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

AMD CPU's help bring me up to speed

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.
bob, you gave up pcie16x2 so no x16x16 sli, granted it's not much of a hit but i like sli x16-x16 because i run 760's in the overcloctagon and can't give up even the 3-5% that x16-x4 would cost me.
 
I was hoping to go mATX on the mobo, kind of tired of my Mid tower I've been using since 2004, would be nice to get something smaller. But the only AM3+ mobo's are the 970G chipsets...are you guys saying those are no good?

Also Microcenter has both the 6300 and 4150 for $99. Those look to perform pretty close with the 6300 edging out the i3 slightly in multithreaded apps which would be good for After Effects. It might come down to mobo choices.
 
If you're going mATX just look at Intel or FM2+
No motherboards worth buying in AM3+ that are mATX
 
110 + 150 + 30 for a cooler = 290


vs

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117302&cm_re=i5-_-19-117-302-_-Product


http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813157512&cm_re=1150-_-13-157-512-_-Product

for ... voila 260-290


I'll take the pepsi challenge on this one any day.


AMD's "Cost effectiveness" is no longer valid with the requirements of upgraded cooling and a stout (read: expensive) motherboard. Put a bulldozer chip on an 80$ board and you're asking for trouble.

The only problem with that setup is the motherboard's Intel H97 chipset and you will NOT even play overclock. With that setup he might as well buy a pre-configured rig from a large OEM and get the complete package cheaper since piece by piece none of us can compete with the buying power of the large OEM system intergrators. It is strokes for folks as always.
RGone...
 
Rgone your right, getting an i3 that you can't OC, would probably run fine on a stock cooler in a shoebox does seem kinda boring. I guess the mATX thing isn't a big deal, my last build was HTPC so I guess I forgot you should get a good onboard chipset if you want a desktop, plus at the rate I'm replacing cases I should just a get a mid-tower to last, and it''s just go in the spot my current mid-tower is in.
 
While we are on the ITX/mATX might want to check out the NUC-style such as the brix I know at least one has a GTX 760 integrated in it I dont see why they couldnt do something better that Intel's iGPU but lower than the 760
 
If you're going mATX just look at Intel or FM2+
No motherboards worth buying in AM3+ that are mATX

I'm always the bad guy....

M5A78 760G boards by Asus hold their own. I've used an FX -8 core. Had the cooling to do it too.

The first of the two boards brought a couple of Phenom II's up to 6ghz and beyond and the current one running 7ghz and beyond.

For daily, I used a 960T unlocker. 4250mhz daily stable. 980BE daily same clocks 1000mhz effective ram speeds on both chips. 955BE over 6ghz but the IMC wasn't as nice as the T series chips, and I could never figure out why that 980BE hand no issues running 1000mhz effective ram speeds.....


But as I recall, I had a 565BE that was 4.4ghz stable and unlocked to a quad until I bricked core #2 and then turned it into a Tri core..... lol fun times. That was on a 760G Asus board as well.

I think for people looking for 8 cores spending money on a bigger board is a better way to go when wanting larger ram amounts and more PCI-E slots and other extras..... I think for a nice little HTPC gamer, 760G chipsets would be like stomping an XBOX with a FX-6300 paired with GTX- 760 :thup:

My opinion of the smaller boards, get the right make and model, cool it properly, you can have big power House PCs in a small envelope.
 
Shrimpy, you're overlooking one big factor.
That kind of cooling takes a lot of careful planning, something most people either aren't capable of or willing to put the time/effort in to.
 
Shrimpy, you're overlooking one big factor.
That kind of cooling takes a lot of careful planning, something most people either aren't capable of or willing to put the time/effort in to.


Well the Asus board fully supports 980BE and FX-8350. Ran both of these models daily on the Asus 760G. Not sure what else to say. I fully tested a certain board I can speak for and put it through more paces. I have nothing but facts for you fellas, not sure what to say. It's a decent board. I'd never recommend it if I didn't think it was capable. It's been as solid as any Asus product I've ever had. ALL of my boards outlasted RMA possibility.


Want certain clocks, yea you need to do some work. Certainly you wouldn't spend 200$ on a motherboard and skimp out with a cheapy 35$ air cooler? The liquid cooling set up for an extremeoverclocking individual such as myself should cost lots of moneys. because I'm getting a mounting bracket that fits multiple platforms, meaning literally hundreds of processors.

I did quote you in an overclocking environment correct? Well that 760G has a lot of guys expensive boards trumped with just a few dollars in dry ice and an hours worth of time in the operating system. That should speak for iteself....

Now you are correct, I do understand what your saying about the laziness excuses. I have children. I'd say "PUT WATER ON THAT ****" and they'd want to dump an air cooler on it.... :rofl:
 
I'm not saying it doesn't work or that you don't have it doing awesome things, simply that the vast majority of people would have problems trying to run your setup.

We're not talking sub-ambient cooling here either.
 
110 + 150 + 30 for a cooler = 290


vs

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117302&cm_re=i5-_-19-117-302-_-Product


http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813157512&cm_re=1150-_-13-157-512-_-Product

for ... voila 260-290


I'll take the pepsi challenge on this one any day.


AMD's "Cost effectiveness" is no longer valid with the requirements of upgraded cooling and a stout (read: expensive) motherboard. Put a bulldozer chip on an 80$ board and you're asking for trouble.

You are calling out AMD because you need a "stout" board. I disagree with that premise. I just call it buying a "quality" board. Personally, whether it is AMD or Intel you shouldn't be buying low quality crap boards. You think putting and I5 or I7 in a $50 to $75 board is a wise move?
 
I'm not saying it doesn't work or that you don't have it doing awesome things, simply that the vast majority of people would have problems trying to run your setup.

We're not talking sub-ambient cooling here either.

This is a true statement. But I believe if my monkey *** can do it, any one can?

I have nothing special or have spent special moneys to make something better than it is. There is nothing special about what I do, thousands of others do it too. I just try and keep a cost effective mind when leaning into an FX platform that's as old as it is, and pretty much about at the end of it's life cycle any ways. Why spend so much moneys on something that can't and won't be upgraded.

If you want hard core computing, you wouldn't consider AMD at all.... IMO imo.
 
This is a true statement. But I believe if my monkey *** can do it, any one can?

I have nothing special or have spent special moneys to make something better than it is. There is nothing special about what I do, thousands of others do it too. I just try and keep a cost effective mind when leaning into an FX platform that's as old as it is, and pretty much about at the end of it's life cycle any ways. Why spend so much moneys on something that can't and won't be upgraded.

If you want hard core computing, you wouldn't consider AMD at all.... IMO imo.

I hate to say it but it doesnt matter how hard we try something better or faster is always around the corner. There is no real upgradability for computer platforms that will tend to be outdated within 12 months(or less) anyways.
 
I hate to say it but it doesnt matter how hard we try something better or faster is always around the corner. There is no real upgradability for computer platforms that will tend to be outdated within 12 months(or less) anyways.

Cheers to that!
 
Not at the moment it isn't , there's very little gain if any in performance of PCIe3.0 vs 2.0
 
I can only speak from personal experience - Some time ago I picked up a 8320, then popped for a Sabertooth 2.0 as an open box item. Both have been terrific to date and the Sabo board is easy to tune and get some nice clocks from it.

The CHV-Z is a more in depth OC'ers board and will take time to figure out with all the options it has available. I will say if you should tweak something to the wrong setting (And it's easy to do with the CHV-Z) it will drive you crazy trying to figure out how to correct it to keep going. You might try it again after tweaking a few more settings and it actually work, that's the only real quirk it has BUT if you want to go after the absolute max from what you have, the CHV-Z can get it done.

The Sabertooth isn't as confusing as the CHV-Z but the range of options in it's BIOS is limited by comparison, for example you have a greater range of NB voltage you can use, the Sabo's being 1.25v's max while the CHV-Z can go much higher there and it's the same way for a good deal of it's options,k not to mention it has more options for tweaking, esp in the RAM department which is nice.

To sum up:
The Sabertooth is indeed a capable performer and is a simpler board to work with.
The CHV-Z is more capable IF you can figure out how to use all it has to offer.

As for what I tend to go with, that would be the Sabo for most of my extreme runs. I've yet to set up the CHV-Z for that kind of use but it's certainly capable of squeezing the max from what I do have here. BTW I also have an older CHV that I was using for extreme runs and it could also deliver the goods and in fact was easier than the newer CVH-Z to make respond to tweaks. I now use it as a daily driver and it's done well there too.

One more thing to note, the CHV supports unlocking cores with older AM3 chips, the Sabertooth 2.0 and CHV-Z do not.
 
Choices Choices, or.... my current mobo supports Phenom IIX6 1035T and I can get it for $100 on ebay. According to Anandtech's benchmarks the 1055T (which I should be able to easily clock to from the 1035T) isn't very far behind the 6300 in most test's and in fact is faster in some multi-threaded tests. Even though that chip is the same price as a 6300 new I wouldn't have to buy a new mobo or RAM. Probably the biggest detriment would be that my board is SATA 3Gb and I'd like to go SSD, so that might bottleneck it some. Tough choices, it seems like AMD hasn't really made any significant changes since Phenom II.
 
Back