Overclocking fx6300 temps and vcore

gambitbro911

Reputable
Apr 10, 2015
7
0
4,510
hi i just built a computer and i have a fx 6300 cpu a asrock 990fx mobo gtx 760 and a nzxt kraken x40. i have been looking at everyone's overclock and my voltage seems alot lower than everybody elses. ive prime95 for a hour and many other benchmarks very stable. but my temps i cant tell if there good or not can some other people tell me what normal temps are with that 1.3 voltage on the cpu and what there temps if they have a 4.5ghz overclock too thanks. heres some screenshots i took of my overclock and sensors.


http://imageshack.com/a/img540/9708/gUyqUm.jpg



http://imageshack.com/a/img540/3315/ITougq.jpg
 
Solution
To address the other side of the issue, I do not use AMD overdrive, at all. I use CoreTemp, which a lot of experienced builders and overclocking "gurus" that I relate to, as well as from my own comparisons, seems to be the most accurate utility, but HWinfo (NOT HWmonitor) generally has identically accurate (IF accurate is even the right word, let's just say "comparatively accurate".) sensor reading to CoreTemp.

I'd use Prime95 v26.6, which does NOT run AVX instructions, and therefore does not create unrealistic temps. Prime 26.6 is the best currently available utility for creating steady state thermal testing loads. Other versions of Prime use AVX instructions and create unrealistic temps.

Regardless of architecture. P95 v26.6...

gambitbro911

Reputable
Apr 10, 2015
7
0
4,510





hey heres some pics of amd overdrive. o yea thanks for your reply. i used to use amd over drive with my last motherboard and didnt like it very much. i like using uefi the most but check there pics out thanks .

https://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/829x655q90/909/fNicZw.jpg

i also noticed that speedfan,HWmonitor and aida64 all show same temps but amd overdrives temps are different and much higher

Speedfan= https://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/1008x630q90/538/3nBuvL.jpg
HW Monitor=https://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/748x655q90/540/DJ7vIM.jpg
Aida64 extreme= https://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/833x655q90/540/gUyqUm.jpg

i want to belive my idle temps are not reall what amd overdrive says and ive never had good luck with their software..ooooo i think i get it not in amd over drive it says thermal MARGIN not degrees. i guess that means how much margin i have before i hit thermal limit. thanks alot.
 


Really, because I've been building clocked rigs on a regular basis with similar specs. In fact, my build I'm on right now has an 8320@4.5Ghz with 1.34v stable for over a year now. It was actually stable with a step below that on the voltage but I bumped it up a notch just for my piece of mind.

Of course, as you well know, each chip is different, but the FX 6 and FX 8 chips I've been using in builds lately have been doing fine in that range.

2e1rfki.jpg
 
To address the other side of the issue, I do not use AMD overdrive, at all. I use CoreTemp, which a lot of experienced builders and overclocking "gurus" that I relate to, as well as from my own comparisons, seems to be the most accurate utility, but HWinfo (NOT HWmonitor) generally has identically accurate (IF accurate is even the right word, let's just say "comparatively accurate".) sensor reading to CoreTemp.

I'd use Prime95 v26.6, which does NOT run AVX instructions, and therefore does not create unrealistic temps. Prime 26.6 is the best currently available utility for creating steady state thermal testing loads. Other versions of Prime use AVX instructions and create unrealistic temps.

Regardless of architecture. P95 v26.6 works equally well across all platforms. Steady-state is the key. How can anyone extrapolate accurate Core temperatures from workloads that fluctuate like a bad day on the Stock Market?

I'm aware of 5 utilities with steady-state workloads. In order of load level they are:

(1) P95 v26.6 - Small FFT's
(2) HeavyLoad - Stress CPU
(3) FurMark - CPU Burner
(4) Intel Processor Diagnostic Tool - CPU Load
(5) AIDA64 - Tools - System Stability Test - Stress CPU

AIDA64's Stress CPU fails to load any overcloked / ovevolted CPU to get anywhere TDP, and is therefore useless, except for giving naive users a sense of false security because their temps are so low.

HeavyLoad is the closest alternative. Temps and watts are within 3% of Small FFT's.

Run it for ten minutes on Small FFTs. NOT large. NOT blend. SMALL. Ten to fifteen minutes, fifteen is probably where I'd stop if thermal testing is the only thing you're currently trying to establish. For stability, the same test, for 15-24 hours, to determine as much as possible, that you have a pretty much entirely stable overclock. I've seen chips error out between 15-24 hrs so a 24hr run is necessary if you want to be as sure as you realistically can be.

For testing stability between steps, an hour is fine, followed by a full run before you call it good.

Prime95 v26.6: http://windows-downloads-center.blogspot.com/2011/04/prime95-266.html
 
Solution
Also, Overdrive shows distance to TjMax, not actual temps. CoreTemp also has the option, in the optional settings, to change to that view instead of actual estimated temps, as well. That's probably why you thought it wasn't right. Even so, I don't much like it either which is why I don't use it.
 

gambitbro911

Reputable
Apr 10, 2015
7
0
4,510
downloading now and thanks alot if i hit 60 in socket temp that isnt bad is i shud i keep running the test and what temps are you hitting when using prime cuz im watercooled and i feel like it shud be lower but i dont really know. and thats socket temp of 60 not core. core temps are a little lower
 

gambitbro911

Reputable
Apr 10, 2015
7
0
4,510
and thanks for the programs cuz im not sure which prime i was using and i was using like temp monitors cuz i really didnt know which was right but i really liked aida64 thats why i bought it but im kinda pissed that aida isnt that accruate ether.