- Joined
- Sep 7, 2013
Yeah, things changed to help protect the sellers a bit more.
100 posts is what ya need now.
-
Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!
whats your thoughts on a FX-6300
- Thread starter ikpthegame
- Start date
100 posts is what ya need now.
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2012
Unfortunately with these chips they require a stout power section to run well when really pushing, ie upper 4's and beyond. They also need big cooling when one starts to step on it's neck and makes it sqeeee.
Alaric
New Member
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2011
- Location
- Satan's Colon, US
And there is a nice deal on a CHV right now. About a month early for me. I really hadn't planned on messing with the FX family further , but I keep thinking of all the fun I'm missing with this board. If Zen weren't a new socket I might have been able to talk myself in to holding off on a new rig till then. If the OP really wants to lean on his chip I'd recommend taking a long look at it when he can , if it's still there. If I had the cash I'd jump on it.
Alaric
New Member
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2011
- Location
- Satan's Colon, US
$40 off is nice. That way you $40 more to put towards cooling. 
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2006
Reading through this thread makes me wonder if I've been doing it wrong all along. My stock FX 8350 should only be marginally better than a FX 6300 for gaming, and I've been using it with a 980TI. (3440x1440).
I've always thought that as long as my GPU usage was maxed out then there was no CPU bottleneck. There is only one instance which I believe I was hitting a CPU bottleneck. That was in Battlefield 4 in one specific location where I crest a hill overlooking a large area of the map in RUSH mode which funnels a large percentage of action into said area. At that point my frame rate reliably tanks ( down to about 30 - 35 fps). At that point, graphs show my GPU at only 50 - 60 % usage, but my System RAM was also pegged at 98%, so there is that.
But any other title I can think of is always maxing out my GPU usage whenever I start to feel it in the frames and check the graphs.
Maybe this is more an issue for players trying to work with the full range of their 120hz and upwards displays ?? Or does that even make sense.
I've always thought that as long as my GPU usage was maxed out then there was no CPU bottleneck. There is only one instance which I believe I was hitting a CPU bottleneck. That was in Battlefield 4 in one specific location where I crest a hill overlooking a large area of the map in RUSH mode which funnels a large percentage of action into said area. At that point my frame rate reliably tanks ( down to about 30 - 35 fps). At that point, graphs show my GPU at only 50 - 60 % usage, but my System RAM was also pegged at 98%, so there is that.
But any other title I can think of is always maxing out my GPU usage whenever I start to feel it in the frames and check the graphs.
Maybe this is more an issue for players trying to work with the full range of their 120hz and upwards displays ?? Or does that even make sense.
Alaric
New Member
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2011
- Location
- Satan's Colon, US
It's my understanding that the FX chips hit their sweet spot around 4.7 GHz , give or take. So much is dependent on the game itself , though. Some games will use cores as fast as you can provide them , and some would run better on an i3. Hopefully some of the smart(er than me) members will jump in on this. BF4 is pretty popular , so I'd be willing to bet the exact scenario you describe has been seen before. I'd do some quick research , but it's late and I'm tired. LOL
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2014
+1 - High voltage city after that most of the time.
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2012
Not really sure what you're asking but the CHV-z BIOS is very extensive. When you get it post here and we'll help you with what needs to be enabled/disabled. Have a read through the link in my sig. It'll give you a pretty good idea of what you'll need to do. There is also a ton of info here if you feel like doing some reading. http://www.overclockers.com/forums/...s-gt-gt-Using-the-AMD-FX-Bulldozer-Piledriver
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2012
If you're looking for specific BIOS settings for X oc there really isn't any. No chip that I have or have seen Oc's the same way. There are plenty of people on this forum that will help you push your chip if that's what the goal is. If you're going with a CHV/CHV F how far you're able to push is going to be determined by the cooling you have, the board is fully capable to push into the realms of extreme cooling. Johan and I just to name a few, have both pushed and tweaked our AMD Fx chips about as hard and far as anyone out there. If you're looking for a setup that is really fun to play with, there are few out there as fun as these Fx chips mated to a top end board such as the CHV.
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2012
Ok just wasn't sure exactly what you were asking. What I can tell you is these chips really shine if you can control the heat, both Johan and I have fans blowing directly on our Vrm heatsinks and also the backside of the socket area on the motherboard. Doing so will usually lower the socket temp around 10c. Something else to note is raising the Nb Frequency on these chips is also helpful. There are a few other pointers we can help you with but we can cross that bridge when the fun begins.
OP
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2007
- Thread Starter
- #35
Ok just wasn't sure exactly what you were asking. What I can tell you is these chips really shine if you can control the heat, both Johan and I have fans blowing directly on our Vrm heatsinks and also the backside of the socket area on the motherboard. Doing so will usually lower the socket temp around 10c. Something else to note is raising the Nb Frequency on these chips is also helpful. There are a few other pointers we can help you with but we can cross that bridge when the fun begins.
Sounds good man, I can't wait.
Alaric
New Member
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2011
- Location
- Satan's Colon, US
The top FX chips have developed a reputation for producing big heat and small OC. Most boards won't even bench them at stock speeds because they throttle due to heat or not enough power. Pushing them requires a custom water loop and one of two motherboards , all while being the most expensive FXs. I wouldn't buy one , but it depends on what you want. For $100 less you can get an 8320E. Easier to OC , less heat , less power usage. It's only down 700 MHz from the 9590 and you can likely make up most or all of that and have some fun doing it. My $.02
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2012
It's an Epeen chip so the uninformed can say they have a Pc that is at 5.0 Ghz. I agree with Alaric, running on daily requires nothing short of a Asus Sabertooth 990 Fx or the Crosshair V F/Z, and big water. I've seen experienced overclockers on this forum have problems just trying to get this chip to run at stock speeds, even with those components listed above. These 9590's are binned as really high leakage chips, meaning the voltage they need for X Oc is usually a lot higher then the 83xx chips. Looking at the P-States on a lot of them they tend to need 1.5 V or more just for 4.8 Ghz on all 8 cores. As an example my 8350 needed 1.48V for 4.8 to pass 2 hours prime and my temps with my custom loop, see signature, were in the mid 50's. In my eyes these chips were produced for overclocking on DICE/Ln2 nothing less.
