Is my AMD FX 8350 Overheating?!?!?!? Please HELP!!!

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Sorry I think we got your core and socket temps confused.

If the 55C core temp reading is based on properly calibrated software then that's still 15C away from the maximum thermal margin for the CPU and perfectly fine.... Again, you really should use AMD Overdrive software for the actual CPU core temps. Within the scope of practical overclocking efforts, (typically <1.55V), the CPU can be operated continuously at any temp within the allowed thermal margin with no consequence to durability.

The 68C socket temp reading is pretty normal for that sort of load. If I recall the board will begin throttling the CPU at 70C or 80C socket temps (can't recall). It's common to have socket temps be the limiting factor for an overclock, especially when using AIOCLCs, which actually tend to make air-flow over the VRMs worse. If you can install a small fan over the VRM heatsink these temps will drop and open up some more headroom.

Obviously you would probably need a bit more than 1.41V to be stable at 4.8ghz, but I suspect finding a usable 4.8ghz overclock is probably well within the practical limits of the hardware you have there.

The durability of the system will not be compromised by disabling power saving features. You can run with or without them it really doesn't matter.
 


Thank for you clarifying all of that! It makes me feel better knowing that I am not destroying my computer lol... I will have to look into downloading AMD overdrive when I get home. Is that a monitoring program like HWmonitor? Because currently that is what I am using. Unfortunately after days and days of overclocking, I decided to just go back to my 4.5GHz overclock... As I stated previously, the temps are amazing at this speed and only using 1.344v for the voltage which is stock. I did NB overclock as opposed to multiplier overclocking. From what JayzTwoCents states, its better for "single core performance" so that is what I did. I'm currently at 4.5GHz. I had to change the NB frequency or whatever its called along with the HT Link so that its close to default. So I know its not damaging on that part. My memory is at 1800MHz I believe. I may go up a little in my overclock like 4.51-4.54 so that I can match my memory as close to 1866 as possible... But after running prime for over an hour and using my PC as normal, I didn't have any concerns or issues at 4.5GHz. I just wanted to make sure that having all those power saving features still off is fine. And from your clarification, I feel good now haha.

If I continue to "fiddle" with my overclock, will I damage anything on my PC? As in if I reset everything back to default and start fresh overclocking to try and achieve a higher speed? If I get lockups, BSOD (which never happened), or core failures on Prime 95, does it damage anything?
 
Overclocking via BCLK is primarily just a fine tuning issue. There's no inherent advantage to using the BCLK to overclock with other than being able to hit in-between clock speeds, or in some cases, with very high overclocks, some chips seem to respond better to running with lower multipliers for a given resulting clock speed. I would personally advise just leaving the BCLK alone at 200mhz and overclocking with multipliers first. Then after the fact you can come back and fine tune above that with the BCLK.

Example: Consider the following overclocks:
A:
200mhz BCLK
X24 4.8GHZ CPU
X12 2.4GHZ CPU-NB
X8 1600MHZ RAM

B:
240mhz BCLK
X20 4.8GHZ CPU
X10 2.4GHZ CPU-NB
X6.66 1600MHZ RAM

Which one is better?
The only meaningful difference here is that "B" will also overclock the cool-n-quiet power states by 20% (... 1.7ghz, 2.5ghz, 3.4ghz, 4.1ghz instead of the usual 1.4, 2.1, 2.8, and 3.4). Otherwise they will perform the same.

-----------

Overclocking the CPU-NB had a significant effect on Phenom II performance. Performance scaling in some games for example, scaled at a 50% rate with CPU-NB overclocking. Overclocking from 2ghz stock NB speeds to 3ghz (a 50% overclock) was possible on some thuban/zosma chips, which would result in a full 25% performance advantage in some workloads, including some popular poorly threaded games like StarCraft II. Since poor single threaded performance had always been the biggest problem there, people associated CPU-NB overclocking with being a way to improve single threaded performance. In reality, it could improve performance in all sorts of workloads, heavily or lightly threaded.

In much the same way that "old" information about disabling power saving features for overclocking support has just kept getting repeated, the CPU-NB overclocking-for-better-single-threaded-performance (a misunderstanding at the time) is still being repeated today as well, even though it no longer applies the same way.

CPU-NB overlclocking on Vishera is far less useful. Even overclocked to ~3ghz the CPU-NB will rarely manage to improve compute performance by more than 5%. This comes at a huge cost to power dissipation and simply isn't worth it compared to overclocking the CPU proper. I wouldn't bother going past 2400mhz.

