Thanks for watching! You can support my work here: www.buymeacoffee.com/ratechyt discord.gg/PFb9cMstZH ▪ instagram.com/ratechyt ▪ twitter.com/ratechyt ▪ facebook.com/ratechyt
@@RATechYT At the end of your video you mentioned getting the 8350 or 8370 over the 9590, would you recommend the 9370 or does it share the same downsides of it's 5ghz counterpart, the 9590..?
@@zacharysniadach8399 The VRMs are definitely going to get warm, though not as hot as they do on the FX-9590. You can also downclock the FX-9370 a bit to reduce temps, so you should be fine.
I totally feel you there. I remember my old FM2 platform that used a 750k that I updated to a 860k. I had a gtx 960 paired with it and the CPU was a huge bottleneck in most games. Still, for a cheap and broke gamer, it did the job. I was able to play everything around console FPS with much higher detail compared to consoles of the time.
I still run an FX9590 to this day, the key to them IMO is that they chased a headline number and to get them, threw all efficiency out the window. The trick to them is to undervolt them a little. It makes a pretty big difference towards cooling for very, very little difference in performance. Have mine on a Sabertooth r3.0 and that's beefy enough it handles it all no bother.
I built an 8320e system in 2014 and my Asrock 990 fatality board has just failed. I paid $120 for cpu and it plays every 2021 game I have so I consider that a great purchase. I also noticed friends that had better initial Intel chips, watch their experience tank and become almost obsolete in the same period of time..
yep only i7's of that era help up great, but whoever bought i5's or i3's definitely didn't because you know how everyone was parroting same bullcrap "i5 is all you need for gaming". ofc if you regularly upgrade your pc then they were fine but whoever wanted most possible lifespan out of their systems or upgraded only when their pc couldnt run games at 60fps didnt invest well. Its the same situation with vram in video cards.
Second-hand Gigabtyte GA-990FXA-UD5 just failed during testing after it's 3rd chassis transfer - I feel your pain Bro. Currently limping along with a AS Rock backup but I'm probably just going to buy another 990FXA so I can rig my old watercooler bracket 1-for-1. Still on the fence about 8350 vs 9590 even after this. I mean it's now or never for the hot one!
Another very well explained and detailed video. Thanks for sharing so much knowledge about the FX's with us, they were never the best architecure but also never deserved the hate they got, also they are quite unique and very interesting to study. Back in 2012-13-14 people laughed about the future proof advertising but AMD proved everyone was wrong, their 9 year old FX-8350 can still handle modern titles at good frame rates and with good consistency, quite impressive for a CPU that has less IPC than a Core i3. (btw i still have an i3 4170, good chip in 2016 when i bought it but that CPU is beyond useless right now, it struggles with microsoft word 2019 if i add too many pictures in the document). I hope my english is decent enough and hope to see an FX-8150 vs FX-8350 video some day! Cheers from Brazil mate!
Awesome video. I have my 8350 overclock and stable at 4.7 on air. Love it. Does what I need it to do. Plays most modern games that I do play at 60 fps or more. Mostly play retro games so don't a modern system so much. Its crazy that this old Cpu can still be relevant all these years later
Always enjoy these old FX CPU type videos. The only board capable of running a FX-9590 out of the box reliably is the Asus TUF Sabertooth R3.0. This is what I have mine paired with. I was shocked to see those Gigabyte VRMs exceeding 100C. The Sabertooth R3 maxes out at about 54C under full AVX artificial load and the CPU can be pushed all the way up to about 5.5Ghz unstable (about 5.3 stable). I use the AMD MSR Tweak to undervolt each P-state resulting in a much cooler CPU for normal use as I had it running as my HTPC in the living room paired with a reference style GTX-1080 for "console killer" performance. The actual total system power use was just about 10 to 15watts over my old 1800X also with a GTX-1080, though of course was no where near the same performance. Effectively, the fastest GPU one can use with a FX-9590 is a GTX-1060 (GTX-970) or equivalent performance as the CPU was leaving about 35% of the GTX-1080's max performance off the table. However in my use case as a 60FPS capped console killer running all games at max details and 1440p in the living room, it totally achieved that with the GTX-1080 and still destroys every console in quality sans the current PS5 and Xbox sX.
@@bsantos1994ss That is of course even better than Sabertooth, but usually way more expensive. I lucked out and bought the Crosshair V Formula a few days ago from an old guy that doesn't understand PC's that well for 20€ (also came with PII X6 1055T and 8Gb ram)
When you're pushing a 250 watt TDP CPU, it doesn't exactly surprise anyone it's faster than a console. You could put a $300 rig together and it would be a console killer...
Actually to state the Asus TUF Sabertooth R3.0 as being "The only board capable of reliably running a 9590" is misleading to say the least of it. There are at least 4 board models from Asus that can run a 9590 without VRM thermal issues, namely the Sabertooth 2.0, 3.0, the Crosshair V and the Crosshair V-Z. In each case these boards typically run a 9590 without issue but even in this case it is suggested to have a little airflow to the VRM heatsinks anyway. I've ran all 4 models with a variety of FX chips, from the lowly 4100 to my 9590 to know this as fact - I even run them on Ln2 and have topped 8GHz under benching conditions with each board before, that's how I know about how well the VRM's in these hold up to the load these chips can place on them. As for how fun they are - I love 'em. I haven't found a more tweakable chip/platform than AM3+ and FX and it's not about the results so much as it's how much you can get out of them vs what you'd expect and they always seem to give more. No CB/CBB issues to worry about and at subzero temps they happily run all day long too so going "Full Pot" with these isn't even an issue to worry about. That's why out of all the different sockets and so on I've ran over the years, FX is my favorite period.
I have an MSI 970a Krait Edition motherboard and an fx 8320. I've never had any performance issues. With windows 10 runs anything I throw at it. People believe the hype that it is poor performing. I get told all the time. But they have no idea how good it runs.
@@ivo3598 +1 = I'm onna' Phenom II 1100@4GHz.(H100i cooling) And YES I can live without SSSSE-numbers&stuff ;-) ..'cause SO MANY(old)games and so little...time to be a gamer nowadays :-O (sigh)
I really like comparisons like these. I have like 10 FX-9590 chips I got on clearance at Fry’s awhile back. I wanted to bin them and resell later... anyway it would be cool to see these all under a nice AIO and the latest revision 990FX boards - and running at 5.0GHz. I think for 1080p 60FPS or 75FPS gameplay these are solid chips still. --- Finally: RAM. 2400MHz 16GB DDR3 kits are pretty affordable on eBay right now. Would love to see the performance with higher clocked RAM like that and tightened timings
just bought a 8590 since i wanted one because of nostalgia AND because it will be my server cpu (its the best for the buck in this department. 8 cores, extremely high undervolt/overclock capabilitys, and also the best linux drivers out there)
If a processor could become a cult classic, it would definitely be FX. I still have an 8350 kicking around that I hope to put into a new system at some point.
Thanks for the professionally made video. Last month I bought myself an fx 8320e to replace the phenom 1045t. I work in Adobe Premiere, the difference is very big.
It is. People keep arguing that the Phenom II was faster than the FX, those people obviously haven't used both. Sure, if you overclock a Phenom II x6 to 4.2GHz it's competitive with an FX @ 4.2GHz but as soon as you run modern software that uses AVX the Phenom II loses badly. The Phenom II also becomes a 200W+ chip at those speeds where FX can hit 4.2GHz @ 125W. Phenom II was a good chip, FX was a worthy successor.
Excellent, excellent work. I never understood why the 9590 was so bad at that time, and now I can see the high-end motherboard is a big issue even now (besides power consumption) for people that are looking to get a decent pc nowadays. Luckily, I had a FX 8350 and wanted to upgrade my system, so I waited and looked everywhere to see a Ryzen 1600 AF at good price and I got it for 99 dollars, thanks to you. I wish I can support your channel now, in the near future I surely will.
The 9590 was considered bad because it needed a top of the line motherboard to run at stock clocks, while at same time you could get a 8320 or 8350 for about 100€ less, which didn't need such a high end motherboard. And if you did get a top of the line motherboard, those cpus could generally be overclocked to be just as fast as the 9590 with similar cooling while still being cheaper.
So the FX-9590 is most likely a special bin product. Has anyone tested undervolting it? Or down clocking it with lower voltage? Basicw, has anyone tested if you can get it to perform the same as the FX-8350 while using less power than it and running cooler?
owner of 8350 started with ati 7850 and 8gb of RAM, now im on 1070ti with 16gb of RAM and I can run everything I want, some games can be even run on 4K at 30-50 fps :D
Lol, so amazing to know about the fx proccesors, i have save a fx 6300 with mb, 16gb ram ddr3 1866mhz and a cooler thermaltake and know is still working well is great
Edit: i didn't know here that FX-9590 has 5Ghz only for 1-4threads, on all core tasks it drops to 4.7ghz! My FX-8350 at 4.8ghz all core OC scores: 760cb Multi, 115cb Single and it draws total system power around 330-340W(without gpu load). So i would expect something like 780-800cb from 9590 4.9-5ghz and you should keep that cpu below 57c. As for cooling, power consumption and performance the sweet spot is 4.4-4.5ghz 260W total system power draw(without gpu load) something like CM 212 Turbo should do fine i guess on 22c room. For 4.7 Zalman CNPS20X,Noctua NH-D15 or Deepcool Assassin III would do the job at 22-23c room. Personally i understand why amd said that you should use Liquid cooler for 9590, because the target of that cpu is 4.7-5ghz and max temp 57c. I Recommend 240mm+ liquid cooler for any OC at or above 4.8ghz and stay at or below 57c. My PC: OS: Windows 10 Bios: APM Off, Power target +30%(130%). CPU: AMD FX-8350 4.8ghz(24x200) 1.525v LLC: Medium on load the voltages goes down to 1.452v, i tried 1.512v at load 1.440v and it wasn't stable | 51c at 22-23c room. Motherboard: Asus crosshair v formula z: NB 2200 and HT-link 2200, when i oc NB my system reacts strange on games it feels like it skips frames or something no idea thats why i leave NB and HT at stock so im unlucky when it comes to NB OC maybe because i buyed a used motherboard and there is possibility taht the user degraded the 990fx chipset etc. Ram: Patriot Viper 1866mhz 10-11-10-30 timings 1.5v. I Decided to drop my oc to 4.7ghz 1.475v(in load 1.404v) LLC-Medium. Update: AMD FX-8350 4.5Ghz - Noctua NH-D15 1.4v(1.344v in Load) Medium LLC AMD FX-8350 anything above 4.5Ghz and you will need 360-420mm Liquid Cooler to keep it at 55-57c(Max). Unless you got A/C and your room is always 20-22c, then Noctua NH-D15 can keep the CPU at 4.6-4.7Ghz. But its really close to Max Temp. That's why i droped my OC to 4.5Ghz, because i can't fit 360 or 420mm Radiator on my Case, in summer my room is 30c++ Noctua NH-D15 vs Arctic Liquid Freezer II 240mm are equal. thats why you need 360 or 420mm AIO.
