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

AMD FX-9370 Vishera 4.4GHz

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

marjamar

Member
Joined
Oct 29, 2010
Location
Loveland, CO, USA
I've got one coming from Newegg and kinda wonder why I'm not seeing much on this processor here. I don't have the time usually to keep up on all the newer stuff, so sure hope this CPU isn't a white elephant or something.

It's going into my year old rebuild, replacing a FX-8150 which is working fine. Just thought I give this new processor a try to see if 5GHz full time is an option. I'm at 4.8 full time and working well with the bulldozer on a full water setup.

So, what am I missing here? You can tell me, I'm a pretty tough old coot.

And I don't mean I'm good looking for all you jokers out there.

-Rodger
 
If I'm not mistaken the FX 9XXX series are just higher binned 8XXX series processors. Specs are all the same just higher factory clock. With that said it could clock higher than your 8150, but would run exactly the same just slightly faster.
 
Well, a 8150 [email protected] on a h80 stable 24/7 is a good cpu (mine was running@5GHz/1.55v IIRC, on a custom loop).

People usually need a custom loop to reach 4.8 and above.

The 9370 is a binned 8320/8350 capable of 4.4GHz on lower volts than average.

Depends on the chip. You might do 4.6, or more with the h80.

For 4.8 and above, I doubt the h80 will be up to the task, unless you have very low ambient.
 
FX9xxx are piledriver, not bulldozer, so they are around 10% faster than the 8150 at a given frequency.
 
My sig is way out of date... Need to fix it sometime.

I've gotten 4.8 with the h100 but had to run a super noisy high speed turbin fan for long term prime95 runs. A little over a year ago when I did the rebuild I went to a custom full water loop, so it's been running stable and quiet sense then -- mostly.

The FX-9370 is a binned FX-8350, which is the "Piledriver" codename series, not the "bulldozer" series. So there are physical difference from my FX-8150. The key here is the series, for which both the FX-8350 and FX-9370 is "Vishera".

I would hope to see a 15%+ overall improvement in processing power, but until I get my mitts on it I will never know for sure with this rig.

-Rodger

**** Sig up to date now ****
 
Last edited:
Maybe I'll revisit an idea I was working on awhile back when this new CPU get here. It turned into a very complex affair and I just didn't want to proceed due to costs involved as well as all the work it would take. The idea is feasible though, so I'll talk to my son (business partner) and see what he thinks.

Got this run on all 8 cores. Not stable by any means, but all cores pulling their weight.

2465957.png
 
Johan45 has one and he's the only one that I know of that has on on this forum. As Manu said they seem to need less voltage then the 8350's for the same clocks. With the right cooling you should be able to get into the 5.4/5.5's not "stable".
 
My sample will run at 4.8 prime stable @ 1.428v. At 4.9 I'm up to 1.476 and 5.0 takes 1.53v. Go surfing through the just putzen thread and you'll see some of the things I've done with it. I'll go look for a page # and get back.

EDIT : ok here is where it starts, there's a lot of stuff in this thread but just keep going forward.
 
My sample will run at 4.8 prime stable @ 1.428v. At 4.9 I'm up to 1.476 and 5.0 takes 1.53v. Go surfing through the just putzen thread and you'll see some of the things I've done with it. I'll go look for a page # and get back.
just to give you a comparison, marjamar, I have one of the lower voltage Fx 8350's out of the bunch of us and I need 1.46 Cpu V for 4.7 24/7 stable, under water.
 
I have been musing over the FX-9590 and FX-9370 since they were talked about and then reviewed. Most of the original reviews of course were of the FX-9590 and just about every review that tried to overclock them, said they were difficult to get stable beyond 5.0Ghz. Some were using water but were reluctant to hit the cpu with a good deal of Vcore. Sure it was unstable. Heat got up quick also.

So AMD decides to get some PR and buzz by releasing the 9590 and 9370 cpus since the "steamroller" has been pushed further out in release. They can do what we cannot do in that they run thru a bunch of silicon looking for chips that run like an over-clocked FX-8350 with reasonable Vcore.

They set the default speed of this low-leakage cpu to produce the FX-9590 and the FX-9370 and they have it. A factory pre-clocked cpu to sell. They have known all along that there was a lot of headroom in the FX series of silicon. They just took advantage of it for dollars. No big deal. Got them some publicity in a rather low interest time frame.

