Professional Help: Getting The Best Overclock From AMD's A8-3870K

[cleeve]

[citation][nom]vitornob[/nom]Don't see how this is an unfair comparative. (A8-3870k vs G620 + HD7750)[/citation]

Because price is wayyy off. The 7750 brings it to a whole other level. A8-3870K is like $110 now, vs a $110 Radeon 7750 and a $65 CPU for $175.

Fair would be an Athlon II X3 455/7750 combo vs a G620/7750 combo.

 

[cleeve]

[citation][nom]jsowoc[/nom]Is the temperature graph on page 9 actual degrees, or degrees above ambient?If actual, what was the temperature in the room when you had the APU sitting at 4 degrees? If above ambient, isn't a typical case ~30 degrees, so 68 degrees above 30 = fried APU?[/citation]

Processor temperature sensors aren't built to be accurate at idle. Accuracy comes at higher temps under load, where they are calibrated to be useful.

 

[cleeve]

[citation][nom]jamie_1318[/nom]what on earth it the apostrophe doing on worlds?[/citation]

Not a lot, except sitting where it's not wanted.

Fixed!

 

[husker]

[citation][nom]jamie_1318[/nom]"Cooler Master’s Hyper TX3 is a cost-effective unit that's world's better than what AMD bundles with its A8-3870K."Really toms? what on earth it the apostrophe doing on worlds?[/citation]
@jamie_1318: You should have included an apostrophe to your reference of Tom's Hardware. Also, you should have capitalized the words "what", "toms" and "earth". You also used the word "it" where is seems the word "is" was called for.

 

[Guest]

[Cleeve] Because price is wayyy off. The 7750 brings it to a whole other level. A8-3870K is like $110 now, vs a $110 Radeon 7750 and a $65 CPU for $175.

Fair would be an Athlon II X3 455/7750 combo vs a G620/7750 combo.


It's still not even a issue if you saw the expensive mid range board paired with it to get to to do it's "backflip"....still a fair comparison. It's about price and performance in the long run.

Even if you had to pair horribly gimping a llano with low end board and ram leaving it almost gimped talking same price range board and ram case with junk included 250-300 watt power supply everything.... Guess what happens the gt 430 + g620 price = same cost and performance as a a8 3870k. But in the long run to enable it [APU] to fly it's takes two many other premiums, a good board and good ram. By time you reach the mark of matching cost of these premiums to pull ahead of the previous even cost, you have my wifes pc [Hello again] with money in the bank both after purchase and ownership. The other thing missing is that "EVEN" comparison you are trying to defend is that same cheap case with a junk included power supply passable for years and years to come even after capacitor aging..... only sucking 150 watts normally 123 in bf3 1080p medium/low mix. So now that heavily overpriced and oc'ed llano is over 60% usage of the cheap power supply in this budget "gaming" machine which is the market target anyways, will be dead in under 2 years. Long story short apu's are truly useless and a simple market ploy to let people feel that fresh new car scent and then later realize there is dog poo underneath in the desktop realm [inspired my wifes rig via previous ownership]. APU's are epic in laptops for sure....that extra power on the go for cheap really sticks it to intel in the mobile market. Long story short APU's have absolutely 0 excuse in the desktop market even for a simple browsing machine or web games machine a lower wattage and cheaper cpu from intel will do just as good and save cost on both fields once again. If your going to game the same price and wattage or less can get you into low/mid range gaming via intel. Companies make money and the APU on desktop is like slapping a thong on a lump of coal.

 

[cleeve]

It's still not even a issue if you saw the expensive mid range board paired with it to get to to do it's "backflip"....still a fair comparison. It's about price and performance in the long run.

You could add an expensive 1155 board to the Pentium, too.

When it's low budget kit, it's all about the dollars and cents up front. That's the real-world choice people make.

No buyer in their right mind who wants to game, and has the cash for a 7750 with a G620, would consider an A8-3870K their alternate choice with no discrete card included.
That simply makes no sense. They *might* consider an Athlon II X3 or X4/7750 combo as an alternate, that's in the ballpark at least.

We'll have to agree to disagree on this one, Snow.

 

[cleeve]

I am too lazy to go back over past TH reviews and quote myself but i will just say Told you so Cleeve !

25% increase across the board by your own hand from 1600-2100.

You did tell me so!

But... one second there sir... I never overclocked the CPU/GPU with 1600 MHz RAM in this review. So the margin between 2100 OCd and 1600 OCd would be a lot less than 25%.

As you can see, the 1600 to 1833 MHz RAM bump alone didn't make the lion's share of the difference, it was the CPU/GPU overclocks that made the real increase.

The RAM bump is nice, but I wouldn't be willing to spend more than $50 on a kit for a budget setup like this. Back when I overclocked Llano in February of this year, 2000 MHz RAM was a lot more expensive.

I see where you're coming from, but just sayin'. The CPU/GPU overclock is the heart of the improvement.

 

[csbeer]

[citation][nom]tourist[/nom]...My only complaint is dual graphics benchmarks or the lack there of them. I would think you would be curious to see what effect the changes had when crossfireing the 6550d with 6670. I could tell you but what fun is that.Good Review and reference worthy Sir.[/citation]

I would love to see dual graphics benchmarks also, especially since catalyst drivers have matured some. Rough rule of thumb when Llano first came out that APU+DGPU adds about 10-15% peformance in dual graphics, but people have learned to do some tweaks to improve those numbers.

 

[abitoms]

don,

reading this article gave me a thought. would it be worthwhile if u do a review of the FX CPUs with modules/1-core-per-module disabled and comparing that to vanilla FX CPUs?

now that i think abt it, it could wait till the release of PD/desktop Trinity ...cos doing such a review so close to these two releases might render it redundant

 

[_zxzxzx_]

AMD Fusion is awesome!

 

[hammadnadeemx]

6690d ?

 

[hammadnadeemx]

what software did you use to measure temperature on these ? i am getting really weird temp on my 3870k apu .

 

[ojas]

Interesting. Though i must ask, how are the CPU and GPU (at stock settings) idling at 4*C? I do believe it's summer in the northern hemisphere!

I mean, if it's the delta w.r.t ambient, then omg 68*C over ambient?!

And i find it interesting that a yorkfield processor + GTX560 + SSD + HDD + 5 fans + 2 sticks of DDR3 ram on a 2010 G45 based mobo +80% efficient PSU idle at 62-64w and manage to stay around 260w during BF3 on ultra (though at 1024x768 ). Still, they're pushing an average of 75 fps, with the CPU @ 80% avg load and the GPU at about 98%.

Compared to this, llano seems pretty inefficient...but i guess everything becomes a bit more inefficient after overclocking.

Performance isn't bad for the price, and it looks like a interesting system to overclock.

 

[ojas]

[citation][nom]Cleeve[/nom]Processor temperature sensors aren't built to be accurate at idle. Accuracy comes at higher temps under load, where they are calibrated to be useful.[/citation]
Sorry, i missed this. idk, intel's sensors seem to be pretty accurate...

 

[cleeve]

Sorry, i missed this. idk, intel's sensors seem to be pretty accurate...

I've seen a lot of Intel sensors report 5 degrees or even minus a few degrees at idle. All depends on the sample I guess.

 

[cleeve]

what software did you use to measure temperature on these ? i am getting really weird temp on my 3870k apu .

The AMD Overdrive tool

 

[jaquith]

Hmm AMD (APU) vs Intel -- it is what it is.

$230 ($110) AMD A8-3870K + ($120) ASUS F1A75-V PRO
vs
$230 ($50) Intel Celeron G530 + ($45) ASRock H61M-DGS + ($135) XFX FX-777A-ZDF4 Radeon HD 7770

I wonder which is faster at Gaming, MPEG-2/4/H.264 encoding and more efficient (without lifting a finger). It's not the AMD's APU is bad, for what limits it has it's fine. I've seen the 'ohh the next AMD will ...' far too long. I really (really) want AMD to be on par with Intel then everyone wins ... I'm still wanting. I looked into an APU solution for an HTPC, but I'm still looking.

"Unfortunately, the game is too demanding for the A8-3870K to run at 1920x1080."

BF3 with HD 7770 ; ref - http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-hd-7770-7750-benchmark,3135-6.html

 

[sarinaide]

What no hybrid crossfire benches?

 

[cleeve]

[citation][nom]jaquith[/nom]Hmm AMD (APU) vs Intel -- it is what it is.$230 ($110) AMD A8-3870K + ($120) ASUS F1A75-V PROvs $230 ($50) Intel Celeron G530 + ($45) ASRock H61M-DGS + ($135) XFX FX-777A-ZDF4 Radeon HD 7770[/citation]

That's a much fairer comparison. In this case, gaming and efficiency obviously goes to the G530/7750.

The APU brings is a significant win in multi-threaded applications, though. The Celeron has no quicksync capability so it would even lose badly when it comes to stuff like media encoding.

But as a pure gaming machine, no contest. The G530/7750 would kill it.

 

[jaquith]

[citation][nom]Cleeve[/nom]The Celeron has no quicksync capability so it would even lose badly when it comes to stuff like media encoding.[/citation]
Crap you're right, I noted it has Intel® HD Graphics but I ass-u-med it offered Quick Sync acceleration -- I admittedly was wrong. None of the Celeron's offer Quick Sync iGPU acceleration.

Frankly, I don't keep up on any low-end CPU's.

Further, IF I'm worried about multi-threaded applications then I'd still go the Intel route and not a i3-2100 or A8-3870K, but i7 CPU. Synthetics I've found mean nothing and prove nothing, I wish they did. Just like sub-HD 1920x1080 resolutions are equally useless -- heck buy an Xbox or PS3 if you like jagged blur and low res.

Trust me, I want (wanted) to replace a blown-out HTPC (LGA 1156) with an AMD APU. I have to have some form of HD gaming and some minimal Xbox+ gaming ability. Unfortunately, fixing the HTPC requires a spare CPU or MOBO - I hate, no I loath, the idea of a PC Repairman moron and flipping a coin is equally idiotic.

 

[blazorthon]

[citation][nom]A Bad Day[/nom]*Looks at AMD Trinity**Notices that the laptop has a 1066 MHz memory with 9-9-9-x timing*Hey manufacturer, why not get a cheaper Trinity and spend a little more on a 1600 or 1866 MHz memory? Oh wait, marketing.[/citation]

HP uses DDR3-1600 memory by default in several of their Trinity laptops. Some don't have anything below DDR3-1600 as an option. I'd have to check the timings to be sure about them, but they're probably 9-9-9-24.

 

[blazorthon]

[citation][nom]jaquith[/nom]Hmm AMD (APU) vs Intel -- it is what it is.$230 ($110) AMD A8-3870K + ($120) ASUS F1A75-V PROvs $230 ($50) Intel Celeron G530 + ($45) ASRock H61M-DGS + ($135) XFX FX-777A-ZDF4 Radeon HD 7770 I wonder which is faster at Gaming, MPEG-2/4/H.264 encoding and more efficient (without lifting a finger). It's not the AMD's APU is bad, for what limits it has it's fine. I've seen the 'ohh the next AMD will ...' far too long. I really (really) want AMD to be on par with Intel then everyone wins ... I'm still wanting. I looked into an APU solution for an HTPC, but I'm still looking.BF3 with HD 7770 ; ref - http://www.tomshardware.com/review [...] 135-6.html[/citation]

You could go for an A6 (some go for $70-80) triple or quad core APU, a cheaper motherboard, and a Radeon 6570 for CF. Heck, an A8 might be able to be fit in with that instead of an A6 and maybe also a Radeon 6670, depending on the deals at the time. It still wouldn't be as efficient as Celeron+77x0 discrete graphics card in many cases, but it would have a chance at winning quite well in CPU-bound games and would win in general productivity.

I know that I simply wouldn't prefer a dual-core Sandy Bridge of Ivy Bridge CPU that lacks at least Hyper-Threading over pretty much any modern AMD quad-core CPU in a low-end gaming rig, but I recognize that not everyone shares my opinion about CPU performance. If an i5 isn't an option, then either an i3 or a quad core are the next options to consider as far as I'm concerned unless we're looking at a machine that's being built strictly for non-CPU heavy games.

 

[jaquith]

[citation][nom]blazorthon[/nom]You could go for an A6 (some go for $70-80) triple or quad core APU, a cheaper motherboard, and a Radeon 6570 for CF. Heck, an A8 might be able to be fit in with that instead of an A6 and maybe also a Radeon 6670, depending on the deals at the time.[/citation]
My need is not typical in that I'm don't looking for a Desktop. Instead, L-O-W noise, yep I've looked at passive, and it must: 1. HD Gaming 30~35FPS good details + 2xAA min, 2. Play media BR NetFlix/HULU/etc, 3. Web. Easy but not so easy. Low cost.

It's my current project and I'm open.

 

[blazorthon]

[citation][nom]jaquith[/nom]My need is not typical in that I'm don't looking for a Desktop. Instead, L-O-W noise, yep I've looked at passive, and it must: 1. HD Gaming 30~35FPS good details + 2xAA min, 2. Play media BR NetFlix/HULU/etc, 3. Web. Easy but not so easy. Low cost.It's my current project and I'm open.[/citation]

You might want to go for a passively-cooled Radeon 7750 or Radeon 7770 for your graphics and a good passive cooler for your CPU. There are passive coolers for CPUs that go up to 130w, so that shouldn't be difficult.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814161417
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814131475
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814102980

Those are passively cooler Radeon 7750 cards. Tom's did an article that mentioned a passively-cooler Radeon 7770, but I didn't see it on newegg. Maybe it's available in other sites.

For your CPU, you could simply get something that is nearly silent with a fan or assuming that you aren't using a high-power consumption CPU (100w or lower), you could get a good air cooler and simply not use the fan, although I'd think that letting it run at very low RPM would still be silent and would provide at least somewhat better thermals than passive cooling would.

http://www.nansgaminggear.com/apps/webstore/products/show/2563118
Something like that would be ideal. This is a cooler that is originally a passive cooler designed for 130w CPUs that Thermalright updated to support modern CPU sockets and also threw a silent fan (supposedly maxes out at 21dbi, so it should be effectively silent) that if you don't want, you really could remove and still have a cool enough CPU. It should passively cool any 100w and lower CPU quite well and here is a review of the fan-less version from the past:

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2010/08/26/thermalright_hr02_passive_processor_heatsink_review/

 

[Guest]

I have no clue why people still favour g620 + discrete. I recently built a Llano 3870k system with stock speed but undervolting. Idle: 27W full power prime95+3d game: 87W.

This is by FAR less power than any intel + discrete could do. And I can still play all the games with twice the frame rates than my old 4670 was capable of.