Vishera 8 core at 5 ghz will get about 812 multi , 119 single in R 15 on windows 7 64 bit if running properly and program affinity set to real time. Power consumption is all over the board, each chip has it's own voltage /frequency wall - process improvements allowed the post batch 1429 8XXX chips to have more potential when it came to efficiency ( generally ). I've had examples that were stable at 4.95 ghz at 1.44 volts and others that required that much voltage at 4.4ghz ( in the same motherboard CHV-Z with same ram, cooling, psu etc.) 9XXX are real wild cards - stock voltage with turbo engaged for my 9370 will hit 1.58 volts but at the same time it was one of the chips requiring the least voltage to run prime 95 stably at 4ghz. HT link should be 2600mhz at stock on a 990FX chipset board , the CHV-Z will however set it to 2200mhz if it knows the settings you are using will be unstable ( have no idea why, but it's what mine does). Crank up the ram voltage to 1.65 volts and see if that helps. FX is a bit strange in that it will tolerate instability and keep on running -albeit poorly. If you open HWINFO the very last reading it will put up will detect instability in the cache and memory - very helpful when trying to figure out what is causing problems, task manager performance tab will also show hard faults. I have better luck with my CHV-Z's (2) when combined with FX chips using very high LLC and having as little v-droop as possible and no voltage overshoot. Other motherboards are quite different even when paired with the same cpu and supporting cast. MSI 990FXA GD-80 is probably my favorite and it has no LLC - here is why ruclips.net/video/DbVo7q2GHh0/видео.html ruclips.net/video/-pi2_eDey20/видео.html
@@cssorkinman Software can't see voltage overshoot and undershoot, that is why medium(25%) is the best option to use if you don't have something to accurately monitor the voltage. High is risky, and anything above high is suicide for me. So if you want to keep your AMD FX for long time, i recommend medium(25%) on asus boards and in general the middle option is the best when it comes to LLC usually. As for Asus boards, it drops HT-Link to 2200mhz even if you tweak a little. So it doesn't detect anything it just drops the HT-link to 2200mhz when you change the stock settings and on 2400mhz NB/HT-Link its not stable even if i put 1.25-1.3v both on CPU/NB and NB, it doesn't matter what voltage i put or whatever i tweak its not stable. But NB stability is hard to detect, you have to use the system daily to see if its stable or not.
@@hliasunknown HWINFO does a great job of monitoring overshoots, v-droop - give it a chance :). I'm sure it's not as accurate as having a DMM monitoring it but it good enough for what we are doing. As for longevity , keep Vishera cool and it's very hard to kill it or degrade it . I have batch 1235 and 1241 FX -8350's that have ran almost daily for nearly 9 years at 5.1 and 5 ghz and at the settings I've mentioned - neither have degraded any measurable amount since about the second week I ran them. My CHV-Z's only drop HT link when I start pushing the memory but it's possible different bios versions behave differently. One thing that will screw up a Vishera system is upping NB voltage - especially on ASUS boards that tend to run higher actual voltage than MSI or GIGA boards to begin with. However CPU/NB is fine up to 1.4 volts generally. I'd back off the cpu voltage and pop up an LLC level. You really shouldn't need more voltage anywhere but the ram at 1866mhz and timings you are running. Think about it, you are running HT link underclocked as well as a NB frequency of 2200 which should be a slam dunk for any FX - feed that ram some onions - give' em 1.65 volts - don't cost nutin :) .
TDP is how hot a CPU gets, not actual wattage usage. Another thing to take note of is that total wattage use is wattage use when the CPU is at 100% utilization, NOT when the CPU is running a game at a locked 60 fps. Another thing to take note of is efficiency. It eats up 1000 watts to finish a task within a few seconds as opposed to 50 watts in the span of a week or at all.
Me still rocking an fx6300 on a basic motherboard and I still love how it's performs well specially Gaming at 1080p 60fps on 2021. Here's my PC specs. Pc specs CPU: FX6300 OC@4.2 GHz RAM: 16GB Dual Channel DDR3 @1600 MHz GPU: RX580 OC edition 4GB (Sapphire Nitro Plus) Motherboard: M5A78L-M LX3 SSD: 250gb WD Green m.2 (SATA 6) HDD: 3.5 inch 1TB Seagate Barracuda : 3.5 inch 230GB Seagate Barracuda : 2.5 inch 500GB Western Digital BLUE : 2.5 inch 500GB HGST (Toshiba) PSU: Silverstone 700w 80+ WHITE ST70F-ES230 Fans: Deepcool Gammax 400 with ID cooling XF-12025-ARGB fan 3pc. ID Cooling DF-12025-ARGB TRIO 1pc ID Cooling 120mm slim LED lights 9pcs 12v LED lights
Good comparison, as allways 👍 Given that this silicon shortage sucks, at least there is a bit of luck in that almost 10 year old hardware is still usable and you proved it more than once, especially if you can get good overclock from it. I also enjoyed the process of squeezing every megahertz out of it.
I think the 9590 is thermal throttling on the OC, which is why the temperatures aren't much higher than the 8350. One of the biggest downsides of the FX series was the thermal limit being only 62-70°C. That's why AMD recommended the 9370 and 9590 be water cooled only.
@@RATechYT The HTC thermal limit and hysteresis is set up by the BIOS, so it's whatever the limit is configured to, unless it's tweaked or disabled at runtime. If it's set to 80C that's pretty useless as a thermal throttle since it's well outside the specified thermal limit. (I'm not saying your BIOS doesn't do that.)
@@TheUAoB Not sure what you're trying to explain. I've been told many times that AMD FX throttles at 61°C and I've been aware of that since basically day one cause that's what it says on AMD's website. I had a chance to use a few mid range to high end AM3+ motherboards over the last few years and using the default settings these are the results that I got - below 80°C performance is as expected without any reduction in scores in software or frame rates in games. Once you hit 80°C it starts throttling and there's a clear decrease in performance. Once again, that's without any changes in the BIOS and while using latest versions of it.
I like it when people go back and review older CPUs in a modern context. Nice work. Also, the reason the 5950X and 5800X have a similar power usage is because the 5950X clocks its 16 cores lower than the 5800X's 8 cores while under load. You couldn't have done that with the 9590 vs the 8350 because they have the same core count.
Great video. If my GIgabyte 990FX - Gaming mb hadn't died on me ; I was one upgrade from having what would of been one the best AMD FX builds any one could have. I had to move on after that mb died - I would of loved to have completed that FX build though.
Thank you, this is a very informative video. I've been trying to build an ultimate windows xp retro pc and pcpartpicker recommends fx resies processors due to it being more likey to still have drivers for this ancient OS. still need to find a matx MB because I want to make this pc compact and quiet.
nice work. back then I was rocking a AMD 960T @ 3.9~4.2GHz. When the FX dropped the i7 4770k looked way better at min fps so went that way and then swapped for a 4790k which I still use today. I think it was a better choice. would like to know how much better a 8350 is than my 960t @ 3.9~4.2 could be.
The 4770k was a much better choice without a doubt. I don't know if I'll ever compare those CPUs, but I have a Phenom II X6 1090T vs FX-8350 comparison, which you can watch over here: ruclips.net/video/WMV_GL1fhpo/видео.html
I found a Asrock N68c-gs fx on my attic and i bought a cheap used FX 8120. Well, this was not the best idea. It throttles after a few minutes down to 1,4 ghz from 3,2.. burning VRMs i guess. Now i'm looking for a 6300 but there are no deals under or about 15€ out there 🤔
conclusions are spot on. Fx8350/70 is the best AM3+ Buy nowadays, it is the CPU that will perform closest to a newer part on the cheap, and will be able to be paired with up to Rx570 without fear of a bottleneck. Fx9590 is a bad choice since a cheap R5 1600 build will outperform it radically, even at stock paired with stock cooler and low end motherboard. Fx6300 on the extreme cheap will still provide good usage for old tittles, casual gaming and productivity, with a much smoother experience than an old gen i3 and comparable to an old gen i5 (maybe even better in some scenarios) But at the end of the day it's 2023 and all Fx are slowly becoming more and more obsolete... maybe Fx8350 still has 1/2 years left being able to run modern games, but alea iacta est
Bought the 6300-FX in 2013. Great CPU, but I used the stock cooler and overclocked it to play Hitman. Unfortunately, it eventually died. However, I bought it again from eBay in a used state and upgraded the cooler. Now I'm wondering how much it can be underclocked and if this CPU is worth putting in a home server.
Great video, as per usual. The 6300 was THE budget choice for the last console generation and really did run almost everything in 2019. My problem with it is , i really don't know what i sould buy next, since i got it for around 25-30e and everything better is being sold for over 100$. I don't know if that sort of money is worth it?
Indeed prices have gone up since the coronavirus crap and all else that happened. It goes for everything really. I'd expect prices won't go down anytime soon so you'd rather save up for a decent AM4 system with an upgrade path. DDR5 won't be cheap, I can assure you.
@@herobrinecyberdemon8104 I am not sure if Intel is a good pick, the 10400f is around 40€ cheaper than the 3600, and the 5600x and 3700x are around the price of 10700f
Great Pos --- t nice Video RA TECH Crazy these are 12 year old CPU'S My buddy bought a FX6300 6Core when we were younger fellas.. he loved it !! Running 4 Raptor 10,000 rom Hard drives in Raid - 0 as 1 drive. I bought the FX8150 8Core with the same setup... Insanely pleased every game ran incredible smooth.. We also used ATI Latest Graphic cards,.. I had the ATI HD 5870 2G DDR5 Special Edition 3 x fan graphic card... still love it today sad I sold it ... Now I use a GTX 1660 Ti 6G DDR6 and I am blown away by this card and I use a Sabrient GOLD 2T 5000mbs connected to my second PCI-E Slot As my hard-drive. Insane loading and install speeds... Now a Ryzen 3600X Very pleased.. GTX 1080 8G MSI OC'D 7000mbs Kingston dual M.2 running in raid > for power now speed..
Seems like it's been forever since I built my last gaming PC (FX-8320 + ASRock 990FX-Extreme4). Even though I stopped gaming, this PC is still running...just repurposed as my Plex server. It has run 24/7/365 since 2015 without a hitch. I heard the same BS about FX being a downgrade, but the FX-8320 performed noticeably better than the 1055T it replaced.
It is what it is. I talk about undervolting in my FX-9590 review (ruclips.net/video/7KpI9s_sbZk/видео.html - 12:39), unfortunately it only reduces the power consumption by 10%.