We have all bought a lesser version of a series of cpus and clocked them up to the level of the more expensive processor. AMD did it for us and asked for extra money. The one thing you seem most likely to get with the Uber FX's is use of a fairly low Vcore up to about 4.8Ghz since they binned for low Vcore at an initial elevated clock. However this lower Vcore is likely coming with a low-leakage cpu and back in the old days when we looked for low/high leakage and other pointers from the heavens, we saw low-leakage cpus don't like to overclock as easily as some other cpus that leak some. The low leakers do well with lower Vcore up to a point and then the cpu seems to quit.

AMD knows their silicon and pin-pointed the upper level of the FX 8 core series and found a way to make some coins. There is little more headroom in a 9590 or 9370 than a standard FX-8350 since the cpus are all the same silicon in general. Same design and fab, only maybe a little more mature FAB which happens.

So really at or around 5.0Ghz you can expect the needed Vcore to rise is my guess just as it would on a regular FX-8350. Stability may be a little more difficult since too much added Vcore on a low leaker will bring on instability as the transistors are over driven.

Just my thinking of the deal over a few months and seeing "johan45s" example FX-9370 results.
Bobert...
 
I have been musing over the FX-9590 and FX-9370 since they were talked about and then reviewed. Most of the original reviews of course were of the FX-9590 and just about every review that tried to overclock them, said they were difficult to get stable beyond 5.0Ghz. Some were using water but were reluctant to hit the cpu with a good deal of Vcore. Sure it was unstable. Heat got up quick also.

So AMD decides to get some PR and buzz by releasing the 9590 and 9370 cpus since the "steamroller" has been pushed further out in release. They can do what we cannot do in that they run thru a bunch of silicon looking for chips that run like an over-clocked FX-8350 with reasonable Vcore.

They set the default speed of this low-leakage cpu to produce the FX-9590 and the FX-9370 and they have it. A factory pre-clocked cpu to sell. They have known all along that there was a lot of headroom in the FX series of silicon. They just took advantage of it for dollars. No big deal. Got them some publicity in a rather low interest time frame.

We have all bought a lesser version of a series of cpus and clocked them up to the level of the more expensive processor. AMD did it for us and asked for extra money. The one thing you seem most likely to get with the Uber FX's is use of a fairly low Vcore up to about 4.8Ghz since they binned for low Vcore at an initial elevated clock. However this lower Vcore is likely coming with a low-leakage cpu and back in the old days when we looked for low/high leakage and other pointers from the heavens, we saw low-leakage cpus don't like to overclock as easily as some other cpus that leak some. The low leakers do well with lower Vcore up to a point and then the cpu seems to quit.

AMD knows their silicon and pin-pointed the upper level of the FX 8 core series and found a way to make some coins. There is little more headroom in a 9590 or 9370 than a standard FX-8350 since the cpus are all the same silicon in general. Same design and fab, only maybe a little more mature FAB which happens.

So really at or around 5.0Ghz you can expect the needed Vcore to rise is my guess just as it would on a regular FX-8350. Stability may be a little more difficult since too much added Vcore on a low leaker will bring on instability as the transistors are over driven.

Just my thinking of the deal over a few months and seeing "johan45s" example FX-9370 results.
Bobert...

I would also like to add that I have seen a few 9370s over a couple of sites and the one I have seem to be a cherry as well. It was on par with a 9590 ES that we did some comparisons with. Just FYI
 
I would also like to add that I have seen a few 9370s over a couple of sites and the one I have seem to be a cherry as well. It was on par with a 9590 ES that we did some comparisons with. Just FYI

I figured you had a good'un. Hehehe.
Bobert...ster.
 
Yeah I have a average chip and its taking 1.45v to get 4.5 stable so at the same voltages hes alot higher
 
@Hr,Soegaard and Ryan Couch, think you could post your CPU P-states?? RGone may like to add them to his list he has going in the flatline thread?? To do this put your machine to default clocks in bIOs then open CPU-z, go to the about tab and select Save Report.txt. Should kick out a report to your documents or where you have the CPU-z .exe. We're looking for the info you'll see here in this post.
 
have never tried that before. ;) Why do i have to set bios to default clocks? now i finally found a sweet spot hehe. Sorry for my ignorance.
 
Back