor?


Ok, since we both have the same CPU, we both ran Prime95 and CPU Z and his clocks were way lower than mine were. I know Intel has a thing called SpeedStep that you can disable in order to ensure stable clock rates, but I don't the AMD equivalent so I may need to be walked through. Something else could be wrong too - but I'm not sure what.

Here's a pic of his during the benchmark: http://i.imgur.com/SHQAH9q.jpg
And here's mine: http://i.imgur.com/yfcMyVf.png

Notice the difference? His temps were stable.

His specs:
Already listed the CPU and mobo
RAM: 8 GB DDR3-1333 RAM
Radeon HD 7970
600 W Thermaltake PSU


m
0
l
Related resources
a c 308 à CPUs
a c 181 À AMD
April 22, 2014 10:46:39 PM



What EXACTLY are the temps?

Possible problems :

1. Throttling of the CPU due to overheating of mobo VRMs, which is common on low cost motherboards like that one.
2. Power supply is problematic. Which i doubt from a new unit. However the exact model PSU is very important when it comes to quality.
3. You need to unpark the CPU. ONLY do this if you have confirmed that overheating VRMs is NOT the problem.

m
0
l
April 22, 2014 10:52:49 PM

Keep in mind that I'm working with him via the phone and he isn't exactly technically literate, so I can't get you the temps and exact specs (as I built the base system in 2011 and I don't remember everything) but I'm sure they're stable. Otherwise the system would be crashing, etc. I don't believe temps are the issue here.

Is there a way to confirm whether or not the voltage regulators are good?
m
0
l
a c 308 à CPUs
a c 181 À AMD
April 22, 2014 11:10:14 PM

Temps is the cause of throttling MOST of the time.

Confirm them. The CPU needs to be under 60C.
m
0
l
April 23, 2014 10:34:02 AM

Sorry about your low W.E.I. score. Have you monitored yo0ur temps and watched your CPU throttle?
I was AMD for over a decade, and now i'm jumping ship to intel, after watching what a 4770k clocked to 4.6 ghz do to an FX-8350 at 4.875 ghz to 5.0ghz , i'm completely convinced that AMD is no longer the alternative if I want to save $30.00 build.. Nobody ever tells you it will take $200.00 to $400.00 in water cooling to clock a FX-8350 up 5.0 ghz, and also that you have to have a $220.00 990FX mobo to get there, when the 4770k can perform BETTER then the FX on a $130.00 Mobo.. I watched it happen, and I watched my friend's face with the FX-8350 just start to contort, and make all kinds of excuses.. AMD isn't the budget way to go when you MUST factor in cooling cost and big PSU.

I watched a 4770k just kick the snot out an FX-8350 in benchmarks and several RTS titles, also Skyrim benches, as a matter of fact on the RTS titles with tons of units on the board, the 4770k was setting at 80% load while the FX-8350 took a nosedive loaded to 100%.. The FX-8350 was clocked to 4.7GHZ and the 4770k was at 3.9GHZ to 4.0GHZ on AIR, The FX-8350 was under water. Clock for clock 4.0GHZ (same clocks for both CPUs) the intel performed better, with similar GPUs used, RAM was OC'd for the FX-8350 to 2133mhz and change, and 4770k 2400mhz and change. The FX-8350 couldn't get the memory performance of the 4770k, and the 4770k had room to go further, the 4770k can use much higher mhz RAM.

I have completely ignored both Bulldozer and Piledriver (Zambezi & Vishera), because the oh so very slight increase in a few small areas of perfomance over my current Phenom II x6 1100t clocked at 4.278GHZ was never even close to being worth buying either a Bulldozer or Piledriver, ATM so I'm jumping ship to intel after over a decade of AMD.