@@RATechYT 1.418v yes, but thats for 4.7 Ghz and 5 Ghz turbo, which I disabled as it doesnt bring anything to the table anyways. With disabled APM (which when enabled costs a bit of performance on my Sabretooth), disabled turbo and stock 4.7 Ghz at about 1.35v or even less, I think you'd save a some more watts while achieving the same performance. I understand this wasnt an optimzation video (good idea maybe?), but when I saw that 1.5v .. oof :)
@@Spicysauced I absolutely agree with you. By disabling Turbo and APM I also saw a small increase in multi-core test using Cinebench R15, while the single core dropped by just one point. I actually did exactly that at the overclocking part of this video; APM & Turbo were disabled, while the CPU was locked at 4.7 GHz, you can even compare the Cinebench scores. The voltage was left on auto, which is why it was jumping to 1.5v. I bet if I tried to undervolt I'd also be able to drop the Vcore to ~1.35-1.4v. Can't remember if I forgot to do that or was too tired and simply didn't want to waste anymore time.
@@RATechYT Nice seeing someone observing the same. When I found out that APM costs a bit performance I googled rahter long and found .. nothing. In general I feel like reviewers back in the day, but also people using FX today mostly dont really know how to tweak/use the platform. In 2011/12 it got flak because of "Muh FpS in SkYrIm" wasnt on par with a 2500k (so surely, it MUST be bad right?) and today its obsolete. It will only be remembered as "the space heater" and "not true 8 cores bruh", while its real intention and reason for designing it the way it was designed will fade away.
@@Spicysauced FX (Piledriver) was a good value proposition for years and is clearly performing even better now compared to similarly priced CPUs it competed with. What I don't understand is why some refuse to believe that it has aged much better thanks to its core count, and how some reviewers manage to make an overclocked 8 core FX perform the same or worse than a 2C/4T processor.
just recently use ATLAS OS on a am1 athlon 5350 system the removal of windows 10 bloat and paranoiaware. the lil 5350 can finally push its hardest. Atlas os is pretty neat.
@@talvisota327 i7 920 is 2008. 12 year old i7 870 or x3440 will beat it too, convincingly. c2q won't though. c2q will lose badly... it might compete with the fx 6000 at it's best.
i still have an fx 8350 (overclocked to 4.8ghz) but it is slowly reaching its limits. will then upgrade to a ryzen 5800x or even because the successor 6800x
El Fx8350 se queda corto comparado con las nuevas generaciones Ryzen , pero después de ver muchas reseñas mejor compré el Ryzen 7 3700x ya que tiene mejor relación de eficiencia consumo energético que el 5800x además es más barato.
Hi, I wanted to let you know I discovered something new and caught me by a surprise.... My FX 8320 felt like more core has been added up when I enabled UNLOCK cpu setting in bios, please can you check yours too?
Was curious, did you end up using an air cooler for the FX-9590? If so, which one? I had been browsing some old forum topics as of late concerning the 9370 and 9590, and had noticed some post of people saying they were using air coolers. It makes me wonder slightly how problematic it would have been to find a proper air cooler back then, as many coolers did not list their max TDP.
Yes, I used a Zalman CNPS14X cooler, which was enough for this CPU. Now I'm rocking a Dark Freezer X128 tower, which would also be more than enough for the 9590.
In "these HW days" where's my/your Phenom II x6 1100 at around 4.1GHz+ ? ..with that said: +1 for the AMD FX "server" - now make 'em desktop FAST! - series. (what I heard)
Nice test RA Tech! Guys do you think a fx 8350 (or 8320) would work on a M4A89GTD/PRO?? (i need SSE 4.1+ to start some "recent game") I can't do an upgrade to the whole configuration now :( In the specs my mobo supports up to fx 8150 (beta support). At the moment I have a Phenom II x4 955 @ 3.8Mhz with a Scythe mugen 2 revB - 14 gb ram @ 1600mhz - rx 580 4 gb
You should be able to run an FX-8350 with that motherboard. Just make sure to have the 3029 BIOS version. Make sure to keep the VRM temps in check just in case. www.asus.com/us/supportonly/M4A89GTD%20PROUSB3/HelpDesk_BIOS/ nambulous.wordpress.com/2014/04/29/amd-fx-8350-on-m4a89gtd-prousb3/
I dont know about you guys, but im still running the 8350 as my main daily driver. Best CPU ive ever had. If i could, i'd pull it out of its socket and sleep with it snug in my bed.
@@stevesmith1383 Ive had three CPU's in a desktop pc, two AMD and one Intel. Had 4 laptops, all have had Intel cpu's. AMD, and specifically the 8350, have never failed me. Its a proper workhorse that was truly ahead of its time in my opinion. I'll be upgrading to a Ryzen 9 next year, so it'll be sad to switch it out, but it'll be installed and run on my testbench.
@@detesla9575 that's still only 3 as I wouldn't compare a desktop to a laptop cpu still a very small sample size for the claim "best CPU I've ever had" (plus what were it's competitors in your possession?) I've owned more smartphones than that (I have actually owned hundreds of cpus and used dozens personally but I'm not a normal consumer in that sense) everyone is entitled to their opinion...but ahead of it's time? it's bad architecture lead to weak IPC (slower than previous Phenom 2 cpus clock for clock), it's bad core design led to weaker multi core performance due to 2 cores being in a module that prevent efficiency (this actually led to a lawsuit), and it used alot of power. AMD gave up on the whole design, only released 1 revision on their mainstream platform via Piledriver ( your 8350 is piledriver compared to the first gen bulldozer), and then gave up to go work on AM4 and Ryzen (they released some revisions on the Fm2 and Fm2+ but those were smaller platforms limited to 4 cores) The only thing that it had going where it was ahead of it's time was it's high core count. my point is that "best" is relative to what you've owned. At one point in my life my best cpu was a Pentium 4 2.8 ghz cause I knew nothing about cpus and it got the job down for me when I was a kid. That in no want makes Pentium 4 not a horrible bunch of CPUs
@@stevesmith1383 FX processors were indeed ahead of their time compared to equivalently priced Intel options thanks to their core count. Yes, the architecture wasn't great, IPC was worse than Phenom II and those 8 FX cores had a hard time catching up to a 4C/8T Intel processor, yet FX processors still had their own advantages. If you're really interested, here are a few videos where I compare FX processors to Phenom II and Intel CPUs: FX-8350 vs i5-3470: ruclips.net/video/qCFeWb4skhE/видео.html FX-8350 vs i3-7100: ruclips.net/video/tl_Y4HXqBFQ/видео.html FX-8350 vs X6 1090T: ruclips.net/video/WMV_GL1fhpo/видео.html FX-8350 vs R5 1400: ruclips.net/video/uH3eTvXXzFA/видео.html FX-6300 vs i3-3240: ruclips.net/video/DNP3WWCWW90/видео.html FX-6300 vs X6 1090T: ruclips.net/video/Lzh6rBTN-iw/видео.html After watching many videos about FX processors and hearing how terrible they are, I never expected my FX-8350 to last me longer than a few years after purchase. It turned out I was wrong, because I only decided it was time to upgrade after about 8 years. The competing quad-core i5 processors didn't fair as well - they already started showing signs of struggle not too long after release, in games such as BF4 (2013), Crysis 3 (2013), Witcher 3 (2015), The Division (2016) and many others, while the FX-8350 handled those games much better thanks to its core count. After using dozens of processors, I honestly don't think FX deserved as much hate as it got.
So, the 9590 is just a binned & overclocked 8350/70. If one got lucky at the silicone lottery, he could match its performance with the cheaper 8-cores.
What is your say on HPET on/off on FX (6300) processors. And also did you test system with APM on/off to see if there is difference (performance, power consumption, frame-time stability)?
HPET was untouched. When it comes to APM, at stock it was enabled (default), while with the overclocked results it was disabled. Disabling APM doesn't seem to increase performance, at least not in my case. Results are usually within margin of error.
@@RATechYT Can you test if HPET does anything with games. My lack of knowledge, equipment and time prevents me do do this myself. You could maybe add this test to already tested CPUs. HPET off is supposed to help with latency/frame timing since game can be rendered asap instead o waiting for timer (Less precision but more free-something).> That is what I found from research, but I can't test it on my own. Thanks in advance.
Given Hardware Unboxeds coverage on Nvidia driver CPU overhead, it would be interesting to see how these old CPUs fare when paired with a comparable AMD GPU such as the 5600xt. Also comparisons between AP's like Vulkan vs DX11 etc, on these old CPUs would be neat to see in today's games which should have more mature Vulkan and DX12 support compared to when these CPUs were commercialy viable since back then DX11 was basically the only API devs utilized
Hi @RA Tech, I hope you are well. This might seem like a silly question, but how is the power usage of the FX 9590 vs the FX 8350 when you have VSync at 60Hz? Since some task might be slightly less work to the FX 9590 because it will likely complete some calculations in shorter time than the FX 8350.
I'm assuming the power draw would be very similar with VSync enabled. The only difference between both CPUs is their clock speed, and by limiting the frame rate we would make them deliver the exact same performance, so I don't see why the power consumption would be any different.
@@RATechYT thank you for your response, I appreciate it. From my findings is that my Graphics Card uses much less power when I have VSync enabled (@60Hz/75Hz) in a game where I was doing; for example, 80FPS and then my GPU does ~70W instead of 108W both @1303Mhz clockspeed. It is likely that the same applies for CPUs with VSync, especially in very single threaded titles where mostly one core is being used. The power draw is affected by the utilization of a CPU core; for example, in HWInfo64 you can enable an OSD feature that calculates clock-speeds in terms of Utilization like follows: Lets say 60% on core 2: 4100Mhz X 0.6 = 2460Mhz effective usage and similar slightly more power draw.
@@hitbm4755 Sorry, I should've clarified that the power draw will obviously decrease with VSync enabled compared to it being disabled, since the PC has less work to do. What I meant is that both processors would have similar power draw *between each other,* despite the fact that one has a higher clock speed than the other, because they'd be doing the same amount of work.
@@RATechYT I agree, I think it would be an interesting scenario, but I definitely think the FX 9590 would start drawing more power in the case that a game is already maxing out a FX 8350 98-100%; even with VSync; and say also require 91% usage on a FX 9590.
@@RATechYT Gigabyte rev 4 ud3 motherboard you are using for testing with? I have rev 3 of this board and am having some weird issues when running 4 sticks of memory and gigabytes web site bios updates don't work but sure it only says rev 3.1 if i run 2 sticks of Kingston 1866mhz i can change multiplier to 2132mhz but when i put 4 sticks in it won't boot unless it's set to 1600mhz? Any help is appreciated Just to let you know i have already asked all the bigger names on youtube and been totally blanked by them alll!!!!! so many thanks for your time all the best from Scotland
@@MWSRD I'd say the reason for it is because of the strain you're putting on the memory controller. Two sticks of RAM don't strain the IMC as much and are usually capable of reaching higher clock speeds than four.
