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

New Setup, Need council on OCing. Am I maxed out or can I try diff settings?

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

Johan45

Benching Team Leader Super Moderator
Joined
Dec 19, 2012
You're right, typically you shouldn't need 1.5v + on any FX to get to 4.5GHz, that being said It can come down to the chip and the motherboard. MSI doesn't have a very good rep when it comes to overclocking the FX. Do you know how old your chip is? Some of the old original chips did take a lot of volts. I had one but it was still only 1.45v at 4.5G.
When it come to memory and amount, like E_D said we have had a lot of experience with the FX. The FX is hit and miss with the IMC in the first place, I have had at least a dozen different chips over the last few years and all of them are different. But the memory itself in that quantity comes down to physical addressing regardless of the speed. Naturally the more memory the more addressing that needs to be allocated. Each stick has chips on it we call ICs the higher the density of the stick the more chips typically. So lets just say there's 1 chip per GB that gives you 8 per stick and 32 in total that the IMC has to keep track of. Now If I use a 2x4 kit that 8 in total. This in itself makes the IMC work harder. I already made my suggestion earlier bout the ram. Unless you are video editing or doing heavy work in photoshop 32 GB of ram is just way too much, you'll never use it.
I have a CPU here that has a very good IMC and with a decent 1866 kit of 2x4 I can run the CPU_NB up to 3000+ with less than 1.3v. Right now I have that chip(9370) in my HTPC with a 2x8GB Geil 1600 kit that I bought. I had a heck of a time getting it stable with that ram. CPU_NB is at 2400 and ram at 1600 and I needed the same amount of voltage to the IMC that I did for 1866 and 3100 NB.
There is nothing written down about the "rules" for an FX and the amount of ram it can handle. Like I said though I did check the QVL list for your board and 32GB at 2133 isn't on there neith is your particualar ram at that speed. My suggestion would be to start the OC with 2 sticks around the 1600 mark. When you get stuck try adding some CPU_NB voltage instead of the core. That MIGHT help keep the V_Core down but no guarentees.
 
OP
aweaver255

aweaver255

Registered
Joined
Apr 11, 2016
Location
New Hampshire
You're right, typically you shouldn't need 1.5v + on any FX to get to 4.5GHz, that being said It can come down to the chip and the motherboard. MSI doesn't have a very good rep when it comes to overclocking the FX. Do you know how old your chip is? Some of the old original chips did take a lot of volts. I had one but it was still only 1.45v at 4.5G.
When it come to memory and amount, like E_D said we have had a lot of experience with the FX. The FX is hit and miss with the IMC in the first place, I have had at least a dozen different chips over the last few years and all of them are different. But the memory itself in that quantity comes down to physical addressing regardless of the speed. Naturally the more memory the more addressing that needs to be allocated. Each stick has chips on it we call ICs the higher the density of the stick the more chips typically. So lets just say there's 1 chip per GB that gives you 8 per stick and 32 in total that the IMC has to keep track of. Now If I use a 2x4 kit that 8 in total. This in itself makes the IMC work harder. I already made my suggestion earlier bout the ram. Unless you are video editing or doing heavy work in photoshop 32 GB of ram is just way too much, you'll never use it.
I have a CPU here that has a very good IMC and with a decent 1866 kit of 2x4 I can run the CPU_NB up to 3000+ with less than 1.3v. Right now I have that chip(9370) in my HTPC with a 2x8GB Geil 1600 kit that I bought. I had a heck of a time getting it stable with that ram. CPU_NB is at 2400 and ram at 1600 and I needed the same amount of voltage to the IMC that I did for 1866 and 3100 NB.
There is nothing written down about the "rules" for an FX and the amount of ram it can handle. Like I said though I did check the QVL list for your board and 32GB at 2133 isn't on there neith is your particualar ram at that speed. My suggestion would be to start the OC with 2 sticks around the 1600 mark. When you get stuck try adding some CPU_NB voltage instead of the core. That MIGHT help keep the V_Core down but no guarentees.

