• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

i7 920 upgrade to 8350/70

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.

Asusguy

Registered
Joined
Apr 13, 2014
Hello guys,

im in a dilemma and i require your help. I am going to purchase one of the new AMD cards once they are released and i need your opinion regarding the cpu.

I currently have an i7 920 running at 4.5ghz on air, along with a rampage 2 extreme. I was wondering if upgrading to a newer CPU such as the AMD fx 8350 or 8370 would give some more FPS in gaming. I will not need a cooler nor will i need memory ram since i already have those. And i suppose that i would be able to clock the new AMD cpu past 4.8ghz and hopefully to 5.0ghz..

My current GPU is a Radeon HD7870. So i want to get something better than that, hopefully double or triple the power.

What do you think?
 

Hi, thanks for the response.

Is the 920 on stock speed in those benchmarks? AAre there any gaming benchmarks available? Because i don't use any of the programs mentioned in the benchmark you have posted. Also, from what i understand the 8350 has a good multicore speed in most applications, but games do not take advantage from many cores, so what would this mean in actual gaming?

Thanks
 
What resolution and what games are you having trouble running?
 
What resolution and what games are you having trouble running?

I play on 1920x1080. I have no trouble running any games with the 7870, but i don't want my new GPU to have any trouble either. The only game that i can say has fps drops is rome total war 2, and after some research i found out that the game requires a somewhat very strong cpu but no matter what cpu one has, it will still have drops in huge battles. Another game that im interested on starting is Arma3 and Witcher 3 (haven't purchased them yet, i am waiting for my new amd card).
 
If you're planning to stay at 1080p for a while just grab a GTX 970 and be done.
Your 920 with the overclock is still a very relevant CPU.
 
I will not need a cooler nor will i need memory ram since i already have those. And i suppose that i would be able to clock the new AMD cpu past 4.8ghz and hopefully to 5.0ghz..

What do you think?

You make n0 mention of what is cooling the i7-920 but if it is not a very good at least dual rad like 240, it is not going to be nearly enough to cool an FX-8xxx to run 4.8GHz and 5.0GHz as a hoped for speed made me cringe. You must not have done much reading in the OCF AMD cpu section since almost the number one thing we have to deal with when first timers come in is to tell them to get some 'real' cooling if they want to see 4.8GHz and 'maybe' beyond. After that is their weak arse choice of motherboard to try and supply enough cpu voltage to an overclocked FX 8 core processor.

Gaming seems your concern and since that is so...don't give anything away by going AMD cpu...get an Intel upgrade and then no one will need to hear that you wished you had gone Intel to begin with. Save yourself some headaches and struggle.

RGone...
 
You make n0 mention of what is cooling the i7-920 but if it is not a very good at least dual rad like 240, it is not going to be nearly enough to cool an FX-8xxx to run 4.8GHz and 5.0GHz as a hoped for speed made me cringe. You must not have done much reading in the OCF AMD cpu section since almost the number one thing we have to deal with when first timers come in is to tell them to get some 'real' cooling if they want to see 4.8GHz and 'maybe' beyond. After that is their weak arse choice of motherboard to try and supply enough cpu voltage to an overclocked FX 8 core processor.

Gaming seems your concern and since that is so...don't give anything away by going AMD cpu...get an Intel upgrade and then no one will need to hear that you wished you had gone Intel to begin with. Save yourself some headaches and struggle.

RGone...

I am using a thermalright true spirit 140 power. My gaming temps are 55-60c celcius at 4.5ghz. I thought the intel 920 was a hotter chip that is why i figured it would be enough for the fx. Also, im not sure what exactly you mean by what you said. Does that mean newer intel chips are better than the fx? My main concern is my 920 against the fx for now, as i have no budget for a new intel chip at this moment.
 
There is absolutely no way I can imagine the i7-920 is a hotter cpu than FX-8 core. I have had both and my FX-8350 @ 4.8GHz needs a 360 radiator with good fans to run that 4.8GHz day in and day out when closed up inside a case with efficient air flow in and out. You really have no concept of how really hot an FX-8350 is at 4.8GHz.

