Affinity like issue

Actually once everything is said and done with this overclock im looking at about a 10% gain overall. Im not pushing anything, well within any temperature tolerances, I have everything running over stock, but its built to do so, the biggest gain I would say ive gotten is bringing the FSB NB and Ram up from stock including bringing the timings down. Right now everything idels at, 22C (CPU) NB 50C, GPU 32, Under load its 60,80,55, but this is under 100% load for 2 hours straight nothing actually ever does that.
 
I didn't spell this out, so it's my fault. What I mean is; over clocking is there, yes, it can be done, yes however, it causes trouble where trouble is not necessary. It's my opinion. As for what Draeos said, "10% gain overall", I'd have to see it to believe it.

Just FYI, I am not a noob or a 'new guy' to overclocking. I know what people do out there and I know the 'differences' it makes. Also, I used to do it myself. 10% is HIGHLY unlikely unless you are talking about a test application that was running at ...say, 10FPS and now you are seeing 11FPS. If so, the difference is stupid for running your purchased items out of scope. Oh you want to argue that? LOL OK! Bring it on....

Read your manual. You will read that an AMD chip is completely open to OCing and whatever you wish to do. However, if you break it, send it back and their techs see that you burnt it up because you ran it past it's default setting or out of the scope of what they deem acceptable, guess what!? It's no longer covered by warranty. That is not worth the risk. Again, this is my opinion. Here's another thought, if Draeos didn't OC his FSB, CPU and Memory then this thread wouldn't exist.

If you take what I am writing here personal, then you are overly emotional for no reason. I am ONLY giving my point of view and have no issues trying to help people out, but you may get a piece of my mind if I think or feel that you caused an unnecessary issue. Cheers!
 
On a side note: Draeos, you know exactly what you are doing when it comes to successfully OCing. A lot of people out there don't have a clue and end up pumping too much power and then, POP! There goes your hardware. ha!
 
back in the day Ocing was worth it, you could ramp up your system more then double its stock performance. Now you have to run all kinds of extra cooling (big dollar stuff) just for at best 10% increase and thats from overclockers.com IMO you're better off just spending a few extra dollars and getting better spec parts out the gate.

RAM OCing? my RAM at stock is latency 9-9-9-24 sure I could tighten it to latency 8 but why put extra strain on my parts for 1 cycle that the human brain can't even comprehend the difference.

my cpu? quad core that always runs at little higher then 3.6ghz and can get to 3.8 on its own (I5 4670 smokes AMD FX 6100 6-Core in everything but price even the extra effort to get 10% can't come close).

TLtR its worth it to spend a little extra these days to get the goods instead of OCing that's just a hobbyist thing now.
 
Yep, I am still intrigued with the OCing concept, but stopped messing with it years ago, because just like what you said Gargate, before you could see a HUGE ~50% difference in performance. That's all changed, again like you said. I just pay the money I feel comfortable and get what I feel is good stuff. Like my CPU...which will smoke any I5 out there when you test the multiple core application. :) AMD 8core 8350. Oh, and even beats out some I7s on certain tests. :)

Let's not talk about the single core tests though....cough cough.
 
The way I feel toward overclocking is more like fine tuning, kinda like how a good chief engineer in star trek will join a new ship and go holy shit we could get another .0003% efficiency this dude was a dunce, I only call what I've done overclocking because i guess thats the real name for it but i feel more like i've just tuned everything to run how its supposed to be ran. Could i get more? In an emergency sure i could bust out warp 9.999999 vs warp 9.99998 if the borg ware behind us but as it sits idel im ready for just about everything else.
 
Gargate said:
lol I dunno http://www.cpu-world.com/Compare/446/AMD_FX-Series_FX-8350_vs_Intel_Core_i5_i5-4670K.html says its multi core is marginal and a lot of folks say I5s are beating amds on BF4 which is a multi core built game.

heh yeah single core is ridic for sure.
Click to expand...

CPU World has always been an Intel loving site. Toms hardware is one I trust MUCH more when it comes to results. Plus the first thing listed in that article is "The charts show relative performance of FX-8350 and Core i5-4670K CPUs in a number of different types of applications".... (EDIT) -- Below are the specifics....some look about right. Seeing where the AMD does something about twice as fast. The best results again are from Toms Hardware.

a number of different types of applications....no specifics. Ya, whatever CPU World. Get specific, that's what readers like me REALLY want to see. Not BS tipping the scale to be almost equal.

Anyway, from the specific results I've seen, the AMD 8 core processors have no issues destroying I5s when it comes to multithreading apps.

Draeos, I used to be just like you. Fine tuning....I LOVED it too, but I just lost the drive. I got tired of seeing little results and risking my hard earned $$ because I wanted that .00001 or even 10% ;)

I still OC sometimes but that is situational. Example: DVDFAB - Ripping a Blu-Ray, converting it to XX format takes (hypothetical) about 1.5 hours. I like to OC so I can see that drop to 1 hour. Save 30 minutes, EFF YA! :) hehe
 
http://cpuboss.com/cpus/Intel-Core-i5-3570K-vs-AMD-FX-8350

Scroll down to the Benchmarks. This is the i5 3570.....and you know what, I apologize. I wasn't paying attention. The results I am speaking of about the AMD FX8350 vs I5 were from about 1 to 2 years ago. So, there are newer I5s at a cheaper cost that compete with the AMD now.