-----------

There's always a risk of damaging something when performance tuning. The risk is low if you approach things intelligently with a good working knowledge of the platform, and what your overclock is effecting. Stay under 1.55V at the chip and within the thermal margin and the CPU should be fine. Instability in and of itself doesn't damage hardware. Voltage and Heat can.
 
Thank you very much mdocod. What you explained right now has cleared up a lot of confusion for me. I think I'm going to reset everything back to factory defaults and just up the multiplier. But my question is, if I do it this way by just upping the multiplier, should I leave the HT Link and CPU/NB Frequency at auto? I also noticed, when I am on idle my H100i is silent. But during even just gaming like COD AW, the fans kick up quite a bit and gets pretty loud. I haven't messed with Corsair Link yet. Is this normal? Thanks for all your help!
 


The h100i can get quite noisy in the upper RPMs, so you have to adjust the fan curve (in corsair link) to allow higher temps before higher RPMs.
 
You can still manually set your HT Link, CPU-NB, and RAM speeds if you wish. I like to even when not overclocking any of them just to be sure they are locked into the setting I want (I WANT CONTROL!). I would advise running CPU-NB at either 2200 or 2400mhz, and the HT link at anywhere from 2200-2600mhz. (won't make any difference unless you're running a BUNCH of hardware on PCIE lanes).

Yea as far as fan controls go... Asus offers pretty good fan speed control in BIOS if you're using the CPU fan headers. I'm not familiar with Corsair Link. I'm guessing that's Windows software.... I haven't used windows on any of my own personal computers since "win2000"
 


Yeah so I followed your suggestions to the a certain point. So I basically loaded optimal defaults in bios. Save changes then reset. Went back into BIOS and I left basically everything as optimal defaults. C1e, Cool'n'quiet, SVM, Core C6 State, etc. I left as default. I did manually change the CPU ratio to 22.5 which puts me at 4.5GHz. Memory frequency is at 1866MHz. I set the CPU Manual Voltage to 1.344 which is stock. I then set the CPU/NB Manual voltage to static default as well. I changed the DRAM voltage to 1.5v which is default. I ran Prime95 blend for about 30 minutes and below is the screen shot. Should I just leave it as is or should I go to 4.8GHz? Like people stated before, .3 won't make difference. I kinda like the temps right now. What do you think?

Current BIOS settings:
AI Overclock Tuner - Manual
CPU Ratio - 22.5
AMD Turbo Core Technology - Auto
CPU Bus - 200
Memory Frequency - 1866MHz
CPU N/B Frequency - Auto
HT Link - Auto
CPU Spread Spectrum - Auto
CPU Manual Voltage - 1.35v
CPU/NB Manual Voltage - 1.1625v
DRAM Voltage - 1.5v
Cool'N'Quiet - Disabled by CPU
C1E - Disabled
SVM - Enabled
Core C6 State - Enabled
HPC Mode - Disabled
APM Master Mode - Auto

Like I stated, a lot of stuff is on optimal default settings

op0fpe.png
 
I'd probably use HWiNFO or AMD overdrive to observe clock speeds in real-time to see if they are truly holding at 4.5ghz under a load with APM on auto mode. APM is one of the few technologies that actually can interfere with overclocking in practical ranges. APM is a technology that allows for on-the-fly frequency and voltage scaling, and takes into consideration temperature and power limits.
 


Hrmmmm didn't know that lol. I've never used AMD Overdrive or HWiNFO. What are those?
 
AMD overdirve... which I've made reference to several times in this thread already, is AMD's performance tuning and monitoring software. I don't advise using it for performance tuning, but you should use it to check thermal margin and compare that against whatever software you are using to read temps. There's really no way to know how the software has been calibrated, so you really have no way of knowing how much headroom you have for a given temp reading without checking it against the actual thermal margin.

HWiNFO is just more 3rd party hardware monitoring software, like HWMonitor that you've been using. But from what I can figure it appears to be able to graph CPU clock speeds, among lots of other hardware information, which would be useful for the diagnostics of all sorts of things.
 


Oh okay cool! Sorry... This thread has been pretty extensive so its kinda hard to take all the info in lol. I will download AMD overdrive since it seems like you reference that one the most. So if everything looks fine/checks out, then we are good? Shouldn't try to push to 4.8?

Thank you!
 


Lol true true... I would love to overclock to 5GHz. That would definitely make a difference. I just don't know where to begin lol. And I don't want crazy temps nor do I want high voltages. What should I do if I want 5GHz. I know I have to up the multiplier and voltage. But what else?

And what do you mean by saberkitty? I think I have a 240mm rad, right? lol (H100i)
 
I don't know where I heard that saberslang first, but I sort of like it.