Had an 8320, 8350 and 9590 after having a Phenom 955 and before that a 2.8Ghz Athlon (not sure of the model). The Athlon did feel slower, but all the others felt like the same CPU. I'm an AMD fanboy if you can't tell (I have always ran AMD GPUs) but that doesn't mean I won't recognize a superior product- Intel was spanking AMD back then. I just had to switch to Intel since AMD had no better CPUs at the time. I'm still using the same 4790k, accept it's at 4.8 now paired with a 5700xt- best value PC part I've ever bought. Starting a new build soon and I'm going back to AMD- hoping the 7700x3d is available when I get to it (not released yet at the time of this comment, but it's been announced)- then pair it with a 7700xt so that I have ALL the 7s
Well, it's pretty trivial to get 2600 mhz on CPU_NB on FX83xx CPUs for a nice performance boost. Strange, that your chip/mobo combos only go as high as 2400. Same goes for memory. FX can easily overclock the cheap oem Samsung BCK0 sticks fron stock 1600 to 2133-2400 with timings in 10-10-10-28 range at 1.65V Even my m5a97 pro and 78lmt usb3 can do that.
On my Sabertooth 990FX R.2 mobo i did a 4.7Ghz OC with a FX8150.. NB was set to 2.6GHz and for some reason i didn't get the ram past 1833Mhz... did however get to tighten the timings to CL9 @ 1.5v. Dual channel 16Gb corsair (lpx?) sticks with a stock timing of CL10 or CL11... can't remember which one..stock "XMP" (DOPCH?) was 1600Mhz. My point being that if you can't get higher speeds with your memory, you can get a close to similar boost by tighten your timings.. at least that's how it appeared to me after stresstesting and benching the system for a week. FX "8 core" CPU's are still viable today for most people getting into pc for gaming and "normal" workloads...however i won't recommend anything below that. (Current system being R7 3800XT ,5700XT ,X570,32Gb 3600Mhz CL17)
I used to be able to easily overclock the NB beyond 2500 MHz on all FX processors, though after upgrading from the 2x4 HyperX Genesis to 2x8 HyperX Fury, that number dropped. For example I was able to hit around 2630 MHz on the FX-6300, yet after the memory upgrade I can't exceed 2200 MHz. The drop isn't as big with the FX-8350, but before the upgrade I was still able to reach a higher frequency, which you can see in my older videos. Now trying to set the same clock speeds results in blue screen. It's a similar situation with memory overclocking, albeit it's not as bad. If before I could push the clock speed to 2100-2200 MHz, now I can't exceed 2050 MHz. Honestly overclocking the NB any more wouldn't make much of a difference anyways. While Phenom II benefits from it quite a bit, improvement on AMD FX processors doesn't seem to be as big in my experience. We'd maybe get an extra frame or two at best with a higher RAM & NB overclock.
Bro my RX 580 COUPLED WITH PHENOM 1100T DOES FULL ULTRA SETTINGS IN FORZA HORIZON 3 and 4 titles what are u showing bruv forget 8350 it can do far more than my PHENOM cpu.
Perhaps, yet if the VRM temperatures on an 8+2 board reach 60 degrees C using a stock FX-8350, on a 3+1 phase board it's definitely hitting 100 degrees, if not more. I'd definitely stick at least to a 6+2 phase motherboard when using an 8 core FX, such as the MSI 970 GAMING.
@@RATechYT VRM Around 70- 80 deg C on prime 95. Single exhaust fan. About 40 - 50 C on processor. Ga 78lmt s2p. Can run 4.2 Ghz if enable the single module per core option. Loooollllll. The VRM still runs cooler than an unlocked 4 to 5 core phenom ii 960T.
@@RATechYT Around that. I do not remember any numbers hitting 90 deg C. Will retest and update. That msi mobo mentioned cost 4 times in the used market compared the mobo I am using at the moment.
@@YTSZAZU That is actually impressive. Though as I mentioned earlier, with an FX-8350 it would most likely hit 100 degrees C. I used to have a Gigabyte GA-970A-D3 (4+1), which was paired with the 8350, and even with 5 case fans it would throttle every now and then. I believe using a fan to cool down the VRMs would've reduce or maybe even eliminated the throttling, though the case was pretty crammed and I only had 120mm fans, so it wasn't really possible. Getting a 990FXA-UD3 fixed the problem, and also allowed me to overclock the CPU. Thanks for the info.
This video is obviously old now, but I enjoyed the comparison. My son uses an overclocked FX-8350 with a AMD RX6600 and it works great. I'm able to clock it to about to about 4.6GHz stable, but my VRMs aren't able to get it stable past this and I still need to implement a lot of tweaks to get it stable even at 4.6. End of the day, it's a good CPU but I also have a 3770K in another build that I like much better and can hands-down destroy the FX, although it was twice the price. The FX8350 architecture just wasn't that good, although you could really get some high clocks with it. I have a pretty beefy cooler for it, and it does blow pretty warm out the back even with that. I also agree, the FX-9590 should be avoided. You really need a liquid cooler for it and absolutely must have a high-end motherboard. It's just not worth it, and was just really the best AMD could do at the time to compete with Intel's flagships.
No one really needs the latest and greatest computer hardware anymore. CPU performance has really peaked out and gaming is just a hobby for any computer enthusiast! As long as a computer can do everything reasonably well then there is no real need for faster and better hardware.... as nearly all computer reviewers will tell their viewers! Everyone knows that most hardware reviews are very rarely legit today so every review has to be taken pretty much with a grain of salt. Do your own research and decide for yourself....! I'm really very happy with my FX8350, GTX 1060 (6GB version), and 32 GB ram computer system! The entire setup cost me less than $120 used and can run pretty much most games quite decently even today in 2024! For a 12 year old CPU, the AMD 8350 was very likely way too good for 2012! This is why the FX line of AMD CPUs was quickly terminated in favour of the Ryzen line of CPUs. AMD finally got something right that could finally outperform Intel CPUs, This is why people who have an FX8350 are still running that same exact FX8350 in 2024. Back in 2012, software and games only had just begun to tap into the potential to use multi-core CPUs in games/software but as soon as software developers learned how to incorporate multiple core processing the FX8350 exhibited its real raw power over Intel processors....!
I have two FX-6300 PC's, one is in my bedroom and the other is my gaming rig which is in the basement. The gaming one has an Asus M5A99X EVO mobo with a massive air cooler, a GTX 1060 6Gb and 16 Gb ram, and I'm able to push 4.9 Ghz stable. Games like COD Warzone are very CPU intensive, it literally stays 100% all the time, still I'm able to play always above 50 fps with all the texture settings in high and I play in a 1920x1200 monitor. I have thought of upgrading to an FX-8350, but I dont think it will make much of a difference.
Thanks for watching! You can support my work here: www.buymeacoffee.com/ratechyt
discord.gg/PFb9cMstZH ▪ instagram.com/ratechyt ▪ twitter.com/ratechyt ▪ facebook.com/ratechyt
How about a video where you see if a framerate cap can help with micro stuttering on older CPUs and more demanding games?
@@elemkay5104 That does help, but only to an extent. You need to cap the frame rate quite a bit for the stutters to disappear.
@@RATechYT At the end of your video you mentioned getting the 8350 or 8370 over the 9590, would you recommend the 9370 or does it share the same downsides of it's 5ghz counterpart, the 9590..?
@@zacharysniadach8399 The VRMs are definitely going to get warm, though not as hot as they do on the FX-9590. You can also downclock the FX-9370 a bit to reduce temps, so you should be fine.
My first pc had a FX 6300 and a R9 380x. In 2016 it played the games I wanted just fine. That first pc will always have a place in my heart!
I totally feel you there. I remember my old FM2 platform that used a 750k that I updated to a 860k. I had a gtx 960 paired with it and the CPU was a huge bottleneck in most games. Still, for a cheap and broke gamer, it did the job. I was able to play everything around console FPS with much higher detail compared to consoles of the time.
I still run an FX9590 to this day, the key to them IMO is that they chased a headline number and to get them, threw all efficiency out the window. The trick to them is to undervolt them a little. It makes a pretty big difference towards cooling for very, very little difference in performance. Have mine on a Sabertooth r3.0 and that's beefy enough it handles it all no bother.
I'm picking up an fx 8350 today and this video has me so excited for my purchase
@14:12 “6300... impressed I am” me too, man. I’ll keep an eye out for an 8 core but imma stick with this for as long as I can
¨4 nucleos 8 hilos *
I built an 8320e system in 2014 and my Asrock 990 fatality board has just failed. I paid $120 for cpu and it plays every 2021 game I have so I consider that a great purchase. I also noticed friends that had better initial Intel chips, watch their experience tank and become almost obsolete in the same period of time..
yep only i7's of that era help up great, but whoever bought i5's or i3's definitely didn't because you know how everyone was parroting same bullcrap "i5 is all you need for gaming". ofc if you regularly upgrade your pc then they were fine but whoever wanted most possible lifespan out of their systems or upgraded only when their pc couldnt run games at 60fps didnt invest well. Its the same situation with vram in video cards.
Second-hand Gigabtyte GA-990FXA-UD5 just failed during testing after it's 3rd chassis transfer - I feel your pain Bro. Currently limping along with a AS Rock backup but I'm probably just going to buy another 990FXA so I can rig my old watercooler bracket 1-for-1.
Still on the fence about 8350 vs 9590 even after this. I mean it's now or never for the hot one!
Another very well explained and detailed video. Thanks for sharing so much knowledge about the FX's with us, they were never the best architecure but also never deserved the hate they got, also they are quite unique and very interesting to study.
Back in 2012-13-14 people laughed about the future proof advertising but AMD proved everyone was wrong, their 9 year old FX-8350 can still handle modern titles at good frame rates and with good consistency, quite impressive for a CPU that has less IPC than a Core i3. (btw i still have an i3 4170, good chip in 2016 when i bought it but that CPU is beyond useless right now, it struggles with microsoft word 2019 if i add too many pictures in the document).
I hope my english is decent enough and hope to see an FX-8150 vs FX-8350 video some day! Cheers from Brazil mate!
Thanks! I'll definitely compare those sooner or later.
Awesome video. I have my 8350 overclock and stable at 4.7 on air. Love it. Does what I need it to do. Plays most modern games that I do play at 60 fps or more. Mostly play retro games so don't a modern system so much. Its crazy that this old Cpu can still be relevant all these years later
Do get any stootering or smoot?
