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

Some questions regarding FX 8320 OC

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

Bobert

New Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2014
Hello overclockers! I registered here with hope to get some help and guidance regarding my recent trip into the overclocking territory. I'm completely new to all of this and I apologize in advance if I ask something incredibly stupid or obvious.

My rig:
--
CPU: AMD FX 8320
MOBO: AsRock Fatal1ty 990FX Killer
COOLER: Noctua DH-14
RAM: Patriot Viper3 1866Mhz, 8GB (2x4GB)
GPU: MSI Geforce GTX 780 3GB DDR5 Gaming OC
SSD: SSD Intel 120GB 530
HDD: Toshiba 2TB,7200rpm, 64MB HDD
PSU: XFX Pro Series CoreEdition 80 650W
CASE: Corsair Graphite Series 230T Windowed Black with Red LED
OS: Windows 7 Ultimate 64bit
--

With some trial and error I managed to get my FX 8320 to 4.5 GHz just by increasing multiplier, and uping the voltage very slightly (1.2875V to 1,3000V). I disabled power saving settings but left everything else on auto. 4.5 GHz on 1.300V seems insane as most OC guides suggest 1.4XXV. Honestly I thougt I'd be lucky if I got it to 4.2 GHz.

I feel like I achieved 4.5 GHz way too easy and I'm wondering if I missed something crucial or if I'm doing something terribly terribly wrong.

My BIOS settings:
--
CPU Frequency Multiplier: x22.5 4500MHz (changed from default x17.5 3500MHz)
CPU Voltage: 1.3000V (changed from default 1.2875V)
NB Frequency Multiplier: x11.0 2200Mhz (default)
CPU NB Voltage: 1.1750V (deafult)
HT Bus Speed: Auto (2000MHz deafult)
HT BUS Width: 16 bit

DRAM Frequency: Auto (default DDR3-1600)

DRAM Voltage: Auto (default 1.500V)
CPU Voltage Offset: Auto (default +50mV)
NB Voltage: Auto (default 1.10V)
HT Voltage: Auto (default 1.200V)
CPU VDDA Voltage: Auto (deafult 2.56V)
PCIE VDDA Voltage: Auto (default 1.81V)

Spread Spectrum, AMD Turbo Core Technology, AMD APM, Cool'n'Quiet, C1E - disabled.
Core C6 Mode - enabled as it made no difference when disabled.
CPU Thermal Throttle - Auto
--

1. VOLTAGE:
My main concern is voltage. Stock voltage was set at 1.2875V. I moved it to the next setting, 1.300V. However when I open up CPU-Z/AIDA64 CPUID I get 4 different values while idle and under load.

IDLE:
1.272V
1.256V
1.264V
1.280V

UNDER LOAD:
1.240V
1.232V
1.224V
1.216V

I guess this is Vdroop. My motherboard does not have LLC settings. This voltage drop occurs when I'm stress testing/gaming but it doesn't seem to affect performance; CPU clock stays at 4500 MHz all the time, I don't get any fps drops or any stutter/lag, everything is running fine. Is this constant voltage change irreversibly damaging my motherboard or CPU in some way? How is it possible that such high clock speed runs at voltage that low? :-/

2. RAM SPEED:
I noticed when I tried to increase RAM speed from 1600 to 1866 my system would become unstable and crash within 5 to 10 mins in AIDA64 stress test. I decided to leave it at 1600 even though my RAM is rated at 1866 as I heard it does not impact gaming performance that much. Would you agree?

3. HTT SPEED:
I've seen that default HTT Speed for FX 8320 is 2600 Mhz. My motherboard defaults it to 2000 MHz. I left it as it is, would changing this to 2600 MHz make any drastic difference in gaming?

4. STRESS TESTING AND TEMPERATURES:
I stress tested my system with AIDA64 extreme for 8+ hours and it remained stable throughout the test with max socket temp 50 C and max core temp 33 C under load. Since I use my system mostly for gaming I fired up World of Warcraft and Hitman Absolution, it ran without any trouble, very nice and fast. I've been using it like this for 3 days now without any trouble. From this I concluded that my system is stable. Hopefully I'm right about that. I did read that temperature readings for cpu core are not correct until they reach around 40 C, is this correct? Is it normal for cpu socket temp to be that much higher than the core temp? Am I doing this part correctly?

