Overclocking Amd Fx-6300

[Johan45]

Guys. I tried to go to 4.2 ghz and it seems like it freezes when i try playing battlefield 4. And yes johan. It has worked great for me until now

Good , glad it was working well for you Xg, Did you add any voltage for that 4.2 clock??

 

[xgjengen]

No i did not tweak anything else

 

[Mandrake4565]

Guys. I tried to go to 4.2 ghz and it seems like it freezes when i try playing battlefield 4. And yes johan. It has worked great for me until now

Did you stress test it running Prime 2 hours for 4.2?

 

[xgjengen]

I jumped from 4.1 to 4.3 cuz i knew it would work with the temps. But hey. At 4.2 my pc freezes after a 15min stress test

 

[Johan45]

I jumped from 4.1 to 4.3 cuz i knew it would work with the temps. But hey. At 4.2 my pc freezes after a 15min stress test

Right and how do you really know that?? You're going to need to add more CPU voltage to make it work. That in conjunction with the higher frequency will make more heat. You're not stable at 4.2 so you have no Idea how hot that is let alone stable at 4.3, This is something you have to do slowly.
Try it a 4.2 and add a bit of voltage and then check it, keep this up until it will run P95 for 20 minutes , monitor temps and then we'll know how hot it gets.

 

[xgjengen]

okay guys this is at running 4.2 ghz . 20minutes stress test before and after
I guess i tweaked the volts way to much


BEFORE



AFTER

 

[Mandrake4565]

Did you add voltage slowly or did you just set it higher because thats a pretty big jump in volts.

 

[xgjengen]

I just set it higher, i took it up 0.200 volts more

 

[Johan45]

Ya that's a big jump try again and maybe drop about .150v. That .2v is a lot when you're talking CPUs What we normally do is add 1 or 2 bumps to the original setting.

 

[xgjengen]

Here are my new results, i dropped it a little and i didnt get any freeze at all by a 25 minutes stress test. here u go

 

[Johan45]

That still seems like quite a large increase. On the last page you were at 1.332v under load from what I can see at 4.1, now you're at 1.452v at I'm not sure what speed 4.2 or 4.3 ?? but your temps are still getting into the end zone. Try dropping another .05v from that at least. You should have started with your original settings and just add a bit at a time. What you're doing isn't really the best way to achieve what you want. You want to be running 4.2,4.2 with as little voltage as you can get away with.

 

[Mandrake4565]

If it was stable in the first hwmonitor ss in post #126 you should set it back and then in crease the voltage .00625 or +1 and keep doing it until you can pass 2 hours of prime. It's a process that takes patience to do it correctly.

 

[xgjengen]

These are my new results

https://imgur.com/dzQyZy3

Im going to try running some games like battlefields and see if it freezes

 

[Johan45]

That looks a bit more reasonable with a voltage of 1.38, what clockspeed are you running ?

 

[Mandrake4565]

xgjengen, please use the inforum tool to host your pictures. It is helpful in two ways, first some people cannot or don't like to click on external links. Secondly in the future if someone looks at your thread for help it may eventually become a dead link and therefore not helpful to that person.
View attachment 144656

 

[trents]

xgjengen, please use the inforum tool to host your pictures. It is helpful in two ways, first some people cannot or don't like to click on external links. Secondly in the future if someone looks at your thread for help it may eventually become a dead link and therefore not helpful to that person.
View attachment 144656

Good point, Manny. Never thought of that.

 

[xgjengen]

The clockspeed is at 4.2 ghz for the moment. I might go up to 4.3ghz. Thanks manny ill do it

 

[Shell]

Anyone else running their 6300 in 3-core mode for 24/7 use?

I find it's an easy way to have a "heavy" OC while remaining cool on mid-range air, performance per clock seems the same, maybe better.

 

[RGone]

Anyone else running their 6300 in 3-core mode for 24/7 use?

I find it's an easy way to have a "heavy" OC while remaining cool on mid-range air, performance per clock seems the same, maybe better.

Have not seen a single user come thru here in over 2 years actually 'specify' they were using one half the cores. Might be one say something since you asked, but don't be surprised if there is no one jumping up and saying they do.
RGone...

 

[Shell]

Have not seen a single user come thru here in over 2 years actually 'specify' they were using one half the cores. Might be one say something since you asked, but don't be surprised if there is no one jumping up and saying they do.
RGone...

Ya it seems like a strange thing to run 1-per-CU mode, but for general use you'll often make use of 3 cores, hardly ever 6. I have 2 profiles saved in my BIOS so I can pick which I want at boot; 3 very overclocked cores or 6 lightly overclocked.

I get 1.29 in Cinebench 11.5 single-threaded amd64, which beats the FX-9590 by a hair(1.28) which is clocked 100MHz higher, maybe my CL8 DDR3-1600 gives it the edge.

At that point you're fighting sandy bridge single threaded speeds, i5-2400 gets 1.3, but cost 80% more, has a 4th core, uses WAY less power.
And haswell blows sandy away... fx6300/i5-2400 are old CPUs though.