Also the memory controller on the 4770k is far superior to that of the FX-8350, I watched the 4770k run memory speeds that the FX-8350 cannot hope to match on an ASRock Z87M Extreme4 micro atx Mobo that cost $120.00, while the FX-8350 was on a Crosshair V 990FX formula mobo that cost $224.99 plus another $300.00 and change in water cooling.
Everyone likes to scream and yell about AMD being cheaper, but they always FAIL to mention the additional costs that you WILL have to pay to get GOOD overclocking. Also at full load the 4770k uses around 74 to 81 watts less then the FX-8350 (8350 at 4.8ghz versus 4770k at 4.7ghz) both on water, but there really isn't any real reason to clock the 4770k that high to pull off extremely good numbers.

(gaming) On some titles you will likely not see a huge difference from either chip, on other titles you WILL, depending on the GPU you run.

Intel 4770k with Mobo = $459.00 End cost OR $70.00 to $200.00 for cooling.
FX-8350 with mobo = $424.00 (then add for water cooling or high end Air), lets say $70.00 to $200.00
End cost FX-8350 = $494.00 to $624.00 end cost
FYI, you cannot decently OC an FX-8350 on a $50.00 Mobo, cheapest I saw a good friend get away with is the Asus M5A99X EVO R2.0 at $139.00, but he hit a wall.

So you have to conclude that for about the same price you can have either one or the other intel or AMD.
intel = $459.00 - $529.00 - $659.00 from stock air to water cooling.
AMD = $424.00 - $494.00 - $624.00 from stock (tiny OC), aftermarket air to water cooling.

If anyone is going to argue over what amounts to a $30.00 price difference as being a deal breaker, then they are just arguing semantics.. I don't even know why people bother arguing the intel versus AMD issue, it's already been decided.

If you plan to build $30.00 is nothing...
m
0
l
April 23, 2014 8:27:37 PM

Odin, I appreciate your response. I am going to replace the motherboard because it's my assumption that the voltage regulators are bad. I like both AMD and Intel for different uses. Right now, I prefer AMD because they solder the heatspreader directly to the die whereas Intel uses thermal paste in between which won't cut it for longevity.

I don't want to start an argument here, either. Just saying that I like both for different reasons. But I appreciate the information nonetheless!
m
0
l
April 25, 2014 10:04:35 AM

cyanghost109 said:
Odin, I appreciate your response. I am going to replace the motherboard because it's my assumption that the voltage regulators are bad. I like both AMD and Intel for different uses. Right now, I prefer AMD because they solder the heatspreader directly to the die whereas Intel uses thermal paste in between which won't cut it for longevity.

I don't want to start an argument here, either. Just saying that I like both for different reasons. But I appreciate the information nonetheless!



No worries, I just have two really good friends, one with the FX-8350 and one with the 4770k, and the friend with the 8350 has spent a lot of additional money to get his 8350 clocked high, on the other note the other friend didn't have to do that to surpass the 8350 while running at lower clocks. I'm still running a Phenom II x6 1100t at 4.27ghz on water, but after seeing the limited performance boost I would get out of a FX series CPU, I just decided to switch over later this year to Intel.

I did read about the die difference in heatsink solder versus thermal paste on the Haswell, but i'm still over AMD.
Although I will go with Haswell, I have no plans of heating up the CPU and knocking off the top of the CPU with a chisel..
Lapping is as far as I go.
m
0
l
April 27, 2014 7:57:42 PM

-Odin- said:
cyanghost109 said:
Odin, I appreciate your response. I am going to replace the motherboard because it's my assumption that the voltage regulators are bad. I like both AMD and Intel for different uses. Right now, I prefer AMD because they solder the heatspreader directly to the die whereas Intel uses thermal paste in between which won't cut it for longevity.

I don't want to start an argument here, either. Just saying that I like both for different reasons. But I appreciate the information nonetheless!



No worries, I just have two really good friends, one with the FX-8350 and one with the 4770k, and the friend with the 8350 has spent a lot of additional money to get his 8350 clocked high, on the other note the other friend didn't have to do that to surpass the 8350 while running at lower clocks. I'm still running a Phenom II x6 1100t at 4.27ghz on water, but after seeing the limited performance boost I would get out of a FX series CPU, I just decided to switch over later this year to Intel.

I did read about the die difference in heatsink solder versus thermal paste on the Haswell, but i'm still over AMD.
Although I will go with Haswell, I have no plans of heating up the CPU and knocking off the top of the CPU with a chisel..
Lapping is as far as I go.


True, but you'd also have to consider the price difference between the two units. The 4770k is almost $350 whereas the 8350 is $200. That's why people often misconstrued the whole AMD vs. Intel war. They'll throw up a cheaper AMD CPU and compare to an Intel that costs $200 more which is obviously unfair. Why people don't consider the price difference is beyond me.
m
0
l
a c 86 à CPUs
a b À AMD
April 27, 2014 8:02:22 PM

check to see if all the cores are activated, and not being throttled too much from heat. change the control panel power saving settings to high performance mode
m
0
l
May 16, 2014 6:58:19 AM

-Odin- said:
Sorry about your low W.E.I. score. Have you monitored yo0ur temps and watched your CPU throttle?
I was AMD for over a decade, and now i'm jumping ship to intel, after watching what a 4770k clocked to 4.6 ghz do to an FX-8350 at 4.875 ghz to 5.0ghz , i'm completely convinced that AMD is no longer the alternative if I want to save $30.00 build.. Nobody ever tells you it will take $200.00 to $400.00 in water cooling to clock a FX-8350 up 5.0 ghz, and also that you have to have a $220.00 990FX mobo to get there, when the 4770k can perform BETTER then the FX on a $130.00 Mobo.. I watched it happen, and I watched my friend's face with the FX-8350 just start to contort, and make all kinds of excuses.. AMD isn't the budget way to go when you MUST factor in cooling cost and big PSU.

I watched a 4770k just kick the snot out an FX-8350 in benchmarks and several RTS titles, also Skyrim benches, as a matter of fact on the RTS titles with tons of units on the board, the 4770k was setting at 80% load while the FX-8350 took a nosedive loaded to 100%.. The FX-8350 was clocked to 4.7GHZ and the 4770k was at 3.9GHZ to 4.0GHZ on AIR, The FX-8350 was under water. Clock for clock 4.0GHZ (same clocks for both CPUs) the intel performed better, with similar GPUs used, RAM was OC'd for the FX-8350 to 2133mhz and change, and 4770k 2400mhz and change. The FX-8350 couldn't get the memory performance of the 4770k, and the 4770k had room to go further, the 4770k can use much higher mhz RAM.

I have completely ignored both Bulldozer and Piledriver (Zambezi & Vishera), because the oh so very slight increase in a few small areas of perfomance over my current Phenom II x6 1100t clocked at 4.278GHZ was never even close to being worth buying either a Bulldozer or Piledriver, ATM so I'm jumping ship to intel after over a decade of AMD.

Also the memory controller on the 4770k is far superior to that of the FX-8350, I watched the 4770k run memory speeds that the FX-8350 cannot hope to match on an ASRock Z87M Extreme4 micro atx Mobo that cost $120.00, while the FX-8350 was on a Crosshair V 990FX formula mobo that cost $224.99 plus another $300.00 and change in water cooling.
Everyone likes to scream and yell about AMD being cheaper, but they always FAIL to mention the additional costs that you WILL have to pay to get GOOD overclocking. Also at full load the 4770k uses around 74 to 81 watts less then the FX-8350 (8350 at 4.8ghz versus 4770k at 4.7ghz) both on water, but there really isn't any real reason to clock the 4770k that high to pull off extremely good numbers.

(gaming) On some titles you will likely not see a huge difference from either chip, on other titles you WILL, depending on the GPU you run.

Intel 4770k with Mobo = $459.00 End cost OR $70.00 to $200.00 for cooling.
FX-8350 with mobo = $424.00 (then add for water cooling or high end Air), lets say $70.00 to $200.00
End cost FX-8350 = $494.00 to $624.00 end cost
FYI, you cannot decently OC an FX-8350 on a $50.00 Mobo, cheapest I saw a good friend get away with is the Asus M5A99X EVO R2.0 at $139.00, but he hit a wall.