I have very skilled friends that run their FX-8350s in the 4.7GHz range, even though they can get 2 hours stability with P95 Blend at 5.0GHz. They say they are just not comfortable with the voltage needed to run at 5.0GHz nor to deal with that much heat day in and day out so they downclock to roughly 4.7GHz even though they have very good water. In fact one friend that runs his new FX-8370 at 4.9GHz daily just remarked in the AMD cpu forum section while we were trying to bring a newer user up to date; that he had easily $1000.00 Usd in his cooling for his FX-8370. I will admit that friend went about $600.00 overboard, but he created a work of art with his water cooling plumbing.

Thermalright True Spirit 140 might have the cooling power to deal with the heat of an FX-8350 at 4.5 to 4.6GHz but unlikely very much more speed which brings voltage and HEAT. Plus the air cooler for cpu needs to blow air in an East/West orientation in a case that will get cool air in and out very effectively so cool air can get in and hot air out in a hurry.

So you want 4.8GHz with an FX-8350?
1. Boards fully capable of supporting such speed start at about $185.00 Usd.

2. Pretty good entry level cooling would likely run around $230.00 Usd to support 4.8GHz regularly.

3. Then you need a fan blowing over the VRMs of the fairly high dollar motherboard so that the cpu does not throttle due to over heating of the VRMs supplying the power to the FX-8 core at 4.8GHz and often even less cpu speed.

4. 2x4Gig sticks of DDR3-1866 ram is best overall since the FX supports two sticks of DDR3-1866. Slower ram will not hurt a lot but the sticks should be installed in pairs. Most X-58 motherboards used 3 sticks of ram.

5. So far the IPC of the Intel Cpus is just greater than the FX processors by AMD. That single threaded greater IPC or even multicored greater IPC can be a benefit in games and most surely with dual video cards.

6. Again I think the AMD cpu is getting the lean toward, strictly on a money basis but the entire cost of doing business had not been accurately considered. Now that can be one huge problem when everything "thought" needed was bought but the bought parts are not nearly enough to satisfy the demands of an overclocked FX 8 core processor. YMMV but it will not vary more than a tiny bit and then there you will be like all the rest of us that run haul booty FX 8 cores. We have monster cooling and the best motherboards money can buy to run 4.7GHz or slightly greater on a day in and day out basis.

RGone...

EDIT:
Thread: Gaming CPU, which one? AMD or Intel?

That is a very good thread about AMD vs Intel FOR gaming. Others cover just about what I wrote above, but it is different people saying about the same thing I said, so am not the only one that sees the real cost of overclocked FX-8350. The read is good all the way thru the first post of the second page. Thereafter it sort of runs off the rails chasing the merits of the 2 core G-3258 cpu.

By the way this thread was only a few down from where your thread is located right now. So the debate was already in progress.
END EDIT.
 
Last edited:
There is absolutely no way I can imagine the i7-920 is a hotter cpu than FX-8 core. I have had both and my FX-8350 @ 4.8GHz needs a 360 radiator with good fans to run that 4.8GHz day in and day out when closed up inside a case with efficient air flow in and out. You really have no concept of how really hot an FX-8350 is at 4.8GHz.

I have very skilled friends that run their FX-8350s in the 4.7GHz range, even though they can get 2 hours stability with P95 Blend at 5.0GHz. They say they are just not comfortable with the voltage needed to run at 5.0GHz nor to deal with that much heat day in and day out so they downclock to roughly 4.7GHz even though they have very good water. In fact one friend that runs his new FX-8370 at 4.9GHz daily just remarked in the AMD cpu forum section while we were trying to bring a newer user up to date; that he had easily $1000.00 Usd in his cooling for his FX-8370. I will admit that friend went about $600.00 overboard, but he created a work of art with his water cooling plumbing.

Thermalright True Spirit 140 might have the cooling power to deal with the heat of an FX-8350 at 4.5 to 4.6GHz but unlikely very much more speed which brings voltage and HEAT. Plus the air cooler for cpu needs to blow air in an East/West orientation in a case that will get cool air in and out very effectively so cool air can get in and hot air out in a hurry.

So you want 4.8GHz with an FX-8350?
1. Boards fully capable of supporting such speed start at about $185.00 Usd.