@@Direwoof it can, you have to tweak it quite a bit to get it stable, can take alot of testing
Always enjoy these old FX CPU type videos. The only board capable of running a FX-9590 out of the box reliably is the Asus TUF Sabertooth R3.0. This is what I have mine paired with. I was shocked to see those Gigabyte VRMs exceeding 100C. The Sabertooth R3 maxes out at about 54C under full AVX artificial load and the CPU can be pushed all the way up to about 5.5Ghz unstable (about 5.3 stable). I use the AMD MSR Tweak to undervolt each P-state resulting in a much cooler CPU for normal use as I had it running as my HTPC in the living room paired with a reference style GTX-1080 for "console killer" performance. The actual total system power use was just about 10 to 15watts over my old 1800X also with a GTX-1080, though of course was no where near the same performance. Effectively, the fastest GPU one can use with a FX-9590 is a GTX-1060 (GTX-970) or equivalent performance as the CPU was leaving about 35% of the GTX-1080's max performance off the table. However in my use case as a 60FPS capped console killer running all games at max details and 1440p in the living room, it totally achieved that with the GTX-1080 and still destroys every console in quality sans the current PS5 and Xbox sX.
What about Asus crosshair formula v ?
@@bsantos1994ss That is of course even better than Sabertooth, but usually way more expensive. I lucked out and bought the Crosshair V Formula a few days ago from an old guy that doesn't understand PC's that well for 20€ (also came with PII X6 1055T and 8Gb ram)
When you're pushing a 250 watt TDP CPU, it doesn't exactly surprise anyone it's faster than a console.
You could put a $300 rig together and it would be a console killer...
Actually to state the Asus TUF Sabertooth R3.0 as being "The only board capable of reliably running a 9590" is misleading to say the least of it.
There are at least 4 board models from Asus that can run a 9590 without VRM thermal issues, namely the Sabertooth 2.0, 3.0, the Crosshair V and the Crosshair V-Z. In each case these boards typically run a 9590 without issue but even in this case it is suggested to have a little airflow to the VRM heatsinks anyway.
I've ran all 4 models with a variety of FX chips, from the lowly 4100 to my 9590 to know this as fact - I even run them on Ln2 and have topped 8GHz under benching conditions with each board before, that's how I know about how well the VRM's in these hold up to the load these chips can place on them.
As for how fun they are - I love 'em. I haven't found a more tweakable chip/platform than AM3+ and FX and it's not about the results so much as it's how much you can get out of them vs what you'd expect and they always seem to give more.
No CB/CBB issues to worry about and at subzero temps they happily run all day long too so going "Full Pot" with these isn't even an issue to worry about.
That's why out of all the different sockets and so on I've ran over the years, FX is my favorite period.
@@MrBones-uw8zd the 2.0s that ran 9590s are all dead
I have 2x GA-990FX-Gaming motherboard and FX-8350 in one and FX-6350 in the other and they run like new ,, i will hold out for socket 5 and ddr5
Yaa man I too use this hardware it's still freakin fast like mordern system s just that people don't realise this .
HAH! FIRST-MOWER! ...x6 1100 here ;-P
I have an MSI 970a Krait Edition motherboard and an fx 8320. I've never had any performance issues. With windows 10 runs anything I throw at it. People believe the hype that it is poor performing. I get told all the time. But they have no idea how good it runs.
I got the FX-8350 running my computer to this day which I do everything on, it's a great CPU! Will probably use it for a long time.
It's Great that you keep making videos on older hardware. Keep it up!
Older?
@@dallesamllhals9161 Its About 7 Years old now right?
@@ZenInnovations ..and? ..any reason to do NEW'ish stuff right now?
OH! "Innovations" I get it ♥
FX 8350 is good,8 core now can use in game
Threads+
4 nucleos 8 hilos *
@@danielgimenez4929 8 cores, 4 fpus, 4 bp, decode and i-fetch units and 8 threads*
Not really performance per core is bad
@@ivo3598 +1 = I'm onna' Phenom II 1100@4GHz.(H100i cooling) And YES I can live without SSSSE-numbers&stuff ;-)
..'cause SO MANY(old)games and so little...time to be a gamer nowadays :-O
(sigh)
I really like comparisons like these. I have like 10 FX-9590 chips I got on clearance at Fry’s awhile back. I wanted to bin them and resell later... anyway it would be cool to see these all under a nice AIO and the latest revision 990FX boards - and running at 5.0GHz.
I think for 1080p 60FPS or 75FPS gameplay these are solid chips still.
---
Finally: RAM. 2400MHz 16GB DDR3 kits are pretty affordable on eBay right now. Would love to see the performance with higher clocked RAM like that and tightened timings
just bought a 8590 since i wanted one because of nostalgia AND because it will be my server cpu (its the best for the buck in this department. 8 cores, extremely high undervolt/overclock capabilitys, and also the best linux drivers out there)
If a processor could become a cult classic, it would definitely be FX. I still have an 8350 kicking around that I hope to put into a new system at some point.
regards bro worth it to view your presentation even if its late, worth it for those loving vintage processor to compare, more power bro!
Another great video thank you
Also the 9590 is it possible to undervolt it and then reduce the clocks till it makes a small difference
Thanks for the professionally made video. Last month I bought myself an fx 8320e to replace the phenom 1045t. I work in Adobe Premiere, the difference is very big.
Thanks for your input!
It is.
People keep arguing that the Phenom II was faster than the FX, those people obviously haven't used both.
Sure, if you overclock a Phenom II x6 to 4.2GHz it's competitive with an FX @ 4.2GHz but as soon as you run modern software that uses AVX the Phenom II loses badly. The Phenom II also becomes a 200W+ chip at those speeds where FX can hit 4.2GHz @ 125W.
Phenom II was a good chip, FX was a worthy successor.
thats what i use
Excellent, excellent work. I never understood why the 9590 was so bad at that time, and now I can see the high-end motherboard is a big issue even now (besides power consumption) for people that are looking to get a decent pc nowadays. Luckily, I had a FX 8350 and wanted to upgrade my system, so I waited and looked everywhere to see a Ryzen 1600 AF at good price and I got it for 99 dollars, thanks to you. I wish I can support your channel now, in the near future I surely will.
Much appreciated!
"9590 was so bad at the time"
Instructions per cycle is the main reason, same problem with Bulldozer.
The 9590 was considered bad because it needed a top of the line motherboard to run at stock clocks, while at same time you could get a 8320 or 8350 for about 100€ less, which didn't need such a high end motherboard. And if you did get a top of the line motherboard, those cpus could generally be overclocked to be just as fast as the 9590 with similar cooling while still being cheaper.
So the FX-9590 is most likely a special bin product. Has anyone tested undervolting it? Or down clocking it with lower voltage? Basicw, has anyone tested if you can get it to perform the same as the FX-8350 while using less power than it and running cooler?
owner of 8350
started with ati 7850 and 8gb of RAM, now im on 1070ti with 16gb of RAM and I can run everything I want, some games can be even run on 4K at 30-50 fps :D
Lol, so amazing to know about the fx proccesors, i have save a fx 6300 with mb, 16gb ram ddr3 1866mhz and a cooler thermaltake and know is still working well is great
Edit: i didn't know here that FX-9590 has 5Ghz only for 1-4threads, on all core tasks it drops to 4.7ghz!
My FX-8350 at 4.8ghz all core OC scores: 760cb Multi, 115cb Single and it draws total system power around 330-340W(without gpu load).
So i would expect something like 780-800cb from 9590 4.9-5ghz and you should keep that cpu below 57c.
As for cooling, power consumption and performance the sweet spot is 4.4-4.5ghz 260W total system power draw(without gpu load) something like CM 212 Turbo should do fine i guess on 22c room.
For 4.7 Zalman CNPS20X,Noctua NH-D15 or Deepcool Assassin III would do the job at 22-23c room.
Personally i understand why amd said that you should use Liquid cooler for 9590, because the target of that cpu is 4.7-5ghz and max temp 57c.
I Recommend 240mm+ liquid cooler for any OC at or above 4.8ghz and stay at or below 57c.
My PC:
OS: Windows 10
Bios: APM Off, Power target +30%(130%).
CPU: AMD FX-8350 4.8ghz(24x200) 1.525v LLC: Medium on load the voltages goes down to 1.452v, i tried 1.512v at load 1.440v and it wasn't stable | 51c at 22-23c room.
Motherboard: Asus crosshair v formula z: NB 2200 and HT-link 2200, when i oc NB my system reacts strange on games it feels like it skips frames or something no idea thats why i leave NB and HT at stock so im unlucky when it comes to NB OC maybe because i buyed a used motherboard and there is possibility taht the user degraded the 990fx chipset etc.
Ram: Patriot Viper 1866mhz 10-11-10-30 timings 1.5v.
I Decided to drop my oc to 4.7ghz 1.475v(in load 1.404v) LLC-Medium.
Update:
AMD FX-8350 4.5Ghz - Noctua NH-D15 1.4v(1.344v in Load) Medium LLC
AMD FX-8350 anything above 4.5Ghz and you will need 360-420mm Liquid Cooler to keep it at 55-57c(Max).
Unless you got A/C and your room is always 20-22c, then Noctua NH-D15 can keep the CPU at 4.6-4.7Ghz. But its really close to Max Temp.
That's why i droped my OC to 4.5Ghz, because i can't fit 360 or 420mm Radiator on my Case, in summer my room is 30c++
Noctua NH-D15 vs Arctic Liquid Freezer II 240mm are equal. thats why you need 360 or 420mm AIO.
Vishera 8 core at 5 ghz will get about 812 multi , 119 single in R 15 on windows 7 64 bit if running properly and program affinity set to real time.
Power consumption is all over the board, each chip has it's own voltage /frequency wall - process improvements allowed the post batch 1429 8XXX chips to have more potential when it came to efficiency ( generally ). I've had examples that were stable at 4.95 ghz at 1.44 volts and others that required that much voltage at 4.4ghz ( in the same motherboard CHV-Z with same ram, cooling, psu etc.) 9XXX are real wild cards - stock voltage with turbo engaged for my 9370 will hit 1.58 volts but at the same time it was one of the chips requiring the least voltage to run prime 95 stably at 4ghz.
HT link should be 2600mhz at stock on a 990FX chipset board , the CHV-Z will however set it to 2200mhz if it knows the settings you are using will be unstable ( have no idea why, but it's what mine does). Crank up the ram voltage to 1.65 volts and see if that helps. FX is a bit strange in that it will tolerate instability and keep on running -albeit poorly. If you open HWINFO the very last reading it will put up will detect instability in the cache and memory - very helpful when trying to figure out what is causing problems, task manager performance tab will also show hard faults.
I have better luck with my CHV-Z's (2) when combined with FX chips using very high LLC and having as little v-droop as possible and no voltage overshoot. Other motherboards are quite different even when paired with the same cpu and supporting cast. MSI 990FXA GD-80 is probably my favorite and it has no LLC - here is why ruclips.net/video/DbVo7q2GHh0/видео.html ruclips.net/video/-pi2_eDey20/видео.html
@@cssorkinman Software can't see voltage overshoot and undershoot, that is why medium(25%) is the best option to use if you don't have something to accurately monitor the voltage.