It's just a slang reference to the sabertooth line of Asus boards. 😉

----------

The fact that you were booting and running before at 4.8ghz with 1.41V tells me you have a good chance of a 5ghz clocker there, whether or not it can be ironed out to be stable at 5ghz within your thermal dissipation is unknown. I used to run an FX-6300 at 5ghz on a 120mm rad (half the size of yours), it wasn't "dead nuts" stable but it was functional enough for gaming and browsing and stuff. The novelty of running 5ghz was fun.

------------


I'll give you a hint:

Th FX-9590 uses ~1.525V for it's 5ghz turbo speed 😉
 
After re-reading your post I kinda figured that saberkitty meant the sabertooth line of boards for ASUS lol. Well it seems like I have all that stuff in line... Maybe I should try it again? Yeah I was able to run 4.8GHz at 1.41v. So for 5GHz, I might be able to up the voltage to like 1.48 or something. I know on other posts for other people to get it to run at 4.8GHz stable was they had to up their voltage to 1.488v. So I might be able to try 5GHz at 1.48v... I guess I'll have to see. Getting it to 5GHz sounds crazy awesome. But will I notice any difference in gaming? Cause thats all I literally do. And to be at 5GHz with the higher temps, is it worth it? lol... All these questions, trial and error...

Found someone that did 5GHz at 1.48v. I'm wondering though if he meant 58c was core and at load? I believe 62c is the max temp that it should get for core and 72 for the socket... Hrmmmm
(http://archive.benchmarkreviews.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=962&Itemid=63&limitstart=12)
 
Core temperature readings in all that 3rd party software could be calibrated to anything. Max temp could be 50C, 60C, 61C, 62C, 70C, 80C, 90C... it just depends how they calibrated the software. When people claim there is a maximum core temperature for piledriver they are effectively proclaiming their ignorance for how the core temp monitoring system works on piledriver. For years I had searched for official word from AMD regarding max temp, nothing nada, because it doesn't exist.

If you're running windows, you need to use AMD overdrive to monitor thermal margin. When you reach 0C thermal margin, THAT is the maximum temperature supported for continuous operation. 3rd party software could be calibrated to show you any of a large variety of possible temps at 0 thermal margin remaining. You can run HWMonitor at the same time, in order to see what temp readings it is giving you at various thermal margins to figure out how it is calibrated. Whatever core temp shows in HWMonitor when AMD Overdrive shows 0 thermal margin, that's the "maximum temp" but only when using HWMonitors calibration.

Max "socket" temps are also not a universally equal thing. Different boards measure the socket temps in different ways. Some don't even generate a useful socket temp reading for the SUperIO. For some reason I think it was closer to 80C on Asus boards with the digi+ VRMs but I can't recall. Either way, you're probably going to need to get some active cooling over your VRMs to run 5ghz. Place a small fan over the heatsink at bare minimum, if you have space behind the motherboard tray another fan behind the socket is a good idea as well.

--------

I've found that when dealing with games that are on the edge of acceptable performance, overclocking is helpful. Otherwise it's mostly just a hobby/novelty/fun thing to do.


 


DAMN! You have a lot of knowledge on all this stuff. You are opening my eyes to a whole new world haha. So basically for the thermal readings, that stuff isn't accurate. I would need to download AMD Overdrive to know for certain or as close to certain as possible. I read on some forums that people state they contacted AMD and the MAX socket temp is 72 and core is 62. I didn't know if it was for sure but I just went by that because there were several places that stated that. If what you are stating is correct, I might as well just download AMD Overdrive to make sure my stuff is running correctly and just keep it as is. I would rather just have a .5GHz boost and have good temps rather than to overclock to 5GHz and have to set up a mini fan on the VRMs and socket. That just seems like too much work lol... Honestly, to come and think of it... I was even thinking about setting everything back to optimal defaults in BIOS and just use the watercooler to have better temps period. Realistically, if an extra .5GHz from 4.5GHz to 5.0GHz makes not much of a difference, whats the point to go from 4.0GHz stock to 4.5GHz?
 
I like the number 44, and 47. No sure why. Maybe because these are the base frequencies for the 9000 series FX chips. No clue. I find myself always going back and forth between a noisy 4.7ghz overclock and a quiet 4.4ghz overclock. I wish Asus offered some of the controls available on Gigabyte boards, I'd setup a 5ghz profile with every other core disabled (1 core per module active). Asus doesn't offer this option, but gigabyte does... (in fact, giga even offers it on really low end boards, like the GA-78LMT-USB3).