So you have to conclude that for about the same price you can have either one or the other intel or AMD.
intel = $459.00 - $529.00 - $659.00 from stock air to water cooling.
AMD = $424.00 - $494.00 - $624.00 from stock (tiny OC), aftermarket air to water cooling.

If anyone is going to argue over what amounts to a $30.00 price difference as being a deal breaker, then they are just arguing semantics.. I don't even know why people bother arguing the intel versus AMD issue, it's already been decided.

If you plan to build $30.00 is nothing...


m
0
l
May 16, 2014 7:25:27 AM

Mr. Odin obviously you are a fan boy comparing i7 4770k against a Fx 8350 which is by the way $200.00 cheaper. Passmark CPU MARK score of 4770k 10000 compared to FX9370 of 19000+ so why don't we start comparing apples to apples.FX 9370 can be fetch for $199.00 and 4770k for 339.00.Let's start with energy cost which intel is more energy efficient than AMD but who cares we are comparing performances so lets stick with it.Fx series has four more cores and larger cache than intel , L1 DATA 8X16 Kbytes four way,L1 Inst 4x64 Kbytes 2way, level2 4x2048 Kbytes 16 way,level3 8192 Kbytes 64 way do the math and translate that to performance in actual applications.I'm an intel guy all my life until I stumbled with FX 9370 my first build and very happy.Lessons learned only way to find out is do your own testing .
m
0
l
a c 106 à CPUs
a b À AMD
May 16, 2014 9:11:28 AM

the motherboard has pretty bad reviews on newegg you're talking about, http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

I guarantee it's throttling the 8350 because of bad VRM cooling, only a 4 pin CPU power connector.

As for the other comments, I'm actually the opposite, I don't play CPU intensive stuff and I honestly regret spending so much on my intel build when I could have saved money with an AMD. I tested BF4 with my bro's a10 5800k paired with a gtx660ti on 1080p ultra and his FPS matched mine in multiplayer. On 64man Shanghai conquest his FPS at the lowest dipped to 35fps, my lowest was like 40ish FPS with my overclocked i5 and 7950. His CPU isn't even overclocked, and would essentially be the 75 dollar athlon x4 750k, and you know how much an i5 costs, ~$220.

I doubt many people could tell a difference in real world usage. Seeing it first hand has actually made me really like AMD now, contrary to all the synthetic charts online and fanboys. I mostly only play BF4 or Minecraft anyway. Probably going to be building a portable Kaveri APU build soon to see how it performs.

GPU is more important for games anyway. It's funny too since everybody always seems to harp on anything if it's not uber maxed out 1080p 60 fps constant(which my pricy i5 setup can't seem to do on BF4 anyway...), but sometimes I find that to be "too" smooth when aiming in BF4 and find it easier to aim when the FPS is lower. Having the FPS very high makes it seem like the mouse sensitivity is up too high, and makes me actually miss my shots more. But I guess that depends on person to person, but, for me, having a little bit lower fps actually makes it easier for me to aim.
m
0
l
a c 210 à CPUs
a b À AMD
May 16, 2014 9:21:32 AM

well i can show you what it should be with the fx 8350
m
0
l
a c 86 à CPUs
a b À AMD
May 16, 2014 1:23:45 PM

-Odin- said:
Sorry about your low W.E.I. score. Have you monitored yo0ur temps and watched your CPU throttle?
I was AMD for over a decade, and now i'm jumping ship to intel, after watching what a 4770k clocked to 4.6 ghz do to an FX-8350 at 4.875 ghz to 5.0ghz , i'm completely convinced that AMD is no longer the alternative if I want to save $30.00 build.. Nobody ever tells you it will take $200.00 to $400.00 in water cooling to clock a FX-8350 up 5.0 ghz, and also that you have to have a $220.00 990FX mobo to get there, when the 4770k can perform BETTER then the FX on a $130.00 Mobo.. I watched it happen, and I watched my friend's face with the FX-8350 just start to contort, and make all kinds of excuses.. AMD isn't the budget way to go when you MUST factor in cooling cost and big PSU.

I watched a 4770k just kick the snot out an FX-8350 in benchmarks and several RTS titles, also Skyrim benches, as a matter of fact on the RTS titles with tons of units on the board, the 4770k was setting at 80% load while the FX-8350 took a nosedive loaded to 100%.. The FX-8350 was clocked to 4.7GHZ and the 4770k was at 3.9GHZ to 4.0GHZ on AIR, The FX-8350 was under water. Clock for clock 4.0GHZ (same clocks for both CPUs) the intel performed better, with similar GPUs used, RAM was OC'd for the FX-8350 to 2133mhz and change, and 4770k 2400mhz and change. The FX-8350 couldn't get the memory performance of the 4770k, and the 4770k had room to go further, the 4770k can use much higher mhz RAM.

I have completely ignored both Bulldozer and Piledriver (Zambezi & Vishera), because the oh so very slight increase in a few small areas of perfomance over my current Phenom II x6 1100t clocked at 4.278GHZ was never even close to being worth buying either a Bulldozer or Piledriver, ATM so I'm jumping ship to intel after over a decade of AMD.

Also the memory controller on the 4770k is far superior to that of the FX-8350, I watched the 4770k run memory speeds that the FX-8350 cannot hope to match on an ASRock Z87M Extreme4 micro atx Mobo that cost $120.00, while the FX-8350 was on a Crosshair V 990FX formula mobo that cost $224.99 plus another $300.00 and change in water cooling.
Everyone likes to scream and yell about AMD being cheaper, but they always FAIL to mention the additional costs that you WILL have to pay to get GOOD overclocking. Also at full load the 4770k uses around 74 to 81 watts less then the FX-8350 (8350 at 4.8ghz versus 4770k at 4.7ghz) both on water, but there really isn't any real reason to clock the 4770k that high to pull off extremely good numbers.

(gaming) On some titles you will likely not see a huge difference from either chip, on other titles you WILL, depending on the GPU you run.

Intel 4770k with Mobo = $459.00 End cost OR $70.00 to $200.00 for cooling.
FX-8350 with mobo = $424.00 (then add for water cooling or high end Air), lets say $70.00 to $200.00
End cost FX-8350 = $494.00 to $624.00 end cost
FYI, you cannot decently OC an FX-8350 on a $50.00 Mobo, cheapest I saw a good friend get away with is the Asus M5A99X EVO R2.0 at $139.00, but he hit a wall.

So you have to conclude that for about the same price you can have either one or the other intel or AMD.
intel = $459.00 - $529.00 - $659.00 from stock air to water cooling.
AMD = $424.00 - $494.00 - $624.00 from stock (tiny OC), aftermarket air to water cooling.

If anyone is going to argue over what amounts to a $30.00 price difference as being a deal breaker, then they are just arguing semantics.. I don't even know why people bother arguing the intel versus AMD issue, it's already been decided.

If you plan to build $30.00 is nothing...


well ill tell you why youre wrong...hes getting 5.9 on WEI and i have an FX 8320 and got 7.8 for CPU on my windows 7 64 bit rig. tell him to check the detailed WEI scores. on the main screen in computer properties it will only show you the lowest score (probably HDD) but if you click on it, it shows you CPU, GPU, RAM and HDD all have there own scores. plus the i7 only rape the FX 8350 in gaming. but for professionals who video edit and model in 3D applications, the FX trades blows with the i7 4770k and at a great price (i snagged mine brand new for 99.99 at micro center). basically in raw integer math, the FX takes the cake. in SSE and single thread the i7 has a big lead.
m
0
l
a c 210 à CPUs
a b À AMD
May 16, 2014 1:43:11 PM