Hopefully my questions make sense, thank you for reading.
 

Mandrake4565

Mr. Clean Senior Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2012
Bobert welcome to the forum, to start off a picture is worth a thousand words. Please have a looksy at this link this is the type of info that helps us have a proverbial look under the hood so to speak. What you should do is open download and open HWMonitor and stress test it then post the screen shots shown in that link.

That said you may have a low voltage ocing chip on your hands, we have another member that recently purchased a Fx 8320 and it's an overclocking gem. I do not know your motherboard well so if you say it has no Cpu LLC to help control the Voltage droop then yes it's going to droop. The constant voltage change isn't going to hurt the motherboard per se, though you are running the Cpu out of spec so there is always a risk. Here is a link where on of our members tested his chip on the Asrock Fatlady

I noticed when I tried to increase RAM speed from 1600 to 1866 my system would become unstable and crash within 5 to 10 mins in AIDA64 stress test. I decided to leave it at 1600 even though my RAM is rated at 1866 as I heard it does not impact gaming performance that much. Would you agree?
We will need more info on what ram you have to help you out with it. When you post the screen shots shown in the link I provided, will help us in that dept. Note that some ram kits do not play nice with AMD cpu's, notably Kinston for what ever reason. Additionally, some Fx Cpu's need a bump in Cpu Nb Voltage to run 1866 or above. My 8350 has a particularly weak IMC and it needs 1.35 Cpu Nb Voltage to run 1866 or above. The difference in gaming with 1600 or 1866 is not huge but there can be a difference depending on the game.

3. HTT SPEED:
I've seen that default HTT Speed for FX 8320 is 2600 Mhz. My motherboard defaults it to 2000 MHz. I left it as it is, would changing this to 2600 MHz make any drastic difference in gaming?
I have not seen any drastic changes gaming with the Ht Link speed turned up though testing it may be in order.


4. STRESS TESTING AND TEMPERATURES:
I stress tested my system with AIDA64 extreme for 8+ hours and it remained stable throughout the test with max socket temp 50 C and max core temp 33 C under load. Since I use my system mostly for gaming I fired up World of Warcraft and Hitman Absolution, it ran without any trouble, very nice and fast. I've been using it like this for 3 days now without any trouble. From this I concluded that my system is stable. Hopefully I'm right about that. I did read that temperature readings for cpu core are not correct until they reach around 40 C, is this correct? Is it normal for cpu socket temp to be that much higher than the core temp? Am I doing this part correctly?
I do not find AIDA to be a useful stress test for my needs, I have found instances where I have had crashes after passing hours of AIDA 64. I find that for my needs and uses if I can pass 2 hours of Prime 95 blend my rig will take anything I throw at it. There are plenty of forum members that use AIDA 64 and believe in it, so if you're not having issues with your rig after 8 hours, then you're good to go.
 
OP
B

Bobert

New Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2014
Thank you for your swift and helpful reply Mandrake.

Here are some snapshots as requested, taken under stress test, 45+ min in.

cpuzCPU.jpg

cpuzMEM.jpg

cpuzSPD.jpg

HWMonitor.jpg
 

manu2b

Member
Joined
Feb 6, 2011
I do not find AIDA to be a useful stress test for my needs, I have found instances where I have had crashes after passing hours of AIDA 64. I find that for my needs and uses if I can pass 2 hours of Prime 95 blend my rig will take anything I throw at it. There are plenty of forum members that use AIDA 64 and believe in it, so if you're not having issues with your rig after 8 hours, then you're good to go.

I am totally with you Manny: AIDA64 is not a good indicator regarding stability, on either Intel and AMD) IMO.

I can pass 12+ hours of AIDA stress test and crash in Cinebench.

My choice go to P95 and OCCT.

Usually, 6 hours are enough (let's say overnight).
 
OP
B

Bobert

New Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2014
So I went ahead and downloaded Prime95 and guess what? Few seconds in and I get errors. So it seems my system isn't as stable as I thought it is. Still it is strange as I passed 8+ hours in AIDA64 and had absolutely no problems at all while playing games. I'm guessing that "stability" is a very delicate term. I'll rely on Prime95 from now on.

Back to the drawing board for me, thank you for your replies and suggestions, I really appreciate it!
 

Johan45

Benching Team Leader Super Moderator
Joined
Dec 19, 2012
So you were using P95 in those screen shots Bobert? If so that's a very nice CPU. Your temps are good.

EDIT: I see I got my answer. Yes P95 is a tough on the CPU kind of test. I have used AIDA64 in the past as well and wasn't happy with my results. I swear by P95 as well now. You'll just need to keep upping the voltage a bit at a time and testing Bobert
 

Mandrake4565

Mr. Clean Senior Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2012
Stability is a touchy subject, everyone has their own definition of it. It's your system so it only has to be good with you. As I said for myself if I pass 2 hours prime blend, my rig will take anything I throw at it.

A suggestion, read these two guides Bulldozer overclocking guide and AMD's Fx performance tuning guide, just an FYI the AMD Performance tuning guide is a PDF. Even if you have read guides before, I feel reading the AMD guide is a must, they go into detail about the different settings, if you really want to learn about OCing. Both guides are on ASUS Motherboards so the terminology/Settings on the ASRock board is a bit different.

CPU: AMD FX 8320
MOBO: AsRock Fatal1ty 990FX Killer
COOLER: Noctua DH-14
RAM: Patriot Viper3 1866Mhz, 8GB (2x4GB)
GPU: MSI Geforce GTX 780 3GB DDR5 Gaming OC
SSD: SSD Intel 120GB 530
HDD: Toshiba 2TB,7200rpm, 64MB HDD
PSU: XFX Pro Series CoreEdition 80 650W
CASE: Corsair Graphite Series 230T Windowed Black with Red LED
OS: Windows 7 Ultimate 64bit
Can you also stick this in your signature, this way we can all see what's in your rig without having to go to your first post. Click on settings at the top of the page then on the left side panel click on edit signature.
Capture2.PNG
 

trents

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2008
Manny, I don't think he has access to the Sig tool yet. No gold star. Needs more posts.

Bobert, you may want to take advantage of your CPU's relatively strong integrated memory controller (IMC) and take full advantage of your 1866 mhz rated RAM as well by going into bios and setting the Memory Frequency to Manual and choosing the XMP setting (See the CPU SPD tab). If at some point you decide to use the HT Reference frequency (aka, FSB) to assist the overclock then you may want to dial the RAM frequency back to 1600. I realize that last sentence probably went totally over your head but it may make more sense later.
 
Last edited:

trents

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2008
Not sure either but when enough have been made there is a gold star beneath the user name.
 
OP
B

Bobert

New Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2014
Thank you for all of your suggestions gentlemen, you have all been very kind and helpful. When I get more free time I'll fiddle with the settings a bit, I'll keep you posted. :)
 

Johan45

Benching Team Leader Super Moderator
Joined
Dec 19, 2012
Sure thing Bobert, you know where to find us.
 

rescuetoaster

Member
Joined
Jan 4, 2012
Seems to me like your voltage is just too low. Try 1.35ish and see how that goes, or walk it up until it's stable.
 
Last edited:

RGone

Senior DFI Staff
Joined
Apr 20, 2004
Location
JAX, Mississauna
"rescuetoaster" is likely on the correct trail...

...correct trail in that the OP says that he can go hours using the load/stress generated by Aida64 but the first time he goes and tests with P95 Blend mode, there are failures within "seconds" and not what appears everything being Aokay when testing with Aida 64. Obviously there is pretty great difference between the pressure applied to the system between the two different pieces of software loader/stressor.

Also there can be a possible great difference between what cpu voltage AMD assigns as the default voltage that should be applied to the cpu just to run the cpus stock or unloaded speed when not influenced by Cool N Quiet. Compare the difference in default non Cool N Quiet cpu speeds between the FX-8320 and the FX-8350.
Code:
Processor                           FX-8320           FX-8350
Default Frequency (MHz)              3500	        4000    Not influenced by Cool N Quiet.
Turbo Frequency (MHz)	             4000	        4200    Turbo Never uses over half the cores.