So...I stand corrected. Anyway, I bought my FX8350 brand new on sale for 120$.....you can't beat that price for the performance you get. :D
 
Hesyous said:
CPU World has always been an Intel loving site. Toms hardware is one I trust MUCH more when it comes to results. Plus the first thing listed in that article is "The charts show relative performance of FX-8350 and Core i5-4670K CPUs in a number of different types of applications".... (EDIT) -- Below are the specifics....some look about right. Seeing where the AMD does something about twice as fast. The best results again are from Toms Hardware.

a number of different types of applications....no specifics. Ya, whatever CPU World. Get specific, that's what readers like me REALLY want to see. Not BS tipping the scale to be almost equal.

Anyway, from the specific results I've seen, the AMD 8 core processors have no issues destroying I5s when it comes to multithreading apps.

Draeos, I used to be just like you. Fine tuning....I LOVED it too, but I just lost the drive. I got tired of seeing little results and risking my hard earned $$ because I wanted that .00001 or even 10% ;)

I still OC sometimes but that is situational. Example: DVDFAB - Ripping a Blu-Ray, converting it to XX format takes (hypothetical) about 1.5 hours. I like to OC so I can see that drop to 1 hour. Save 30 minutes, EFF YA! :) hehe
Click to expand...


eh tbh I just linked the first one but the differences are slim, I did do a little BF4 testing and was in fact beating amd chips at some points.
 
Hesyous said:
http://cpuboss.com/cpus/Intel-Core-i5-3570K-vs-AMD-FX-8350

Scroll down to the Benchmarks. This is the i5 3570.....and you know what, I apologize. I wasn't paying attention. The results I am speaking of about the AMD FX8350 vs I5 were from about 1 to 2 years ago. So, there are newer I5s at a cheaper cost that compete with the AMD now.

So...I stand corrected. Anyway, I bought my FX8350 brand new on sale for 120$.....you can't beat that price for the performance you get. :D
Click to expand...

nah for sure amd on anything below the $175 mark is better performance per dollar, I've used AMD most of my life but after my last intel chip worked so well I decided why not.
 
Now that I'm....older...have a decent job and have $$; I could buy a nice I7 Extreme rig (build one) if I want, but I really don't have the need for it. I want something inexpensive that will run all the stuff I use fast.

FX8350 stock speed
16GB DDR3 - 1600
Nvidia 660GTX 2GB
2 SSDs (1 for OS drive and 1 for games) 120GB/256GB **From the time I press the power button on my computer to the login screen it takes 25 seconds. That's ok with me. It would be faster but I need to disable crap in the BIOS, and I just don't care to do it.

1HDD for storage (videos/audio/blah)
24" LED

It's all I need and I've yet to push it to the max....

The only thing I do that is intensive is video converting and decoding/encoding. :) Evertime I zone in game with a raid, I've yet to see someone zone faster. Literally I load in zone first...at least on my screen I do and sometime by several seconds. If I am boxing....same thing with my boxed char.

EDIT: You know, if I OC my CPU to 5ghz instead of it's stock at 4, then upped my DDR to 1833, then OC my video card to....lol, who am I kiddin!? :p
 
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817371074
My PSU. That PSU is crazy solid on Watts/Volts....I put a meter on it and ....it doesn't bounce around at all like some other PSUs. Power on, off, continual.

SSDs are about 50 cents a GB now, on sale. Well worth it even for a small one like 120GB. You can throw your OS on it and a game or 2. I HIGHLY suggest you google how to set up an SSD in Windows OS. You'll disable a whole bunch of stuff that you don't need anymore and it saves the overall life of the SSD. Just FYI....
 
Last edited:
Btw, you know the funny saying "Once you go Black, you never go back?". Well, Once you go SSD, you're spoiled. Seriously, don't do it unless you are ready to see the light.
 
Gargate said:
LOL right I may down the road when they get cheaper swap my i5 4670 for an i7 4770 or 4790, my HDD is a 1T WD black edition (really didnt see much reason to do ssd yet cost wise) maybe next year on the ssd drive when they get cheaper. all in all sounds like you gota pretty solid rig, what psu are you running?

atm I'm using sea sonic X 750w http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817151087
Click to expand...

In general replacing HHDs with SSDs is the largest single upgrade you are going to do to any computer system. It makes that large of a difference in performance. I argue that putting in an SSD is usually better than buying a newer computer. It make rigs so much faster you wont believe it is the same computer. SSDs are so fast they put the speed bottleneck/throttles back on chips and board architecture. I'll add that they run with no vibration, much less power, and much less heat is generated from their use.

I have built many of my own computers, over clocked, refurbished laptops, etc. Trust me when I say that if you have a desktop, running your OS and programs from an SSD will be a mind-blowingly fast compared to top end HDDs. Due to price and data retention quality, use HDDs for mass storage/backups and use a 120 larger gig SSD for your OS and programs.

I am typing this on a dual core laptop with 2 gigs of ram that was high end in 2007. The only reason I can still use this laptop, and use it well, is because of the decent SSD drive inside. The gaming rig that I built about 5 years ago will smoke modern rigs that don't have SSDs. This is in terms of noticeable hands on usage speed. This was especially true when I was running a 4 drive RAID0 (now I use a 3 drive RAID5 but it is still absurdly fast... My mainboard bridges are the IO limiter, not the drives.)

Do yourself a favor and buy a new computer by using your HDD as storage and installing an SSD to run your OS and programs... (I'll also argue that SSDs wont be getting that much cheaper without sacrificing quality or a revolution in architecture. At some point we may even be switching back to gas filled mechanical drives if they can produce them cheaply and keep the IO super high.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom