Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

FX 8320

Last response: in CPUs
Share
December 4, 2012 8:03:02 AM

Was on the fence and considering the FX 6300 6 core, but after looking at more bench tests it seems to make more sense and go for the FX 8320. One thing that surprised me was that it apparently only has 4 "true" cores or modules? So the question is can you disable the pseudo "cores" in the BIOS? Since this thing is such a power hog, I was thinking of running it like a true 4 core instead by disabling 4 of it's "logical" cores (as I think AMD calls them) and just have 1 dedicated per true core. Does that make sense? Am I correct with that thinking it'd be more or less a true quad core at that point instead of a pseudo 8 core? I plan on OC'ing the he77 out of it, but the power it consumes seems a bit high and will be much higher with OC. Any idea how good it'd run in a true 4 core? BTW, the 4 core being offered only has 2 modules, and the 6 core only has 3, which is why I'm thinking this would be a better route. Most CPU intensive stuff I do is gaming.

More about : 8320

December 4, 2012 9:51:18 AM

If you're gaming, you'll want the I5 3570K. Those two FX computers have 6 and 8 cores respectively, but most games don't use more than 2. The I5 3570K is the far better gaming option, as seen here:

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/698?vs=701

If you scroll down to the bottom, you'll see it murders the FX 8320 at even the most CPU-intensive games.
m
0
l
Related resources
December 6, 2012 2:33:14 AM

I'm not interested in spending more for an Intel set-up although they are definitely better in bench tests. Also, it'd be too much of a PITA and at this point waste of $$$ to convert EVERYTHING over for an Intel socket board, RAM, Intel chip, drivers, etc. The next time I end up doing a build from scratch I'll consider it assuming AMD hasn't made any improvements over the next year or two. Also, with the AMD set-up, I can just upgrade to the next better chip when it comes out without worrying about changing anything else unless they decide to go with an AM4 socket or whatever the next socket will be.

Right now I'm still running an old Athlon II X2 250 OC'd @3.95Ghz (can get 4.05Ghz or more but it's too demanding on cpu voltage once it hits 4Ghz and I have to scale back RAM speed) and it scores a 2.19 on Cinebench 11.5, and scores a 1.14 on the single core test (same score for single core as an i7 860 @2.80Ghz). In all honesty, it runs every game I've thrown at it quite well, but some of the newer DX11 games are getting a little too taxing for it (FPS are usually around 30-60+ depending on the graphic settings or on how well optimized the game is, but I usually set everything to be visually pleasant which is normally everything max except shadows). So, with that being said, if I can at the very least DOUBLE the performance of this Athlon chip I'd be happy; whether or not it's synthetic benchmark testing scores are through the roof are irrelevant.

The link to the guy with the 8120 (thank you Z1NONLY) suggests the idea of running it as a true 4 core should be advantageous to the 8320 and easily do the "double" performance I'm wanting over the Athlon 250, especially with a high OC and theoretically cut power consumption too. Although, in the long-run, the Intel would probably save me money or pay for itself with the savings in power consumption over the power hungry AMD.
m
0
l
April 8, 2013 8:04:36 PM

the FX-6300 is good value if you do a lot of labour intensive stuff... rendering, zipping. compressing, ripping, multitasking, etc.

However, if your a gamer the only way to go for now and the immediate future considering your budget is an "MSI B75MA-P45 Motherboard" (ivy bridge ready) over-clockable intel mobo with New B75 chipset it has value with most of the features of a Z77 Motherboard. like UEFI BIOS and a few MSI sound features on top all for the lowered price of only £41.00 consider it well above the H61 series and a i5 3570K. Best CPU for gaming ATM. KILLS THE FX-8320 AND FX-6300.

don't be fooled by attractive flashy red boxes from AMD.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/MSI-B75MA-P45-Motherboard-Intel...

However if your only a casual gamer and you could not be bothered with the hassle to change mobo.. stick with an FX-8320 or wait to steam-roller comes out.. but you may have a long wait.

remember, even a modern i3 3220 3.3Ghz 2 core with 4 threads, is a brilliant value entry to Ivy Bridge, as you only need two cores for gaming. you can OC an extra 100-200Mhz in the Bios depending on the board you choose, to bring the clock speed up a fraction, fabulous budget entry for gaming with the MSI Board and MSI's flashy UEFI Bios. Then say Xmas you can upgrade to a i5 3570K and sell the i3 3220, just don't forget to keep the Box. The GPU does most of the work (to a certain degree) so Please dont get strung out on processior choice.

If it was me on a budget I would always go intel, as there is just so more you can do with them like the i3 3220 + the above MSi Board to get you into the IVY Bridge Club. £91 + £41 at time of posting. the B75 sometimes is called the Z75 too.

I hope so of my suggestions have been helpful. At the end of the day its yor money, please you go ahead and choose. I know your still going to be thinking AMD, but even a i3 3220 with 4 threads, can beat a Phenom II 965 in many more benchmarks, and the 965 is a full Quad. Remember its your money, good luck...
Take Care, and thanks for reading.
m
0
l
April 8, 2013 10:41:41 PM

I ended up getting the 8350 and an MSI 990FXA-GD80. Before, with the Athlon II X2 250 OC'd @3.75ghz (this was the best OC for me as I could keep RAM speeds untouched and cpu voltage was safer as opposed to 3.9ghz) it finally started showing it's age with games like AC3, Hitman, and even BO2 multiplayer where I had to actually scale back visual settings to keep FPS playable (actually thought it was the video card's fault, but much of it was the aging budget CPU). BO2 also liked to PEG the chip HARD with constant 100% usage on BOTH cores which at the time I thought was a bug with the game. I like to play emulators and it really wasn't until playing PCSX2 (most recent revisions constantly) that some games could not maintain a SOLID 60 FPS which is crucial as sound, video, in-game, etc. MUST be at 60 or you'll get actual slow downs making the game unplayable, unlike PC games where you can play at 20 fps but it'll be jerky or laggy- but still playable.

After installing the drivers, I remembered seeing somewhere there were 2 hotfixes needed for the FX chips that increase performance as well as how it handles each core. After all that was said and done, I tried all the games mentioned above and got solid fps increases. The improvement was so good I was actually able to turn visual settings up well beyond what was possible before. It was interesting to see just how much of a role the CPU has with having a high frame rate as I thought it was more of an issue with the card. EVERY PCSX2 game that had issues with the 2 core chip was playing at 60 fps (or higher but it just makes the game speed to quick) with the 8350. Atv Offroad, Ratchet and Clank (any of them) Metal Gear Solid 2 and 3, etc. were all 100 percent playable now, so I was very happy with that.

Trouble didn't start until I tried OCing. Apparently, MSI retroactively nerfed the cpu core voltage at 1.45 volts due to the board's ability to cook certain components. And there's no clear fix in site. Very angry with this. It's extremely misleading and false advertisement when they have the 8 ghz "World Record holder" plastered all over the page for the board. Reality check, 1.45v can barely get you a 4.5ghz 100% stable. I could get 4.8, play games with it, eyc. but Prime would crash as soon as it started, so not stable. 5ghz is a pipe dream with this board. Another rather big disappointment is you can NOT disable individual threads either. I wanted to try and run a true 4 core by disabling a thread from each core which was possible with my older MSI 760GM P-35 which allowed individual thread/core deactivation. This stupid board only lets you disable the entire core, meaning 4 & 5 are disabled at the same time, instead of just 5. If you want to "risk it", you can try flashing an earlier bios before the nerfing occurred, but they made so many updates since that one you run a risk of more problems or even bricking. If you could run as a true 4 core, I think a higher OC would be possible as it'd be lessing demanding on voltage as well as a bonus in heat reduction. BUY another board!

To the guy above talking about Intel and stuff like the i3 and claiming games don't use more than 2 cores. This 8350 destroys the i3. It's also able to do better at many games than i5 and even some i7's. Apparently the benchmarks are wrong as this plays everything I've thrown at it without an issue and at solid fps. It does an excellent job with the emulators allowing me to finally enjoy some games I haven't been able to play in 10-12 years. That old "2 cores can play any game because they don't use more than cores" simply isn't true anymore. With the PS4 using an 8 core, you're going to see games that will recognize how many cores you have and use many of them, especially as more visuals and background interactions are thrown on the screen.

I liken this AMD chip to a Ford Mustang GT500 and Intel i7 to a Ferrari, both have the HP and are fast, but one is priced better and even has room for the kids.
m
0
l
April 9, 2013 12:29:07 AM

im happy you went for the 8350 its quite powerful at multitasking and many AMD fans claim destroyed the i5 & i7 cpu's however. your not being objective in what you state please point me to any professional reviewing website that backs up what you now claim...
I'm not wishing you to stop enjoying your new CPU, just point me to any PROFESSIONAL Website to show the stats and the benchmarks of the, FX-8350 against the i5 3570K or i7 3770K as in most Professional benchmarks don't lie.
The New FX-8350 is a powerful CPU don't get me wrong and is certainly good value for money (Point taken) but yes the Intels are more expensive because they out shine "AMD Pile-drivers". Especially at multi-thread and certainly single threaded apps.

Please show the evidence for what you're stating.
don't mean to spoil you're breakfast. . but please back up your statement. Thanks.. Laxblade

PS. Lets keep this 'friendly' the world aint going to end, and we are only 'chating' about PC Parts bro...

Please see links below - thanx!
m
0
l
a c 210 à CPUs
April 9, 2013 8:40:53 AM

BobCharlie said:
I ended up getting the 8350 and an MSI 990FXA-GD80. Before, with the Athlon II X2 250 OC'd @3.75ghz (this was the best OC for me as I could keep RAM speeds untouched and cpu voltage was safer as opposed to 3.9ghz) it finally started showing it's age with games like AC3, Hitman, and even BO2 multiplayer where I had to actually scale back visual settings to keep FPS playable (actually thought it was the video card's fault, but much of it was the aging budget CPU). BO2 also liked to PEG the chip HARD with constant 100% usage on BOTH cores which at the time I thought was a bug with the game. I like to play emulators and it really wasn't until playing PCSX2 (most recent revisions constantly) that some games could not maintain a SOLID 60 FPS which is crucial as sound, video, in-game, etc. MUST be at 60 or you'll get actual slow downs making the game unplayable, unlike PC games where you can play at 20 fps but it'll be jerky or laggy- but still playable.

After installing the drivers, I remembered seeing somewhere there were 2 hotfixes needed for the FX chips that increase performance as well as how it handles each core. After all that was said and done, I tried all the games mentioned above and got solid fps increases. The improvement was so good I was actually able to turn visual settings up well beyond what was possible before. It was interesting to see just how much of a role the CPU has with having a high frame rate as I thought it was more of an issue with the card. EVERY PCSX2 game that had issues with the 2 core chip was playing at 60 fps (or higher but it just makes the game speed to quick) with the 8350. Atv Offroad, Ratchet and Clank (any of them) Metal Gear Solid 2 and 3, etc. were all 100 percent playable now, so I was very happy with that.

Trouble didn't start until I tried OCing. Apparently, MSI retroactively nerfed the cpu core voltage at 1.45 volts due to the board's ability to cook certain components. And there's no clear fix in site. Very angry with this. It's extremely misleading and false advertisement when they have the 8 ghz "World Record holder" plastered all over the page for the board. Reality check, 1.45v can barely get you a 4.5ghz 100% stable. I could get 4.8, play games with it, eyc. but Prime would crash as soon as it started, so not stable. 5ghz is a pipe dream with this board. Another rather big disappointment is you can NOT disable individual threads either. I wanted to try and run a true 4 core by disabling a thread from each core which was possible with my older MSI 760GM P-35 which allowed individual thread/core deactivation. This stupid board only lets you disable the entire core, meaning 4 & 5 are disabled at the same time, instead of just 5. If you want to "risk it", you can try flashing an earlier bios before the nerfing occurred, but they made so many updates since that one you run a risk of more problems or even bricking. If you could run as a true 4 core, I think a higher OC would be possible as it'd be lessing demanding on voltage as well as a bonus in heat reduction. BUY another board!

To the guy above talking about Intel and stuff like the i3 and claiming games don't use more than 2 cores. This 8350 destroys the i3. It's also able to do better at many games than i5 and even some i7's. Apparently the benchmarks are wrong as this plays everything I've thrown at it without an issue and at solid fps. It does an excellent job with the emulators allowing me to finally enjoy some games I haven't been able to play in 10-12 years. That old "2 cores can play any game because they don't use more than cores" simply isn't true anymore. With the PS4 using an 8 core, you're going to see games that will recognize how many cores you have and use many of them, especially as more visuals and background interactions are thrown on the screen.

I liken this AMD chip to a Ford Mustang GT500 and Intel i7 to a Ferrari, both have the HP and are fast, but one is priced better and even has room for the kids.


Good for you man! Don't let anyone tell you AMD product isn't great! Intel is a good product, but they're way too proud of it...the performance per dollar is just not there.

Enjoy your chip man! Hope you love the system!

EDIT: As far as overclocking goes, you can overclock just as well with all 8 cores active. It is a 4 "module" design, however, unlike intel, it really has 8 cores that can perform integer calculations independently without sapping resources from one another. The difference is, there are only 4 floating point units, so each block of 2 cores shares one floating point unit for floating point calculations. This will not dramatically effect your performance in any way.

AMD's 8 GHz record for OC is with all 8 cores active...(they also own the single core record at 8.67, but I find the 8 core record to be more impressive)
m
0
l
June 16, 2013 12:53:05 PM

bemused_fred said:
If you're gaming, you'll want the I5 3570K. Those two FX computers have 6 and 8 cores respectively, but most games don't use more than 2. The I5 3570K is the far better gaming option, as seen here:

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/698?vs=701

If you scroll down to the bottom, you'll see it murders the FX 8320 at even the most CPU-intensive games.


It does, however at a higher price point but I wouldn't say it "Murders" the 8320 theres probably only something like 1-7 FPS difference

m
0
l
!