When you inspect the difference in the various cpu speeds it can be seen that the default voltage of the two cpus can be or could be pretty different. A cpu with a 500Mhz slower default speed can or could require much less cpu voltage at default speed than the one set to run 500Mhz faster at default speed.

So depending on the actual quality of the cpu itself, an FX-8320 could be programmed to 'ask' the motherboard for a lower Vcore than we are used to seeing when dealing with the faster FX-8350. You could get a better glimpse of what AMD thought was the quality of the FX-8320 by looking at the P-States listed for the particular CPU of the OP.

Now when TurboCore is disabled as all of us do since we normally don't want a varying CPU multiplier when under load, then the cpu cannot report a higher required Vcore to the motherboard. It is because we know we turned off TurboCore and now have ALL 8 cores running, that we hardly ever run the cpu voltage (Vcore) at Auto and submit the system to P95 Blend mode. Auto Vcore no longer senses any extra voltage requests from the cpu and only CPU_LLC (not adjustable on the Killer) can add any additional Vcore to the cpu. All those hardware or software variables can result in a fast error when the cpu is subjected to a real load like P95 Blend on the cpu, IMC and ram.

At first we are impressed by the low Vcore that the OP's cpu seems to need to reach 4.5Ghz but we all know there is a big difference between just booting windows and not doing much and booting into windows and doing some heavy lifting such as P95 Blend mode.

OP is definitely going to have to add Vcore for more overall stability as evidenced by the quick failure of P95 Blend mode with only about 1.3Volts to the cpu at 4.5Ghz. It is the unexpected low Vcore noticed for his default slower, FX-8320 that is throwing the thought process off. However the quick failure of P95, when a good load from P95 Blend mode is applied, quickly does away with the idea of a super low Vcore cpu. As soon as a hefty load goes on ALL 8 cores enabled and working on the applied load...well the very low appearing Vcore requirements go out the window quickly.

We all hope for that super low Vcore cpu and we see the lower Vcore asked for by the FX-8320 against the considerably faster FX-8350 and "want" the user to have the "gem" but that may in fact not be so. It has been over three years since AMD released the FX series of cpus and I can count the number of real 'gem' cpus that " I " have actually seen come thru here on the fingers of one hand and that is not counting a thumb as finger.

OP will most certainly have to increase voltage to the cpu (Vcore) in order to pass the load that is on the cpu when loaded with P95 Blend mode.
RGone...ster.
 

Mandrake4565

Mr. Clean Senior Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2012
As always Rgonester, very well explained and you could have just said 4 but that wouldn't be the gonester. :D
 

RGone

Senior DFI Staff
Joined
Apr 20, 2004
Location
JAX, Mississauna
Hale "manny" I just thought I would try and get a little of the idea of the thing across. We know these things. We help most by just saying do this and let us see CPUz and HWMonitor and tell them what is next. I can probably count on 8 fingers, considering my ole brain cells, the number that have come in here and took to the idea of overclocking like young ducks do to water. They got it.

I just hoped the more that TurboCore was looked at and how a cpu is setup by the mobo, well it might not be such black art. Hehehe. Who in hale knows. Not me boss as I used to say.
RGone...
 
OP
B

Bobert

New Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2014
So I'm back with a little update;

When I put my Vcore at 1.35+ socket temperature gets quite high, around 72-74 C. Core temp never goes above 47 C.
I suspect this is due to the VRM overheating. I've had Prime 95 failing on 4.3GHz @ 1.35 and I didn't want to risk burning something up so I decided to settle for less.

I enabled XMP profile as trents suggested, increased multiplier to x 20,5 and left voltage at stock (1.2875V).

Here are the results after roughly two hours of Prime 95 blend test:
Clipboard01111.jpg

What do you guys think? I realize this is fairly modest overclock but to be honest after a lot of exhausting trial and error I'm happy with it since it's on stock voltage and temps seem to be fine.
 

Mandrake4565

Mr. Clean Senior Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2012
Think you should get some fans on the VRM heatsinks and or behind the mother board to get the Cpu temp a bit closer to the package temp. Otherwise it looks good.