Beezy said:
-Odin- said:
Sorry about your low W.E.I. score. Have you monitored yo0ur temps and watched your CPU throttle?
I was AMD for over a decade, and now i'm jumping ship to intel, after watching what a 4770k clocked to 4.6 ghz do to an FX-8350 at 4.875 ghz to 5.0ghz , i'm completely convinced that AMD is no longer the alternative if I want to save $30.00 build.. Nobody ever tells you it will take $200.00 to $400.00 in water cooling to clock a FX-8350 up 5.0 ghz, and also that you have to have a $220.00 990FX mobo to get there, when the 4770k can perform BETTER then the FX on a $130.00 Mobo.. I watched it happen, and I watched my friend's face with the FX-8350 just start to contort, and make all kinds of excuses.. AMD isn't the budget way to go when you MUST factor in cooling cost and big PSU.
yep buy for what you need

I watched a 4770k just kick the snot out an FX-8350 in benchmarks and several RTS titles, also Skyrim benches, as a matter of fact on the RTS titles with tons of units on the board, the 4770k was setting at 80% load while the FX-8350 took a nosedive loaded to 100%.. The FX-8350 was clocked to 4.7GHZ and the 4770k was at 3.9GHZ to 4.0GHZ on AIR, The FX-8350 was under water. Clock for clock 4.0GHZ (same clocks for both CPUs) the intel performed better, with similar GPUs used, RAM was OC'd for the FX-8350 to 2133mhz and change, and 4770k 2400mhz and change. The FX-8350 couldn't get the memory performance of the 4770k, and the 4770k had room to go further, the 4770k can use much higher mhz RAM.

I have completely ignored both Bulldozer and Piledriver (Zambezi & Vishera), because the oh so very slight increase in a few small areas of perfomance over my current Phenom II x6 1100t clocked at 4.278GHZ was never even close to being worth buying either a Bulldozer or Piledriver, ATM so I'm jumping ship to intel after over a decade of AMD.

Also the memory controller on the 4770k is far superior to that of the FX-8350, I watched the 4770k run memory speeds that the FX-8350 cannot hope to match on an ASRock Z87M Extreme4 micro atx Mobo that cost $120.00, while the FX-8350 was on a Crosshair V 990FX formula mobo that cost $224.99 plus another $300.00 and change in water cooling.
Everyone likes to scream and yell about AMD being cheaper, but they always FAIL to mention the additional costs that you WILL have to pay to get GOOD overclocking. Also at full load the 4770k uses around 74 to 81 watts less then the FX-8350 (8350 at 4.8ghz versus 4770k at 4.7ghz) both on water, but there really isn't any real reason to clock the 4770k that high to pull off extremely good numbers.

(gaming) On some titles you will likely not see a huge difference from either chip, on other titles you WILL, depending on the GPU you run.

Intel 4770k with Mobo = $459.00 End cost OR $70.00 to $200.00 for cooling.
FX-8350 with mobo = $424.00 (then add for water cooling or high end Air), lets say $70.00 to $200.00
End cost FX-8350 = $494.00 to $624.00 end cost
FYI, you cannot decently OC an FX-8350 on a $50.00 Mobo, cheapest I saw a good friend get away with is the Asus M5A99X EVO R2.0 at $139.00, but he hit a wall.

So you have to conclude that for about the same price you can have either one or the other intel or AMD.
intel = $459.00 - $529.00 - $659.00 from stock air to water cooling.
AMD = $424.00 - $494.00 - $624.00 from stock (tiny OC), aftermarket air to water cooling.

If anyone is going to argue over what amounts to a $30.00 price difference as being a deal breaker, then they are just arguing semantics.. I don't even know why people bother arguing the intel versus AMD issue, it's already been decided.

If you plan to build $30.00 is nothing...


well ill tell you why youre wrong...hes getting 5.9 on WEI and i have an FX 8320 and got 7.8 for CPU on my windows 7 64 bit rig. tell him to check the detailed WEI scores. on the main screen in computer properties it will only show you the lowest score (probably HDD) but if you click on it, it shows you CPU, GPU, RAM and HDD all have there own scores. plus the i7 only rape the FX 8350 in gaming. but for professionals who video edit and model in 3D applications, the FX trades blows with the i7 4770k and at a great price (i snagged mine brand new for 99.99 at micro center). basically in raw integer math, the FX takes the cake. in SSE and single thread the i7 has a big lead.


m
0
l
July 12, 2014 1:59:16 PM

cyanghost109 said:
Greetings, people!

I upgraded my friend's PC with a Gigabyte GA-970A-DS3P motherboard and an AMD FX-8350 CPU. We loaded up Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit and installed the drivers and latest updates. We ran the WEI assessment and the CPU scored 5.9! He tries playing games and they don't perform well at all. All of the other components scored good scores, except the CPU!

Can anyone explain what's happening here! We've tried reinstalling the OS, installing hotfixes related to this issue and still no luck! Any help would be appreciated!


I am having the same issue with a Biostar TA970 I am getting a 6.0 my other rig with a sabertooth is getting 7.6 I can't find a problem or an answer
m
0
l
September 26, 2014 1:50:53 PM

4 pin power it has to be that because on the older 8 pin power boards it advertised 140w processor ready i believe and the 8300's need more power in order to work properly this is just an assumption as i have a 8pin power 970A-g46 and ive heard of great results using this board and the higher up fx proccessors
m
0
l

Best solution

a c 106 à CPUs
a b À AMD
September 26, 2014 2:00:09 PM

Did the OP ever fix their problem? Likely due to a bad motherboard. I wouldn't use anything lower than the Asus R2.0 970 chipset. Supposedly the new MSI 970 chipset Gamer series is good, or that one Gigabyte mobo with an 8+2 powerphase and 970 chipset.
Share
a b à CPUs
September 26, 2014 2:02:55 PM

I have an i7 4790k running at 4.4Ghz full time and I have a CPU score of 7.8 so I KNOW it is a load of bull :p 
m
0
l
a c 91 à CPUs
a b À AMD
September 26, 2014 2:34:47 PM

WhiteSnake91 said:
the motherboard has pretty bad reviews on newegg you're talking about, http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

I guarantee it's throttling the 8350 because of bad VRM cooling, only a 4 pin CPU power connector.

As for the other comments, I'm actually the opposite, I don't play CPU intensive stuff and I honestly regret spending so much on my intel build when I could have saved money with an AMD. I tested BF4 with my bro's a10 5800k paired with a gtx660ti on 1080p ultra and his FPS matched mine in multiplayer. On 64man Shanghai conquest his FPS at the lowest dipped to 35fps, my lowest was like 40ish FPS with my overclocked i5 and 7950. His CPU isn't even overclocked, and would essentially be the 75 dollar athlon x4 750k, and you know how much an i5 costs, ~$220.

I doubt many people could tell a difference in real world usage. Seeing it first hand has actually made me really like AMD now, contrary to all the synthetic charts online and fanboys. I mostly only play BF4 or Minecraft anyway. Probably going to be building a portable Kaveri APU build soon to see how it performs.

GPU is more important for games anyway. It's funny too since everybody always seems to harp on anything if it's not uber maxed out 1080p 60 fps constant(which my pricy i5 setup can't seem to do on BF4 anyway...), but sometimes I find that to be "too" smooth when aiming in BF4 and find it easier to aim when the FPS is lower. Having the FPS very high makes it seem like the mouse sensitivity is up too high, and makes me actually miss my shots more. But I guess that depends on person to person, but, for me, having a little bit lower fps actually makes it easier for me to aim.


This............... That motherboard has 4+1 phase and the the vrm's are getting too hot trying to supply that cpu with juice. They are throttling to keep from failing. He needs a good board with 8+2 phase power. The key to getting the most out of an FX cpu is a good, stout motherboard.
m
0
l
a c 86 à CPUs
a b À AMD
September 26, 2014 5:02:24 PM

bmacsys said:
WhiteSnake91 said:
the motherboard has pretty bad reviews on newegg you're talking about, http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

I guarantee it's throttling the 8350 because of bad VRM cooling, only a 4 pin CPU power connector.