Nah I'm not sure on the age of the CPU. If it's old then that could be the culprit. Like I had stated before I really need the RAM. I don't do any gaming, this PC is strictly for video editing. I use Adobe's Master Collection and I'm back and forth cross platform all the time. RAM is a must in my case and I use all of it and then some into my SSD's, and whatever I could get for a stable OC is what I'm going to have to settle with.

I'm so curious to throw in that single 8GB Samsung stick and do some testing, it's really getting the best of me lol. On topic of the RAM though, I did run memtest on the current sticks and passed without error.
 

Johan45

Benching Team Leader Super Moderator
Joined
Dec 19, 2012
If ram is where it's at you do have a bit of room. Upping the speed a bit and also NB speed would gain you some in your editing. Maybe not as much as more core speed but it will help.
 
OP
aweaver255

aweaver255

Registered
Joined
Apr 11, 2016
Location
New Hampshire
Great news for the Overclocking Community! I received two emails from AMD Tech Support answering the questions we had pertaining to some of the talk in this thread as we weren't able to find any definitive answers. First we're talking specifically about the FX 8350 but this may apply to all AMD Processors. Here's my questions and their answers:

Question 1: "What capacity RAM can the FX 8350 handle? 8gb? 16gb? 32gb? 64 gb? If the motherboard allows it, would one be able to install 4 sticks of 8gb RAM at 1600MHz or 1866MHz etc...? We're talking capacity not bandwidth. If you could give me some answers on this it would be of such a great help. Thanks for your time! :) Adam"

AMD Tech Support Answer:"I confirm that RAM size does not have any effect on the CPU. If the motherboard supports 32GB of RAM, 8GB in 4 channels for example, then that will have no effect on the CPU (as far as capacity compatibility)."

Question 2:"In regards to this same subject, does having the full 32GB on the motherboard have any effect on the stress to the integrated memory controller? I'm guessing the memory controller is rated to run any capacity ram at default factory speed? What is the IMC rated for anyways? Some boards take 64GB which is why I ask. Is there some data sheet I could read about the IMC?"

AMD Tech Support Answer:"In the past the memory controller was on the motherboard. For the past few generations of CPUs from AMD the controller has been moved to the CPU itself. This has many benefits such as reducing latency. Hence Ram size has no impact on the IMC of the processor."

So this lays to rest the issues and talk about RAM and the IMC here. Please keep this info in mind and share this knowledge we have learned from our friends at AMD!
 

Johan45

Benching Team Leader Super Moderator
Joined
Dec 19, 2012
Hence Ram size has no impact on the IMC of the processor

I really can't see how this "tech" could possibly say or believe this. Just an increase in CPU speed has an effect on the IMC. I find it odd how he refers to an "on board" mem controller. Now physically they're not the same but on board and internal both perform the same function. Any one familiar with the 775 platform will know that the more memory and faster the memory the more stress it put on that chip which in the end requires more voltage for stability. It really doesn't matter if it's Intel or AMD the IMC will require some tweaking depending on density and speed of the ram. If that wasn't the case why are the voltages adjustable?
 
OP
aweaver255

aweaver255

Registered
Joined
Apr 11, 2016
Location
New Hampshire
I really can't see how this "tech" could possibly say or believe this. Just an increase in CPU speed has an effect on the IMC. I find it odd how he refers to an "on board" mem controller. Now physically they're not the same but on board and internal both perform the same function. Any one familiar with the 775 platform will know that the more memory and faster the memory the more stress it put on that chip which in the end requires more voltage for stability. It really doesn't matter if it's Intel or AMD the IMC will require some tweaking depending on density and speed of the ram. If that wasn't the case why are the voltages adjustable?

Don't be confused here, we're only talking specifics to my case and that involves RAM capacity, not speed. I'd be willing to bet that the IMC would have the same ratings as the CPU since they're together in this case. As far as speed, which was never the issue in this thread, I can send them a follow up question in regards to that if you'd like to have a difinitive answer? In my case I'm not adjusting the IMC voltage separately and as we see all of my voltages are within "safe operating" specs. If you were to up the voltages of the IMC outside of spec then yes, that's an obvious stress on the IMC lol.
 

EarthDog

Gulper Nozzle Co-Owner
Joined
Dec 15, 2008
Location
Buckeyes!
Great news for the Overclocking Community! I received two emails from AMD Tech Support answering the questions we had pertaining to some of the talk in this thread as we weren't able to find any definitive answers. First we're talking specifically about the FX 8350 but this may apply to all AMD Processors. Here's my questions and their answers:

Question 1: "What capacity RAM can the FX 8350 handle? 8gb? 16gb? 32gb? 64 gb? If the motherboard allows it, would one be able to install 4 sticks of 8gb RAM at 1600MHz or 1866MHz etc...? We're talking capacity not bandwidth. If you could give me some answers on this it would be of such a great help. Thanks for your time! :) Adam"

AMD Tech Support Answer:"I confirm that RAM size does not have any effect on the CPU. If the motherboard supports 32GB of RAM, 8GB in 4 channels for example, then that will have no effect on the CPU (as far as capacity compatibility)."

Question 2:"In regards to this same subject, does having the full 32GB on the motherboard have any effect on the stress to the integrated memory controller? I'm guessing the memory controller is rated to run any capacity ram at default factory speed? What is the IMC rated for anyways? Some boards take 64GB which is why I ask. Is there some data sheet I could read about the IMC?"

AMD Tech Support Answer:"In the past the memory controller was on the motherboard. For the past few generations of CPUs from AMD the controller has been moved to the CPU itself. This has many benefits such as reducing latency. Hence Ram size has no impact on the IMC of the processor."

So this lays to rest the issues and talk about RAM and the IMC here. Please keep this info in mind and share this knowledge we have learned from our friends at AMD!
What you should have asked is what the question is at hand..."Does increased memory capacity (i.e 2x4GB vs 4x8GB) and DIMMs limit memory overclocking/speeds possible?"

Sorry, I can't say I buy his other answer being in overclocking for well over 12 years and watching EVERYONE say the same thing and post their experiences proving what we are saying contrary to the Tier 1 AMD rep reading out of a manual.

Remind me again (sorry, long thread)... did you get 32GB stable at 2133Mhz or above?
 

Lochekey

Senior Pink Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2015
There is also the underlying issue of running mixed ram kits. I would be interested to know what AMDs official line is on running mixed ram.
 
OP
aweaver255

aweaver255

Registered
Joined
Apr 11, 2016
Location
New Hampshire
What you should have asked is what the question is at hand..."Does increased memory capacity (i.e 2x4GB vs 4x8GB) and DIMMs limit memory overclocking/speeds possible?"

Sorry, I can't say I buy his other answer being in overclocking for well over 12 years and watching EVERYONE say the same thing and post their experiences proving what we are saying contrary to the Tier 1 AMD rep reading out of a manual.

Remind me again (sorry, long thread)... did you get 32GB stable at 2133Mhz or above?

Ok so there it is. You've completely missed why I chose to contact AMD in the first place. The question was never the speed of RAM, but specific to capacity. That has to do with the mobo and not the CPU in regards to capacity. I'm not trying to OC my RAM, I'm OCing my CPU. Based on their answers and me being within specs for voltages and temps, it does not matter whether I have one stick of RAM or 4. I'm not stressing the IMC out either way in regards to capacity. As far as me getting the 32GB of RAM stable at 2133MHz, well again, I'm not OCing my RAM here, I'm OCing the CPU.

I'll forward your question over to AMD Tech Support, but I don't see how asking the same question in 2 different ways will provide any alternate answers. Also, keep on topic with AMD. While some of the "guidelines and techniques for tweaking" may be generalized, Intel is an entirely different topic.
 

Johan45

Benching Team Leader Super Moderator
Joined
Dec 19, 2012
Don't be confused here, we're only talking specifics to my case and that involves RAM capacity, not speed. I'd be willing to bet that the IMC would have the same ratings as the CPU since they're together in this case. As far as speed, which was never the issue in this thread, I can send them a follow up question in regards to that if you'd like to have a difinitive answer? In my case I'm not adjusting the IMC voltage separately and as we see all of my voltages are within "safe operating" specs. If you were to up the voltages of the IMC outside of spec then yes, that's an obvious stress on the IMC lol.
CPU voltage kept at 1.52v with the CPU-NB voltage at 1.3v and the DRAM voltage set at 1.64v.

CPU_NB voltage is the IMC.
I'm not confused , I know what I am saying. Goes back to what I said before about overcompensating the core voltage when it could be more CPU_NB voltage needed to accomodate the ram. That's all. I was trying to give you a way to lower the core voltage. Whether you believe me or the AMD guy is irrelevant. I do have a bit of experience with these chips, I know what it takes to make them go.
 

EarthDog

Gulper Nozzle Co-Owner
Joined
Dec 15, 2008
Location
Buckeyes!
As I said earlier, at the TOP END of your overclock (4.5Ghz is likely not it), the amount and speed of your memory can limit the CPU speeds (be it for voltage/temperature reasons or stability). It is the reason why competitive benchers, like Johan and myself only run the least amount needed for the benchmark so we can push the CPU clock higher. Now, that may not be happening here (memory limiting your overclock), you seem to just have a dud of a chip as we both mentioned earlier.

As far as intel, don't worry, I am not trying to derail the thread, just making a mention that we see the same behavior there, even if that is an apple and an orange. :grouphug:

As far as me getting the 32GB of RAM stable at 2133MHz, well again, I'm not OCing my RAM here, I'm OCing the CPU.
2133MHz is the rated speed of your memory. It wouldn't be overclocking (to the sticks), but it is to the AMD IMC as Kenrou has alluded to above.

Weird though... if I missed the point, how is my question (which is different than what you asked) asking the same thing in a different way??? (that is rhetorical).

I digress...perhaps I missed the point, but not according to where we last left off in post 64/66... oh well. :)
 
Last edited:

Woomack

Benching Team Leader
Joined
Jan 2, 2005
Looks like person who replied to above questions has no idea what is talking about and is clearly first contact or like some like to call it "firewall". Memory capacity affects stability of memory controller but it happens above some capacity. AMD FX ( or most motherboards for FX ) was designed to work with 4GB memory modules in older ( read lower ) capacity. That means most motherboards are prepared to support 4x4GB in double sided modules at default clock which is 1866.
Some 990FX boards don't like single sided modules and will work with them but won't overclock. I wasn't able to set more than 1866 clock using 2x8GB Crucial Ballistix LP memory which was working at 2133 on Intel platforms. This is memory on new IC.

If motherboard supports higher capacity memory also depends from BIOS and some other factors.
2000+ memory clock on AMD FX almost always requires higher CPU-NB voltage regardless of capacity. If you set voltage at auto then most motherboards will bump it by at least 0.1V just because these settings were tested as stable on some memory kits at the test stage.

Next thing is that AMD has generally poor support from motherboard manufacturers which are only releasing new microcode and similar updates after about 3 months after mobo premiere. Most motherboards were designed to work with memory modules manufactured 3 years ago and there are no significant changes in BIOS since then. Some manufacturers like Gigabyte rather drop support and design new PCB than continue releasing new BIOS for older series.

Simply AMD can support 32GB but there is much higher chance on old IC and at no more than 1866 clock. Also FSB/HTT overclocking can be limited or impossible above some point.
 
OP
aweaver255

aweaver255

Registered
Joined
Apr 11, 2016
Location
New Hampshire
There is also the underlying issue of running mixed ram kits. I would be interested to know what AMDs official line is on running mixed ram.

