FX its tougher than you think.

[ShrimpBrime]

Meh. It don't matter. I read 1.460v at 4.7ghz which was at one point a part of the discussion how a lower fx chip than a 9590 runs cooler.... but that's more voltage than what I typically see my 9590 run at load which is generally 1.4260v at the same speed 4.7ghz.

And your right. Stability is in the eye of beholder. So stock vs stock which should be bone dead set stable no testing involved, fx-9590 would be a better buy. It can be a cool running processor.

So demanding is a of forum to set and see stability. Who am I kidding.

If stability was set aside, I can tell you guys I've gamed in the 7 ghz area with fx-8300 while running 2 cores with LN2.... and it was stable.... enough for gaming any how.

Think I got a few points across if it matters or not here.... is beyond me.

700gpm doesn't tell me water delta. I can tell you that fx-8300 took about 1.7v at around 5600mhz as well. But I know the delta was sub ambient on my loop lol. There's no way I could have done it without chilling on about 7 or 8 processors I've done.... I guess mine just where not cherry

 

[Kenrou]

How was gaming on 2 cores at 7ghz, and FPS difference ? assuming you got bottlenecked by GPU or...

 

[caddi daddi]

for me any more, benching stable is i can save the screen shot.
game stable is i can get through the game.
but for the guy at the other end of the internet wee all need somthing that tells us the guys rig is going to play nice, so what do you do.........

 

[EarthDog]

How was gaming on 2 cores at 7ghz, and FPS difference ? assuming you got bottlenecked by GPU or...

I'd imagine it stopped scaling in the 5 ghz range. There are plenty of games that top out the cpu earlier than most think, even an amD with a high end single card. Of course this is assuming 1080 with ultra type settings and not lower resolutions that are more cpu bound.

Take a gander at the techreports' game reviews that show cpu scaling and see.

 

[Sologuy]

And your right. Stability is in the eye of beholder. So stock vs stock which should be bone dead set stable no testing involved, fx-9590 would be a better buy. It can be a cool running processor.

So demanding is a of forum to set and see stability. Who am I kidding.

If stability was set aside, I can tell you guys I've gamed in the 7 ghz area with fx-8300 while running 2 cores with LN2.... and it was stable.... enough for gaming any how.

Think I got a few points across if it matters or not here.... is beyond me.

Yep, that's how I see this issue too. If its stable for what the user does on the machine, then its good enough for them!

 

[zPacKRat]

Ricky Bobby says, You made that CPU your *****!

 

[TZO2K15]

Wow! 80+c!?

Damn, I'm sure glad I went for the FX 8350, as I try to future-proof as much as possible, hell, my last build can still stand another 5 more years before it was spent, but the ole' phenom was bottle-neckin' my r9 290x...