As for the other comments, I'm actually the opposite, I don't play CPU intensive stuff and I honestly regret spending so much on my intel build when I could have saved money with an AMD. I tested BF4 with my bro's a10 5800k paired with a gtx660ti on 1080p ultra and his FPS matched mine in multiplayer. On 64man Shanghai conquest his FPS at the lowest dipped to 35fps, my lowest was like 40ish FPS with my overclocked i5 and 7950. His CPU isn't even overclocked, and would essentially be the 75 dollar athlon x4 750k, and you know how much an i5 costs, ~$220.

I doubt many people could tell a difference in real world usage. Seeing it first hand has actually made me really like AMD now, contrary to all the synthetic charts online and fanboys. I mostly only play BF4 or Minecraft anyway. Probably going to be building a portable Kaveri APU build soon to see how it performs.

GPU is more important for games anyway. It's funny too since everybody always seems to harp on anything if it's not uber maxed out 1080p 60 fps constant(which my pricy i5 setup can't seem to do on BF4 anyway...), but sometimes I find that to be "too" smooth when aiming in BF4 and find it easier to aim when the FPS is lower. Having the FPS very high makes it seem like the mouse sensitivity is up too high, and makes me actually miss my shots more. But I guess that depends on person to person, but, for me, having a little bit lower fps actually makes it easier for me to aim.


This............... That motherboard has 4+1 phase and the the vrm's are getting too hot trying to supply that cpu with juice. They are throttling to keep from failing. He needs a good board with 8+2 phase power. The key to getting the most out of an FX cpu is a good, stout motherboard.


running my FX 8320 at 4.3Ghz with 6 power phases to the CPU and a Hyper 212 EVO, motherboard is VERY important when powering such a high TDP chip. 8 power phases would certainly help because my limiting factor right now is socket temp, not the cooler.
m
0
l
October 1, 2014 7:54:49 PM

Upgraded my board and no more problems Thanks Guys
m
0
l
December 10, 2014 11:32:57 PM

WhiteSnake91 said:
Did the OP ever fix their problem? Likely due to a bad motherboard. I wouldn't use anything lower than the Asus R2.0 970 chipset. Supposedly the new MSI 970 chipset Gamer series is good, or that one Gigabyte mobo with an 8+2 powerphase and 970 chipset.


Thanks a lot for asking and my apologies for never responding to any of the kind members who contributed to this post! TomsHardware USED to send me emails whenever someone replied to a topic of mine, but I guess that's no longer the case. And I'm a pretty busy person, so things like this don't cross my mind often.

Anyway, it's been a while so I'll need to regress back to what was going on. If I remember correctly, we ended up returning the motherboard and ordered an Asus board and that time, it wouldn't work it all. It turned on for a split second and shut off. I've had experience with this kind of behavior before and the last time this happened to me, it turned out the CPU was actually bad and was shorting out motherboard components.

Without taking another chance and ruining another good board, I returned the CPU and they sent me a replacement for both the board and the CPU and everything worked just fine after that. I should also note that I remember the voltages were significantly lower than mine (I also have an FX-8350) so that may have also indicated an issue with the voltage regulators on one of the previous boards. It's really hard to say.

So to anyone else that's having trouble like this, my advice to you is to return the board AND the CPU and get new parts. It's not worth your time to keep swapping parts and damaging them when it's still under warranty. :)  Hopefully this helped. And apologies for the late response and the revival of an old thread. I believe it's okay in this case since the FX-8350 is still being sold on Newegg and others may still come across the same issue.
m
0
l
a c 308 à CPUs
a c 181 À AMD
December 10, 2014 11:46:02 PM

What exact motherboard did you get?

m
0
l
a c 308 à CPUs
a c 181 À AMD
December 13, 2014 2:42:10 AM

Very good motherboard. :) 
m
0
l