Would you mind defining the issue you speak of that pertains to this thread only and my case specifically, based on what you've read so far? I'd be happy to forward any questions you may have! :)

- - - Updated - - -

CPU_NB voltage is the IMC.
I'm not confused , I know what I am saying. Goes back to what I said before about overcompensating the core voltage when it could be more CPU_NB voltage needed to accomodate the ram. That's all. I was trying to give you a way to lower the core voltage. Whether you believe me or the AMD guy is irrelevant. I do have a bit of experience with these chips, I know what it takes to make them go.


Right but we're talking staying in the safe zones particularly. If I use the CPU multiplier method ONLY and keep the RAM speed the same for 2 sticks or 4 sticks, there was no difference. I've tested that already.

- - - Updated - - -

As I said earlier, at the TOP END of your overclock (4.5Ghz is likely not it), the amount and speed of your memory can limit the CPU speeds (be it for voltage/temperature reasons or stability). It is the reason why competitive benchers, like Johan and myself only run the least amount needed for the benchmark so we can push the CPU clock higher. Now, that may not be happening here (memory limiting your overclock), you seem to just have a dud of a chip as we both mentioned earlier.

As far as intel, don't worry, I am not trying to derail the thread, just making a mention that we see the same behavior there, even if that is an apple and an orange. :grouphug:

2133MHz is the rated speed of your memory. It wouldn't be overclocking (to the sticks), but it is to the AMD IMC as Kenrou has alluded to above.

Weird though... if I missed the point, how is my question (which is different than what you asked) asking the same thing in a different way??? (that is rhetorical).

So basically I'm underclocking the RAM. Would that mean less voltage? Or keep it at default setting for 1600MHz at 1.5v.
 

EarthDog

Gulper Nozzle Co-Owner
Joined
Dec 15, 2008
Location
Buckeyes!
So basically I'm underclocking the RAM. Would that mean less voltage? Or keep it at default setting for 1600MHz at 1.5v.
Perhaps. I do not recall what your CPUz SPD tab says. But typically if its rated at 2133 @ 1.65V, at 1600 it may be 1.5V. Check the SPD tab and see what it says.
 
OP
aweaver255

aweaver255

Registered
Joined
Apr 11, 2016
Location
New Hampshire
Perhaps. I do not recall what your CPUz SPD tab says. But typically if its rated at 2133 @ 1.65V, at 1600 it may be 1.5V. Check the SPD tab and see what it says.
Yes you're correct. During my CPU multiplier only tests with 2 sticks and 4 sticks, I kept them both at 1600MHz and 1.5v. Still, it made no difference to what I was able to do to the CPU in reaching higher clock speeds at lower CPU voltages.
 

EarthDog

Gulper Nozzle Co-Owner
Joined
Dec 15, 2008
Location
Buckeyes!
Yes you're correct. During my CPU multiplier only tests with 2 sticks and 4 sticks, I kept them both at 1600MHz and 1.5v. Still, it made no difference to what I was able to do to the CPU in reaching higher clock speeds at lower CPU voltages.
Dud CPU, sub-par MSI board, not enough NB voltage for the capacity...I would move on at 1600MHz and your 32GB. :)
 
Last edited:

Johan45

Benching Team Leader Super Moderator
Joined
Dec 19, 2012
Obviously this is going no-where. Let's just get back to finishing off your overclock. Where are you now as far as speeds etc...
 
OP
aweaver255

aweaver255

Registered
Joined
Apr 11, 2016
Location
New Hampshire
Hey that's what I was happy with! :) My goal from the beginning was to reach 4.5GHz with my setup. Having to go up to 1.5v, I didn't feel like I was doing something I should have but evidently I've done all I can do. So as it runs now, I'm stable at 4.5GHz, at 1.55v. CPU Temps: 33°C @ Idle, 51°C @ Full Load. RAM at 1600MHz at 1.5v. Unless I decided to keep going with the CPU voltage and keep it below max temp I think this is maxed out and cooled.
 

Kenrou

Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2014
How about selling the 4 sticks and getting just 2x16gb 1600mhz bog standard ? wouldn't that "ease the load" so to speak ?