2. Pretty good entry level cooling would likely run around $230.00 Usd to support 4.8GHz regularly.

3. Then you need a fan blowing over the VRMs of the fairly high dollar motherboard so that the cpu does not throttle due to over heating of the VRMs supplying the power to the FX-8 core at 4.8GHz and often even less cpu speed.

4. 2x4Gig sticks of DDR3-1866 ram is best overall since the FX supports two sticks of DDR3-1866. Slower ram will not hurt a lot but the sticks should be installed in pairs. Most X-58 motherboards used 3 sticks of ram.

5. So far the IPC of the Intel Cpus is just greater than the FX processors by AMD. That single threaded greater IPC or even multicored greater IPC can be a benefit in games and most surely with dual video cards.

6. Again I think the AMD cpu is getting the lean toward, strictly on a money basis but the entire cost of doing business had not been accurately considered. Now that can be one huge problem when everything "thought" needed was bought but the bought parts are not nearly enough to satisfy the demands of an overclocked FX 8 core processor. YMMV but it will not vary more than a tiny bit and then there you will be like all the rest of us that run haul booty FX 8 cores. We have monster cooling and the best motherboards money can buy to run 4.7GHz or slightly greater on a day in and day out basis.

RGone...

EDIT:
Thread: Gaming CPU, which one? AMD or Intel?

That is a very good thread about AMD vs Intel FOR gaming. Others cover just about what I wrote above, but it is different people saying about the same thing I said, so am not the only one that sees the real cost of overclocked FX-8350. The read is good all the way thru the first post of the second page. Thereafter it sort of runs off the rails chasing the merits of the 2 core G-3258 cpu.

By the way this thread was only a few down from where your thread is located right now. So the debate was already in progress.
END EDIT.

Ok thanks for the info, so should i assume that on similar clocks the 920 sould be better than the fx 8350 provided im not going to buy a new cooler? But then again how could a 6 year old cpu be better than a newer fx cpu? Finally, are there any other suggestions, or should i just stick to the 920 as long as it is not going to hold back the new card.... i still havent gotten an answer asmto which one is better and if i should reallymget the fx or save up and get a new intel cpu, and i cant find gaming b3nchmarks with oced 920 against the fx.
 
I would just buy the card that you are planning to get anyway, then save up the spare cash for an Intel CPU. If you have a microcenter near you they generally have the lowest prices on CPUs and they have bundle prices as well if you buy a motherboard at the same time.
 
There is absolutely no way I can imagine the i7-920 is a hotter cpu than FX-8 core.

From what I have seen on the internetz, 920s typically get real hot! And usually max out at around 4.2. 80C seems to be the usual without phase change or low temp outside air.
 
From what I have seen on the internetz, 920s typically get real hot! And usually max out at around 4.2. 80C seems to be the usual without phase change or low temp outside air.

Not the way an FX does.
 
From what I have seen on the internetz, 920s typically get real hot! And usually max out at around 4.2. 80C seems to be the usual without phase change or low temp outside air.

Bloomfields were heat monsters. Nothing like Sandy Bridge and later.
 
Replacing i7 920 with FX is a total mistake. It will be nearly no improvement in games. If you think about upgrade then get even 2nd hand i7 3770K, 4670K, 4770K, 4690K, 4790K.
 
Replacing i7 920 with FX is a total mistake. It will be nearly no improvement in games. If you think about upgrade then get even 2nd hand i7 3770K, 4670K, 4770K, 4690K, 4790K.

Unless parts are aging and he'd like to get a new system for a moderate cost :shrug:
 
Just wait for Skylake and upgrade to that it should be on store shelves by the end of August along with the new Z170 chipset boards just be aware theyre coreleasing them with a few broadwell cpus too so ensure you pick a skylake one
 
Last edited:
Last I understood, Skylake is the end of this year (late 4Q, not mid 3Q/August)... Broadwell is just now releasing???
 
The yields of the broadwells were terrible hence the delays theyve, invested too much in trying to up the yields and instead will have a co-release of a few broadwell skus in with their Skylake launch. We'll likely have an early launch of broadwell-e in january 2016 and Skylake-e in august 2016.
 
Back