High is risky, and anything above high is suicide for me.
So if you want to keep your AMD FX for long time, i recommend medium(25%) on asus boards and in general the middle option is the best when it comes to LLC usually.
As for Asus boards, it drops HT-Link to 2200mhz even if you tweak a little. So it doesn't detect anything it just drops the HT-link to 2200mhz when you change the stock settings and on 2400mhz NB/HT-Link its not stable even if i put 1.25-1.3v both on CPU/NB and NB, it doesn't matter what voltage i put or whatever i tweak its not stable.
But NB stability is hard to detect, you have to use the system daily to see if its stable or not.
@@hliasunknown HWINFO does a great job of monitoring overshoots, v-droop - give it a chance :). I'm sure it's not as accurate as having a DMM monitoring it but it good enough for what we are doing. As for longevity , keep Vishera cool and it's very hard to kill it or degrade it . I have batch 1235 and 1241 FX -8350's that have ran almost daily for nearly 9 years at 5.1 and 5 ghz and at the settings I've mentioned - neither have degraded any measurable amount since about the second week I ran them. My CHV-Z's only drop HT link when I start pushing the memory but it's possible different bios versions behave differently. One thing that will screw up a Vishera system is upping NB voltage - especially on ASUS boards that tend to run higher actual voltage than MSI or GIGA boards to begin with. However CPU/NB is fine up to 1.4 volts generally. I'd back off the cpu voltage and pop up an LLC level. You really shouldn't need more voltage anywhere but the ram at 1866mhz and timings you are running. Think about it, you are running HT link underclocked as well as a NB frequency of 2200 which should be a slam dunk for any FX - feed that ram some onions - give' em 1.65 volts - don't cost nutin :) .
Love the FX series...
FX 8150 was great
FX 8350 was a bit better..
Bought brand new never used
FX9590 STILLSEALED
NEVER BUILT..
TDP is how hot a CPU gets, not actual wattage usage. Another thing to take note of is that total wattage use is wattage use when the CPU is at 100% utilization, NOT when the CPU is running a game at a locked 60 fps. Another thing to take note of is efficiency. It eats up 1000 watts to finish a task within a few seconds as opposed to 50 watts in the span of a week or at all.
Me still rocking an fx6300 on a basic motherboard and I still love how it's performs well specially Gaming at 1080p 60fps on 2021. Here's my PC specs.
Pc specs
CPU: FX6300 OC@4.2 GHz
RAM: 16GB Dual Channel DDR3 @1600 MHz
GPU: RX580 OC edition 4GB (Sapphire Nitro Plus)
Motherboard: M5A78L-M LX3
SSD: 250gb WD Green m.2 (SATA 6)
HDD: 3.5 inch 1TB Seagate Barracuda
: 3.5 inch 230GB Seagate Barracuda
: 2.5 inch 500GB Western Digital BLUE
: 2.5 inch 500GB HGST (Toshiba)
PSU: Silverstone 700w 80+ WHITE ST70F-ES230
Fans:
Deepcool Gammax 400 with ID cooling XF-12025-ARGB fan
3pc. ID Cooling DF-12025-ARGB TRIO
1pc ID Cooling 120mm slim
LED lights
9pcs 12v LED lights
Good comparison, as allways 👍
Given that this silicon shortage sucks, at least there is a bit of luck in that almost 10 year old hardware is still usable and you proved it more than once, especially if you can get good overclock from it. I also enjoyed the process of squeezing every megahertz out of it.
I think the 9590 is thermal throttling on the OC, which is why the temperatures aren't much higher than the 8350. One of the biggest downsides of the FX series was the thermal limit being only 62-70°C. That's why AMD recommended the 9370 and 9590 be water cooled only.
With my setup, every FX processor that I've tested can reach 80°C before thermal throttling.
Undervolt by -10 to -12 and call it a day.
@@RATechYT The HTC thermal limit and hysteresis is set up by the BIOS, so it's whatever the limit is configured to, unless it's tweaked or disabled at runtime. If it's set to 80C that's pretty useless as a thermal throttle since it's well outside the specified thermal limit. (I'm not saying your BIOS doesn't do that.)
@@TheUAoB Not sure what you're trying to explain. I've been told many times that AMD FX throttles at 61°C and I've been aware of that since basically day one cause that's what it says on AMD's website. I had a chance to use a few mid range to high end AM3+ motherboards over the last few years and using the default settings these are the results that I got - below 80°C performance is as expected without any reduction in scores in software or frame rates in games. Once you hit 80°C it starts throttling and there's a clear decrease in performance. Once again, that's without any changes in the BIOS and while using latest versions of it.
I like it when people go back and review older CPUs in a modern context. Nice work. Also, the reason the 5950X and 5800X have a similar power usage is because the 5950X clocks its 16 cores lower than the 5800X's 8 cores while under load. You couldn't have done that with the 9590 vs the 8350 because they have the same core count.
Great video. If my GIgabyte 990FX - Gaming mb hadn't died on me ; I was one upgrade from having what would of been one the best AMD FX builds any one could have. I had to move on after that mb died - I would of loved to have completed that FX build though.
Thanks for making this video. It was cool.
Thanks for watching!
I loved my 6300 system. But when Ryzen was released it was impossible to ignore the difference in performance.
Sure thing.
Unfortunately the mb is not reporting the cpu temp corectly... you should look at the package temp... thats the correct one !
I appreciate such detailed comparasion, well explained
Thank you, this is a very informative video. I've been trying to build an ultimate windows xp retro pc and pcpartpicker recommends fx resies processors due to it being more likey to still have drivers for this ancient OS. still need to find a matx MB because I want to make this pc compact and quiet.
nice work. back then I was rocking a AMD 960T @ 3.9~4.2GHz. When the FX dropped the i7 4770k looked way better at min fps so went that way and then swapped for a 4790k which I still use today. I think it was a better choice. would like to know how much better a 8350 is than my 960t @ 3.9~4.2 could be.
The 4770k was a much better choice without a doubt.
I don't know if I'll ever compare those CPUs, but I have a Phenom II X6 1090T vs FX-8350 comparison, which you can watch over here:
ruclips.net/video/WMV_GL1fhpo/видео.html
As always i enjoyed your testing and video :)
I found a Asrock N68c-gs fx on my attic and i bought a cheap used FX 8120. Well, this was not the best idea. It throttles after a few minutes down to 1,4 ghz from 3,2.. burning VRMs i guess. Now i'm looking for a 6300 but there are no deals under or about 15€ out there 🤔
I dont alot of trash builds of free stuff from friends and got three boards with fx 6300 cpu. Glad to see you can do budget builds with them still
conclusions are spot on.
Fx8350/70 is the best AM3+ Buy nowadays, it is the CPU that will perform closest to a newer part on the cheap, and will be able to be paired with up to Rx570 without fear of a bottleneck.
Fx9590 is a bad choice since a cheap R5 1600 build will outperform it radically, even at stock paired with stock cooler and low end motherboard.
Fx6300 on the extreme cheap will still provide good usage for old tittles, casual gaming and productivity, with a much smoother experience than an old gen i3 and comparable to an old gen i5 (maybe even better in some scenarios)
But at the end of the day it's 2023 and all Fx are slowly becoming more and more obsolete... maybe Fx8350 still has 1/2 years left being able to run modern games, but alea iacta est
im still using fx8320 o.c to 4.2ghz with 16gb ram and a rx480 8gb i play all my games at high / ultra at good framerates
And your games are?
Bought the 6300-FX in 2013. Great CPU, but I used the stock cooler and overclocked it to play Hitman. Unfortunately, it eventually died. However, I bought it again from eBay in a used state and upgraded the cooler.
Now I'm wondering how much it can be underclocked and if this CPU is worth putting in a home server.
Got a few of mine to 5.0Ghz
Great video, as per usual. The 6300 was THE budget choice for the last console generation and really did run almost everything in 2019.
My problem with it is , i really don't know what i sould buy next, since i got it for around 25-30e and everything better is being sold for over 100$. I don't know if that sort of money is worth it?
Probably saving up an moving to a newer platform is the best option. With these prices buying FX doesn't make sense.
Indeed prices have gone up since the coronavirus crap and all else that happened. It goes for everything really.
I'd expect prices won't go down anytime soon so you'd rather save up for a decent AM4 system with an upgrade path. DDR5 won't be cheap, I can assure you.
@@herobrinecyberdemon8104 I am not sure if Intel is a good pick, the 10400f is around 40€ cheaper than the 3600, and the 5600x and 3700x are around the price of 10700f
@@herobrinecyberdemon8104 coronavirus is a people virus it doesn't impact computers lolol
@@philcooper9225 It's very naive from you to suggest this, as enough companies are making use out of this.
I recommend upgrading the system fx9590 or not
Great Pos --- t nice Video RA TECH
Crazy these are 12 year old CPU'S
My buddy bought a FX6300 6Core when we were younger fellas.. he loved it !! Running 4 Raptor 10,000 rom Hard drives in Raid - 0 as 1 drive.
I bought the FX8150 8Core with the same setup... Insanely pleased every game ran incredible smooth..
We also used ATI Latest Graphic cards,.. I had the ATI HD 5870 2G DDR5 Special Edition 3 x fan graphic card... still love it today sad I sold it ...
Now I use a GTX 1660 Ti 6G DDR6 and I am blown away by this card and I use a Sabrient GOLD 2T 5000mbs connected to my second PCI-E Slot
As my hard-drive. Insane loading and install speeds...
Now a Ryzen 3600X Very pleased..
GTX 1080 8G MSI OC'D
7000mbs Kingston dual M.2 running in raid > for power now speed..
I was told you can upgrade them processors with ddr4 ram with a Asus x370 motherboard what are your thoughts
Seems like it's been forever since I built my last gaming PC (FX-8320 + ASRock 990FX-Extreme4). Even though I stopped gaming, this PC is still running...just repurposed as my Plex server. It has run 24/7/365 since 2015 without a hitch. I heard the same BS about FX being a downgrade, but the FX-8320 performed noticeably better than the 1055T it replaced.
The 9590s Vcore was waaay too high at 1.5v man. For 4.7 Ghz I used ~1.35v iirc. That goes a long way regarding power consumption.
It is what it is. I talk about undervolting in my FX-9590 review (ruclips.net/video/7KpI9s_sbZk/видео.html - 12:39), unfortunately it only reduces the power consumption by 10%.
@@RATechYT 1.418v yes, but thats for 4.7 Ghz and 5 Ghz turbo, which I disabled as it doesnt bring anything to the table anyways.
With disabled APM (which when enabled costs a bit of performance on my Sabretooth), disabled turbo and stock 4.7 Ghz at about 1.35v or even less, I think you'd save a some more watts while achieving the same performance.
I understand this wasnt an optimzation video (good idea maybe?), but when I saw that 1.5v .. oof :)
@@Spicysauced I absolutely agree with you. By disabling Turbo and APM I also saw a small increase in multi-core test using Cinebench R15, while the single core dropped by just one point. I actually did exactly that at the overclocking part of this video; APM & Turbo were disabled, while the CPU was locked at 4.7 GHz, you can even compare the Cinebench scores. The voltage was left on auto, which is why it was jumping to 1.5v. I bet if I tried to undervolt I'd also be able to drop the Vcore to ~1.35-1.4v.
Can't remember if I forgot to do that or was too tired and simply didn't want to waste anymore time.
@@RATechYT Nice seeing someone observing the same. When I found out that APM costs a bit performance I googled rahter long and found .. nothing. In general I feel like reviewers back in the day, but also people using FX today mostly dont really know how to tweak/use the platform. In 2011/12 it got flak because of "Muh FpS in SkYrIm" wasnt on par with a 2500k (so surely, it MUST be bad right?) and today its obsolete. It will only be remembered as "the space heater" and "not true 8 cores bruh", while its real intention and reason for designing it the way it was designed will fade away.
@@Spicysauced FX (Piledriver) was a good value proposition for years and is clearly performing even better now compared to similarly priced CPUs it competed with. What I don't understand is why some refuse to believe that it has aged much better thanks to its core count, and how some reviewers manage to make an overclocked 8 core FX perform the same or worse than a 2C/4T processor.
Can you post settings you used for overclocking fx8350? vcore,nb voltage etc. Thank you!
Yes, I been waiting for this.
just recently use ATLAS OS on a am1 athlon 5350 system the removal of windows 10 bloat and paranoiaware. the lil 5350 can finally push its hardest.
Atlas os is pretty neat.
Holy crap!
Fx 8150 released 10 years ago.
I remember that I had a hard time that should I go for FX-6100 or Phenom II X6 1055T, I chose the Phenom as it was way better back then..
13 year old intel 4 cores are better than these
@@Fin4L6are not really. ofc a core 2 quad is also still usable today but its definitely not as good as an fx with 8 threads
@@talvisota327 i7 920 is 2008. 12 year old i7 870 or x3440 will beat it too, convincingly. c2q won't though. c2q will lose badly... it might compete with the fx 6000 at it's best.
i still have an fx 8350 (overclocked to 4.8ghz) but it is slowly reaching its limits. will then upgrade to a ryzen 5800x or even because the successor 6800x
El Fx8350 se queda corto comparado con las nuevas generaciones Ryzen , pero después de ver muchas reseñas mejor compré el Ryzen 7 3700x ya que tiene mejor relación de eficiencia consumo energético que el 5800x además es más barato.
Great stuff as always.
Thank you!
Hi, I wanted to let you know I discovered something new and caught me by a surprise.... My FX 8320 felt like more core has been added up when I enabled UNLOCK cpu setting in bios, please can you check yours too?
Can Fx8350 fit in bm4 like aorus elite?
do the 95w vs 125w fx's
guru3d did that long time ago and the results on 95w were impressive
anyone have test Elden Ring with FX-9590?
Was curious, did you end up using an air cooler for the FX-9590? If so, which one? I had been browsing some old forum topics as of late concerning the 9370 and 9590, and had noticed some post of people saying they were using air coolers. It makes me wonder slightly how problematic it would have been to find a proper air cooler back then, as many coolers did not list their max TDP.
Yes, I used a Zalman CNPS14X cooler, which was enough for this CPU. Now I'm rocking a Dark Freezer X128 tower, which would also be more than enough for the 9590.
In "these HW days" where's my/your Phenom II x6 1100 at around 4.1GHz+ ?
..with that said: +1 for the AMD FX "server" - now make 'em desktop FAST! - series. (what I heard)
FX 8350 was the best value CPU for his time ! They're still people that are using it to play games like CS:GO
as opposed to people using a i5-2400?
Nice test RA Tech! Guys do you think a fx 8350 (or 8320) would work on a M4A89GTD/PRO?? (i need SSE 4.1+ to start some "recent game")
I can't do an upgrade to the whole configuration now :( In the specs my mobo supports up to fx 8150 (beta support). At the moment I have a Phenom II x4 955 @ 3.8Mhz with a Scythe mugen 2 revB - 14 gb ram @ 1600mhz - rx 580 4 gb
You should be able to run an FX-8350 with that motherboard. Just make sure to have the 3029 BIOS version. Make sure to keep the VRM temps in check just in case.
www.asus.com/us/supportonly/M4A89GTD%20PROUSB3/HelpDesk_BIOS/
nambulous.wordpress.com/2014/04/29/amd-fx-8350-on-m4a89gtd-prousb3/
Can you compare the FX 6300 Vs FX 6350 please for gaming.
The difference won't be massive. The frame rate will increase a bit, but that will be it.
I still want to see your comparison of the 8350 vs the i5, the steves need to be shown whats up.
I think you meant the FX-8350 vs i3 7100. It's coming next.
I still have a FX 6300, FX 8370, and a i7 860 as well as several others. I have a thing for collecting them. lol
Is the FX-9590 socket compatible with the FX 8350?
Yes, they're all AM3+.
@@RATechYT I thoguht so, but the FX 9590 is not coming up in the Compatible cpu list for motherboards that has the AM3+ socket...
@@ssdravidian That's because the FX-9590 is a power hungry CPU, only certain mid-range to high-end boards can handle it.
@@RATechYT AH ! makes sense !...will stick with the 8350 then...thanks mate !
I dont know about you guys, but im still running the 8350 as my main daily driver. Best CPU ive ever had. If i could, i'd pull it out of its socket and sleep with it snug in my bed.
lol
how many cpus does a normal person/consumer normally actually have? it's a pretty small sample size right?
@@stevesmith1383 Ive had three CPU's in a desktop pc, two AMD and one Intel. Had 4 laptops, all have had Intel cpu's. AMD, and specifically the 8350, have never failed me. Its a proper workhorse that was truly ahead of its time in my opinion. I'll be upgrading to a Ryzen 9 next year, so it'll be sad to switch it out, but it'll be installed and run on my testbench.
@@detesla9575 that's still only 3 as I wouldn't compare a desktop to a laptop cpu
still a very small sample size for the claim "best CPU I've ever had" (plus what were it's competitors in your possession?)
I've owned more smartphones than that
(I have actually owned hundreds of cpus and used dozens personally but I'm not a normal consumer in that sense)
everyone is entitled to their opinion...but ahead of it's time? it's bad architecture lead to weak IPC (slower than previous Phenom 2 cpus clock for clock), it's bad core design led to weaker multi core performance due to 2 cores being in a module that prevent efficiency (this actually led to a lawsuit), and it used alot of power.
AMD gave up on the whole design, only released 1 revision on their mainstream platform via Piledriver ( your 8350 is piledriver compared to the first gen bulldozer), and then gave up to go work on AM4 and Ryzen (they released some revisions on the Fm2 and Fm2+ but those were smaller platforms limited to 4 cores)
The only thing that it had going where it was ahead of it's time was it's high core count.
my point is that "best" is relative to what you've owned. At one point in my life my best cpu was a Pentium 4 2.8 ghz cause I knew nothing about cpus and it got the job down for me when I was a kid. That in no want makes Pentium 4 not a horrible bunch of CPUs
@@stevesmith1383 FX processors were indeed ahead of their time compared to equivalently priced Intel options thanks to their core count. Yes, the architecture wasn't great, IPC was worse than Phenom II and those 8 FX cores had a hard time catching up to a 4C/8T Intel processor, yet FX processors still had their own advantages.
If you're really interested, here are a few videos where I compare FX processors to Phenom II and Intel CPUs:
FX-8350 vs i5-3470: ruclips.net/video/qCFeWb4skhE/видео.html
FX-8350 vs i3-7100: ruclips.net/video/tl_Y4HXqBFQ/видео.html
FX-8350 vs X6 1090T: ruclips.net/video/WMV_GL1fhpo/видео.html
FX-8350 vs R5 1400: ruclips.net/video/uH3eTvXXzFA/видео.html
FX-6300 vs i3-3240: ruclips.net/video/DNP3WWCWW90/видео.html
FX-6300 vs X6 1090T: ruclips.net/video/Lzh6rBTN-iw/видео.html
After watching many videos about FX processors and hearing how terrible they are, I never expected my FX-8350 to last me longer than a few years after purchase. It turned out I was wrong, because I only decided it was time to upgrade after about 8 years. The competing quad-core i5 processors didn't fair as well - they already started showing signs of struggle not too long after release, in games such as BF4 (2013), Crysis 3 (2013), Witcher 3 (2015), The Division (2016) and many others, while the FX-8350 handled those games much better thanks to its core count. After using dozens of processors, I honestly don't think FX deserved as much hate as it got.
Nice video 👌
Thank you!
So, the 9590 is just a binned & overclocked 8350/70. If one got lucky at the silicone lottery, he could match its performance with the cheaper 8-cores.
My 8350 happily sits at 4.8ghz and had it that way for many years. :)
Did you have to use a water cooler on the 9590
I used the same cooler on every CPU - 1:33.
A $30-40 tower cooler can handle the FX-9590 without a problem.
@@RATechYT ok thank man!!
What is your say on HPET on/off on FX (6300) processors. And also did you test system with APM on/off to see if there is difference (performance, power consumption, frame-time stability)?
HPET was untouched. When it comes to APM, at stock it was enabled (default), while with the overclocked results it was disabled. Disabling APM doesn't seem to increase performance, at least not in my case. Results are usually within margin of error.
@@RATechYT Can you test if HPET does anything with games. My lack of knowledge, equipment and time prevents me do do this myself. You could maybe add this test to already tested CPUs.
HPET off is supposed to help with latency/frame timing since game can be rendered asap instead o waiting for timer (Less precision but more free-something).> That is what I found from research, but I can't test it on my own. Thanks in advance.
@@Pukovnik141 Windows 10 chooses automatically the best HPET settings, so changing that probably will affect performance in a negative way
greatest video ever, thx
Thanks!
so is it worth it to do a mini upgrade from 6300 to 8350? just asking
If you find it for a good deal - sure.
@@RATechYT thx man, i just upgraded to fx 8320 tho
Given Hardware Unboxeds coverage on Nvidia driver CPU overhead, it would be interesting to see how these old CPUs fare when paired with a comparable AMD GPU such as the 5600xt. Also comparisons between AP's like Vulkan vs DX11 etc, on these old CPUs would be neat to see in today's games which should have more mature Vulkan and DX12 support compared to when these CPUs were commercialy viable since back then DX11 was basically the only API devs utilized
I'll be getting a Radeon GPU as soon as prices drop.
maybe just maybe there's a big difference in gaming performance when threaded optimization in nvidia control panel is turned on/off
Should I upgrade my 6300 to 8350? Advise pls
Only if you can find one for a good deal.
@@RATechYT is $78 a good deal?
Hi @RA Tech, I hope you are well. This might seem like a silly question, but how is the power usage of the FX 9590 vs the FX 8350 when you have VSync at 60Hz? Since some task might be slightly less work to the FX 9590 because it will likely complete some calculations in shorter time than the FX 8350.
I'm assuming the power draw would be very similar with VSync enabled. The only difference between both CPUs is their clock speed, and by limiting the frame rate we would make them deliver the exact same performance, so I don't see why the power consumption would be any different.
@@RATechYT thank you for your response, I appreciate it.
From my findings is that my Graphics Card uses much less power when I have VSync enabled (@60Hz/75Hz) in a game where I was doing; for example, 80FPS and then my GPU does ~70W instead of 108W both @1303Mhz clockspeed.
It is likely that the same applies for CPUs with VSync, especially in very single threaded titles where mostly one core is being used. The power draw is affected by the utilization of a CPU core; for example, in HWInfo64 you can enable an OSD feature that calculates clock-speeds in terms of Utilization like follows:
Lets say 60% on core 2: 4100Mhz X 0.6 = 2460Mhz effective usage and similar slightly more power draw.
@@hitbm4755 Sorry, I should've clarified that the power draw will obviously decrease with VSync enabled compared to it being disabled, since the PC has less work to do. What I meant is that both processors would have similar power draw *between each other,* despite the fact that one has a higher clock speed than the other, because they'd be doing the same amount of work.
@@RATechYT I agree, I think it would be an interesting scenario, but I definitely think the FX 9590 would start drawing more power in the case that a game is already maxing out a FX 8350 98-100%; even with VSync; and say also require 91% usage on a FX 9590.
How did u get rev 4 of the modo bud?
What do you mean?
@@RATechYT Gigabyte rev 4 ud3 motherboard you are using for testing with?
I have rev 3 of this board and am having some weird issues when running 4 sticks of memory and gigabytes web site bios updates don't work but sure it only says rev 3.1 if i run 2 sticks of Kingston 1866mhz i can change multiplier to 2132mhz but when i put 4 sticks in it won't boot unless it's set to 1600mhz? Any help is appreciated
Just to let you know i have already asked all the bigger names on youtube and been totally blanked by them alll!!!!! so many thanks for your time all the best from Scotland
@@MWSRD I'd say the reason for it is because of the strain you're putting on the memory controller. Two sticks of RAM don't strain the IMC as much and are usually capable of reaching higher clock speeds than four.
Had an 8320, 8350 and 9590 after having a Phenom 955 and before that a 2.8Ghz Athlon (not sure of the model). The Athlon did feel slower, but all the others felt like the same CPU. I'm an AMD fanboy if you can't tell (I have always ran AMD GPUs) but that doesn't mean I won't recognize a superior product- Intel was spanking AMD back then. I just had to switch to Intel since AMD had no better CPUs at the time. I'm still using the same 4790k, accept it's at 4.8 now paired with a 5700xt- best value PC part I've ever bought. Starting a new build soon and I'm going back to AMD- hoping the 7700x3d is available when I get to it (not released yet at the time of this comment, but it's been announced)- then pair it with a 7700xt so that I have ALL the 7s
Can anyone tell me if FX 6300 good for basic video editing and music production
It'll do fine, though you have to consider that it is an ancient CPU at this point. I wouldn't expect too much from it.
Well, it's pretty trivial to get 2600 mhz on CPU_NB on FX83xx CPUs for a nice performance boost. Strange, that your chip/mobo combos only go as high as 2400.
Same goes for memory. FX can easily overclock the cheap oem Samsung BCK0 sticks fron stock 1600 to 2133-2400 with timings in 10-10-10-28 range at 1.65V
Even my m5a97 pro and 78lmt usb3 can do that.
You mean the Samsung "Green" low-profile RAM? That was more than popular back in the day as it OC'd to 2400 almost always.
@@RuruFIN not only low profile, original ones also OC very well if they have BCK0 chips.
@@devl547 okay, I just saw only the low profiles here in Finland back then when they were popular.
On my Sabertooth 990FX R.2 mobo i did a 4.7Ghz OC with a FX8150.. NB was set to 2.6GHz and for some reason i didn't get the ram past 1833Mhz... did however get to tighten the timings to CL9 @ 1.5v.
Dual channel 16Gb corsair (lpx?) sticks with a stock timing of CL10 or CL11... can't remember which one..stock "XMP" (DOPCH?) was 1600Mhz.
My point being that if you can't get higher speeds with your memory, you can get a close to similar boost by tighten your timings.. at least that's how it appeared to me after stresstesting and benching the system for a week.
FX "8 core" CPU's are still viable today for most people getting into pc for gaming and "normal" workloads...however i won't recommend anything below that.
(Current system being R7 3800XT ,5700XT ,X570,32Gb 3600Mhz CL17)
I used to be able to easily overclock the NB beyond 2500 MHz on all FX processors, though after upgrading from the 2x4 HyperX Genesis to 2x8 HyperX Fury, that number dropped. For example I was able to hit around 2630 MHz on the FX-6300, yet after the memory upgrade I can't exceed 2200 MHz. The drop isn't as big with the FX-8350, but before the upgrade I was still able to reach a higher frequency, which you can see in my older videos. Now trying to set the same clock speeds results in blue screen.
It's a similar situation with memory overclocking, albeit it's not as bad. If before I could push the clock speed to 2100-2200 MHz, now I can't exceed 2050 MHz.
Honestly overclocking the NB any more wouldn't make much of a difference anyways. While Phenom II benefits from it quite a bit, improvement on AMD FX processors doesn't seem to be as big in my experience. We'd maybe get an extra frame or two at best with a higher RAM & NB overclock.
CPU NB 2600MHz ?!
8:48
What gpu did you use for these benchmarks?
1:42
GTX 1070
6300 for life.
watching this on my fx 8100
Bro my RX 580 COUPLED WITH PHENOM 1100T DOES FULL ULTRA SETTINGS IN FORZA HORIZON 3 and 4 titles what are u showing bruv forget 8350 it can do far more than my PHENOM cpu.
A low end 3+1 VRM mobo is able to support a fx 8300 at 3.7 Ghz.
Perhaps, yet if the VRM temperatures on an 8+2 board reach 60 degrees C using a stock FX-8350, on a 3+1 phase board it's definitely hitting 100 degrees, if not more. I'd definitely stick at least to a 6+2 phase motherboard when using an 8 core FX, such as the MSI 970 GAMING.
@@RATechYT VRM Around 70- 80 deg C on prime 95. Single exhaust fan. About 40 - 50 C on processor. Ga 78lmt s2p. Can run 4.2 Ghz if enable the single module per core option. Loooollllll. The VRM still runs cooler than an unlocked 4 to 5 core phenom ii 960T.
@@YTSZAZU Are you getting those temperatures at 3.7 GHz?
@@RATechYT Around that. I do not remember any numbers hitting 90 deg C. Will retest and update. That msi mobo mentioned cost 4 times in the used market compared the mobo I am using at the moment.
@@YTSZAZU That is actually impressive. Though as I mentioned earlier, with an FX-8350 it would most likely hit 100 degrees C.
I used to have a Gigabyte GA-970A-D3 (4+1), which was paired with the 8350, and even with 5 case fans it would throttle every now and then. I believe using a fan to cool down the VRMs would've reduce or maybe even eliminated the throttling, though the case was pretty crammed and I only had 120mm fans, so it wasn't really possible. Getting a 990FXA-UD3 fixed the problem, and also allowed me to overclock the CPU.
Thanks for the info.
This video is obviously old now, but I enjoyed the comparison. My son uses an overclocked FX-8350 with a AMD RX6600 and it works great. I'm able to clock it to about to about 4.6GHz stable, but my VRMs aren't able to get it stable past this and I still need to implement a lot of tweaks to get it stable even at 4.6. End of the day, it's a good CPU but I also have a 3770K in another build that I like much better and can hands-down destroy the FX, although it was twice the price. The FX8350 architecture just wasn't that good, although you could really get some high clocks with it. I have a pretty beefy cooler for it, and it does blow pretty warm out the back even with that. I also agree, the FX-9590 should be avoided. You really need a liquid cooler for it and absolutely must have a high-end motherboard. It's just not worth it, and was just really the best AMD could do at the time to compete with Intel's flagships.
No one really needs the latest and greatest computer hardware anymore. CPU performance has really peaked out and gaming is just a hobby for any computer enthusiast! As long as a computer can do everything reasonably well then there is no real need for faster and better hardware.... as nearly all computer reviewers will tell their viewers!
Everyone knows that most hardware reviews are very rarely legit today so every review has to be taken pretty much with a grain of salt.
Do your own research and decide for yourself....!
I'm really very happy with my FX8350, GTX 1060 (6GB version), and 32 GB ram computer system! The entire setup cost me less than $120 used and can run pretty much most games quite decently even today in 2024!
For a 12 year old CPU, the AMD 8350 was very likely way too good for 2012! This is why the FX line of AMD CPUs was quickly terminated in favour of the Ryzen line of CPUs. AMD finally got something right that could finally outperform Intel CPUs, This is why people who have an FX8350 are still running that same exact FX8350 in 2024.
Back in 2012, software and games only had just begun to tap into the potential to use multi-core CPUs in games/software but as soon as software developers learned how to incorporate multiple core processing the FX8350 exhibited its real raw power over Intel processors....!
I have two FX-6300 PC's, one is in my bedroom and the other is my gaming rig which is in the basement.
The gaming one has an Asus M5A99X EVO mobo with a massive air cooler, a GTX 1060 6Gb and 16 Gb ram, and I'm able to push 4.9 Ghz stable. Games like COD Warzone are very CPU intensive, it literally stays 100% all the time, still I'm able to play always above 50 fps with all the texture settings in high and I play in a 1920x1200 monitor.
I have thought of upgrading to an FX-8350, but I dont think it will make much of a difference.
i am upgrading from my fx 6300 to a fx 8320
Would keept using mine if the board didnt die... :P (Athlon X4 replaced by Ryzen 3600 and FX replaced by i5-10600)
now a cheap ryzen 5 5500 is 50fps more than all..
FX 9590 you need a dedicated outlet of 240V hahahahaah
#fx8370 is actual, #amdfxforever
my fx 9590 is still very good cpu and gtx 780ti
Add i7 2600K @5ghz plz.
That's one of the CPUs I'll be making a video about in the near future.
very good processors, still works perfect, i use all games of 2020/2021 and play in hd so better
I hope ddr 3 ram have rgb😂😂