I actually do have some use for a 5ghz overclock. While I don't game much, the few games I like tend to be poorly threaded, compute intensive, CPU bottlenecked. Every bit helps.
 


Haha that makes sense. That is most likely why you like those numbers. Yeah I heard that disabling some of the cores helps too with higher overclocks... Now I'm contemplating about trying out the 5GHz at 1.48v when I get home to see if I can get a stable overclock and if it makes a difference for my real world usage... I'm kinda torn of either having stock speeds, my 4.5GHz overclock, or pushing it to 5GHz. But I really don't want to put a extra fan on my motherboard or back motherboard. But I don't want to burn anything or mess anything up either. I did consider going back to defaults or leaving it at 4.5GHz but then whats the point in me having a watercooler?

I mean, I'm not rich or anything so I can't afford to buy another CPU and or motherboard if something messes up. But I do plan on upgrading in the future... GAH I don't know what to do! lol
 
So I got home and fiddled a little more. I downloaded AMD Overdrive and I now see what you mean. Everything is good though and I see the thermal margins you were talking about. So I cross referenced it with HWmonitor and its accurate. So I tried to get to 5.0GHz at 1.48v and my comp posted, got into desktop and worked. But as soon as I open up Prime95 blend, it froze lol. Tried different variations and I couldn't get Prime95 blend to run without locking up. So I decided to say fuck it! Lol. Don't feel like uping my voltage anymore. So I tried 4.8GHz again and of course it worked fine. So I decided to start fresh from the beginning again. Optimal defaults set. Changed multiplier to 23 and now its at 4.6GHz on stock voltage of 1.344v. I ran Prime95 blend and everything checks out. AMD Overdrive shows 100% processing with no bottlenecking and the speed never dropped on any of the 8 cores. Thermal margins were fine. I'm now thinking of just staying at 4.6GHz since I was able to get it stable at stock voltage.

Current BIOS settings:

AI Overclock Tuner - Manual
CPU Ratio - 23
AMD Turbo Core Technology - Auto
CPU Bus - 200
Memory Frequency - 1866MHz
CPU N/B Frequency - 2200
HT Link - 2600
CPU Spread Spectrum - Auto
CPU Manual Voltage - 1.344v (1.35v)
CPU/NB Manual Voltage - 1.1625v
DRAM Voltage - 1.5v
Cool'N'Quiet - Disabled by CPU
C1E - Disabled
SVM - Enabled
Core C6 State - Enabled
HPC Mode - Disabled
APM Master Mode - Auto

I tried bumping the multiplier to 23.5. 4.7GHz posted. Got into desktop. Ran Prime95 but one of the cores failed. So I stopped the test and backed it down to 4.6GHz. At this point, should I try to go higher and just bump the voltage little by little by hitting the "+" key till I can get it stable at 4.7GHz? Then once its stable do 4.8GHz? Lol... Or... Shall I just keep stock voltages for best temps and just run it at 4.6GHz. I mean... .6GHz is a good amount I think, especially on stock voltages.
 
some chips just hit a wall or take a lot of voltage to get a higher clock and those are the ones that will respond better to a larger fsb.
really the difference in 4.6ghz and 5ghz is nothing to write home about. what you will find if you play a variety of games is that some will just suck on fx cpu's.. mostly ones that are demanding on 1 core or have poor optimization.
pretty good cpu just no overclocked i5 in gaming.
 


Yeah I read that on some posts as well... So after considering temperatures and certain things, I said fuck it! I decided to just keep it at 4.6GHz with stock voltage at 1.344v. I think its more beneficial that way because I get really good temps and the lifespan of CPU is going to hold because I didn't have to up the voltage. Less voltage, less power draw, and less heat but at a stable speed of 4.6GHz. I agree with you about the games part too. My wife has a i5 3570k, my CPU that I gave her and ended up getting the FX 8350 because it was the cheapest that I could get at that time. Playing Tera online, my wife gets better FPS and smoother gameplay. She also has my old video card which is an ATI 7850. So I know my video card is better then hers which is the GTX 770. So my next bet would be the CPU specs. I took a guess and did research that Tera operated better on single core which the i5 3570k definitely had better single core performance. So yeah... I think at this point, I'm just going to stick with my 4.6GHz overclock. I was able to get a stable overclock and keep my normal voltage of 1.344v. So why not? More speed (.6GHz) and kept everything at default practically.
 
sorry if my post was kinda insulting saying you need to read some more man

it can just take a long time to gain expert level knowledge and even game developers that go to college for 4 or more years can fail to bring something reliable to the table like you may have seen people talking about the optimization in the ubisoft games
 


No need to apologize. I completely understand! I get what you mean haha
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom