The Vishera Review: AMD FX-8350, FX-8320, FX-6300 and FX-4300 Tested
by Anand Lal Shimpi on October 23, 2012 12:00 AM ESTOverclocking
AMD's FX architecture was designed for very high clock speeds. With Piledriver we're able to see some of that expressed in overclocking headroom. All of these chips should be good for close to 5GHz depending on your luck of the draw and cooling. For all of these overclocking tests I used AMD's branded closed loop liquid cooler which debuted back with the original FX launch. I didn't have enough time to go through every chip so I picked the FX-8350 and FX-4300 to show the range of overclocks that may be possible. In my case the FX-4300 hit 5GHz with minimal effort, while the FX-8350 topped out at 4.8GHz (I could hit 5GHz but it wasn't stable through all of our tests). Both of these overclocks were achieved with no more than 10% additional core voltage and by simple multiplier adjustments (hooray for unlocked everything). The increase in performance is substantial:
The increase in power consumption is pretty bad however, you do pay for these types of voltage driven overclocks:
The 5GHz FX-4300 is pushed into FX-8300 territory, while the 4.8GHz 8350 is in a league of its own at just under 300W of total system power consumption.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
250 Comments
View All Comments
MySchizoBuddy - Tuesday, October 23, 2012 - link
correct for your workload AMD is a better choice in speed and costBlibbax - Tuesday, October 23, 2012 - link
Read the techreport review. Intel still comes out on top.CeriseCogburn - Tuesday, October 30, 2012 - link
Don't worry AMD is going to SteamRoll Intel soon !CeriseCogburn - Tuesday, October 30, 2012 - link
NO, amd never does better. It does worse, often by a lot, and sad little cheapo SB's spank it sorry a lot of the time.Mugur - Tuesday, October 23, 2012 - link
I'm trying to find a good scenario for those desktop cpus... Cheap 8 core virtualization hosts? Video encoding? Other than that, in this "mobile" world when every desktop PC looks out of time, I don't know what you can do with them. They are obviously not good for light loads or gaming...lmcd - Tuesday, October 23, 2012 - link
The architecture makes more sense when less modules are used, i.e. the APU series. Look at how Trinity destroyed Llano, both desktop and mobile. And note that an A10+6670 is a perfect midrange gaming value.CeriseCogburn - Tuesday, October 30, 2012 - link
fanboy much ? Now we have again the amd perfection. LOLSB smacks it down, as does nVidia. Sorry fanboy, amd has nothing that is a perfect value, especially in gaming.
RussianSensation - Tuesday, November 6, 2012 - link
What are you blabbing about? You should be banned from this forum.While Intel's CPUs are clearly in a class of their own for high-end CPU gaming rigs, AMD's GPUs are doing very well this generation, having captured single-GPU performance crown, performance/$ and overclocking performance. The minute you said NV smacks AMD's GPU around, you lost ALL credibility.
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Catalyst_12...
You may want to take a look at 90% of all the games that came out in 2012 - GTX680 loses to 7970 GE (or 680 OC vs. 7970 OC). Facts must not sit well with AMD haters.
mayankleoboy1 - Tuesday, October 23, 2012 - link
Nice performance predictions for Haswell and Steamroller.But IMHO, 15% increase for Haswell is too high and 15% for Steamroller is low.
IMHO, more realistic expectations would be :
Haswell 10%. probably more like 8%.
Steamroller 20%
dishayu - Tuesday, October 23, 2012 - link
Steamroller 15% is straight from the horse's (AMD's) mouth and 15% for Haswell is well within reason because it's a "tock" (new architecture). So, i think 15% for both works out fine for making speculative statements at this moment.