cdabc123 :
if you could disable 4 cores you would have lower temps and be able to overclock more.
That is not a guarantee. The issue with the FX series is that the cores you are disabling are not full cores so there is not nearly as much to gain by doing so so putting out a blanket statement like this could potentially mislead people. Not every CPU is the same, his might not be able to reach the same clock speeds as others and might not be able to take as much voltage as others even with the secondary cores in each module disabled.
That said, disabling the cores will not increase performance in multithreaded applications. There was an issue with the early FX 8000 series where it wasn't being handled properly, i.e. if there were 4 threads it would load the first two modules and that would bottleneck instead of loading all 4 modules and then the secondary cores in each as threads are needed. That has been resolved for the most part.
As for overclocking, there is no 100% yes to this question. Most FX 8300 series hit 4.8GHz on all 8 threads pretty easily but you will need a really good cooling solution, either the best air cooler or a H80 or better to keep it under its thermal limit of 62.5c. Considering that even if you hit 5GHz on just 4 cores vs the 4.8GHz on 8 cores you would not see a massive performance boost or one that is worth dropping multithreaded performance for.
Again this all depends on your CPU as well as your board (if it has high quality VRMs to help regulate voltage) and cooling setup.
bmacsys :
mason marnell@1457018692 :
So I just upgraded from the AMD FX 4300 to the 8320e. If I (not saying I would, but I might do It until games use < 4 cores) disabled every other core in the bios, would the increased resources and maybe a higher overclock have better performance than all 8 cores? Would there be any difference in performance from the 4300? Thanks!
A Piledriver core is a Piledriver core. The ONLY difference is clockspeed. If you disable four cores or two modules of the 8320e it becomes a 4300/4350. Only
slower because it has a base clock speed of 3.2 GHz vs a base clock speed of 3.8 GHz for the 4300 and 4.2 GHz for the 4350.
You can disable the secondary core per module making each module effectively a single core. It would be faster than a FX 4300 as it wouldn't have to share resources like the 4300 would.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram