What is the best cooling solution for a AMD FX 8350?

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
D

denizkucuk200

Feb 21, 2018
32
0
30
I have a AMD FX 8350 CPU. I was planning to upgrade to a AMD FX 9590 however I saw it was almost impossible to keep the CPU cool so I decided to keep my AMD FX 8350. I have a stock cooler and the question I want to ask is that do I need to upgrade? My cpu at idle is about 29/30 degrees celsius and the cpu at load is about 67/69 degrees celsius at load. A problem I have is when I am using the computer sometimes my computer freezes and blue screens. The only problems that I could think of is overheating cpu or my power supply (600w) isnt supplying enough power to my pc. The software that I used to find the load of my pc is CPU-Z and I used the stress CPU option whilst checking temperatures using the Core Temp software.

PC Specs:
• CPU: AMD FX 8350
• Graphics Card: Gigabyte NVIDIA GTX 1050 2GB
• Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-990X AM3+
• RAM: 16GB DDR3
• Power Supply: Corsair CX600 80+
• Storage: 2TB HDD & 128GB SSD
• Case: NZXT S340
 
Sort by date Sort by votes
When i had that chip i used a h100i corsair keeped very cool. I think playing battlefield i was in the 48c range overclocked at 4.5.These chips were very sensitive to temperature very much the same as the gen before(Phenom) the higher the heat the lower the fps
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


Well the only problem is that my NZXT S340 case has 1 fan slot at the top and 2 slots at the front and 1 slot at the back. Any other solutions for me? I am really a beginner when it comes to pcs.

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Keep the 8350. At 5GHz it gets almost exactly the same performance as either of the 9 series cpus, at 5GHz. Wonder why oh yeah, it's cuz all the FX 8 and 9 series (not the E versions) are the same cpu, just different factory settings. It's honestly not an upgrade at all, all a swap would be is lateral to a hotter and more troublesome cpu.

Cooler is decided by the level of OC you are using, and on an FX you should be OC to mid 4.xGHz anyways. If you are pushing 4.5ish or better, you'll want the big towers or big AIO's, for @4.2-4.7 you can use the mid towers or 140/240mm AIO's. For @4.4 or lower, a decent budget cooler or 120mm AIO is good. Much will depend on exactly what fits in your case, what preferences you have, budget and usage.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I think you need to decide what you want to do. Do you want to advance you knowledge in computers ? If not than i would leave it alone. If you are than i would consider a few things. Are you happy with your current cause ? How is your budget ? There are other solutions that will fit those causes. The H80i and those alike will work if you only have one cause fan slot available. If you do decide you go this route make sure you take your cooler off right after using you PC. This will avoid you ripping the CPU right out of its socket. I like arctic silver 5 thermal paste
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


Yes I think I will go the h80i route rather than changing case. I want to use the parts I already have so I will get rid of my stock cooler then get the h80i, hopefully that will keep it more cool? Would it keep the idle and load temperatures lower. I dont really see the need in overclocking and havent got to that knowledge yet.

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
AS5 isn't that good. It's actually a very mediocre paste that happens to come in large quantities at a cheap price, so became instantly popular when good pastes were $20+ for a single-three application.

Better off with sticking to the included paste with a corsair aio. It's just as good, is pre-applied and a no brainer to use. Just add cooler to pump. (don't forget to remove the safety plastic first). If you decide you need more, Arctic MX-4, Noctua or Gelid extreme is good.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


What evidence do you have that Arctic silver 5 is Mediocre ? Arctic Mx-4 is the same price and i have read it isnt good for OCing. I cant speak on the other 2 because i ahve never used it before. Any respectable thermal paste will work. My experiance with Arctic silver 5 is its overall life span. 4790k overclocked 4.6 all temps under 70c with a hyper evo under load. i have had mine for almost 3 years now. If i had water temps would be amazing.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/thermal-compound-charts/benchmarks,155.html

I've been working on pc's for @30 years or so, give or take a few, so have experience with many different pastes, quite a few that no longer even exist. My biggest issue with AS5 is its thermal cycles, after @200ish its done. A thermal cycle being a cpu driven to extreme heat, then cooling off. That's not normal gaming loads as such with a decent cooler, that's gaming loads with a mediocre or budget cooler, crappy airflow, rendering loads etc, where users tend to overheat the cpu, then let it go back to idle. AS5 gets old and dry like toothpaste.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X1gleM_8tMA
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


Do NOT upgrade to FX-9590. Your MB will not take the 220W TDP draw that 9590 demands under load. (VRMs will overheat)
Your PSU is inadequate even for the 8350 under load and requires a 750W- 850W gold certified unit especially if you want to OC.
If you want to OC then an upgrade to the cooler is recommended. If it will fit into your case, a top mounted AIO of H100i will keep temps normal.
Having reviewed your case specs, A dual radiator will not top mount but will support Front 2 x 140 or 2 x 120mm.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


Yea i have to agree the 900 series chips were a massive failure
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Umm MM41, Op is running a gtx1050 2Gb gpu. Even with a massive OC on that 125w cpu, you are still only looking at a maximum of @400w usage, and thats a total system 100% load. That CX600 is plenty good as gaming loads will be running around 250-300w tops. Absolutely no need for a 750w-850w gold rated psu.

And since the mobo is the 990X, not a 990FXA UD series, then no, it won't support the 9 series 220w cpus, but is absolutely fine for the 8350.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


I dont understand why discourage someone from getting a good PSU ?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
@sydneyblue. Ok, I'm sorry, but that's a joke right? A 3570@4GHz is barely an OC at all, a 3570k can run 4.2GHz without changing anything but the multiplier. You've honestly not really changed the heat output of that cpu at all from stock. Even turbo is 3.8GHz and runs at anything over @30% loads. Aida 64 is miserable for temp testing, it's next to useless. It uses linpack, basically running the ram as well as the cpu, so loads vary between @80% and 100% on the cpu. You can't get a stable baseline on a variable test. If Timmy Joe really wanted to test right, he'd have used a K cpu, got an OC of closer to 4.6/4.7GHz to top out that Hyper212 and used Prime95 v26.6 small fft. It's the only temp stress torture test that'll give 100% consistent loads for a true stable baseline. Aida 64 is far better for system stability since it does use linpack than for temp testing.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


Im sure your calculations are correct but did not answer my question. Are you saying the base model Corsair 80+ is a good power supply for overclocking ? Im not sure i understand your logic but pretty confident you will explain.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
The 80+ ratings are efficiency levels. 80+ is a voluntary certification program, it's not a recognised standard. It just means that at 20/50/100% loads the psu has been certified to be above a certain level. There's Gold rated psus I wouldn't own if paid too, and Bronze rated psus that I'll swear by. Efficiency has nothing to do with quality of output or quality of build.

Don't mistake wattage size for quality either, bigger is most definitely not better. The CX line is one of Corsair's few budget lines, granted, but they are not terrible. They are also not supposed to be used for a gaming pc, even Corsair says that much, but they work none the less. I wouldn't put a high demand, expensive system with one, but a fx 8350 and gtx1050? That gpu doesn't even require 75w draw or even external connection. It gets power through the motherboard. Cpu is 125w, even with a large OC, Mebe 200w, everything else maybe 50-100w. That's a 400w max. Which is impossible to obtain. Never seen a pc run 100% everything from ram to hdd to cpu to cpu. It'll run 100% components individually, but not all together. Gaming loads will be closer to 250-300w tops.

On a 600w CX, that's less than 50% loads, actually putting it in the most energy efficient range, the most thermally efficient range, highest grade output range.

That gpu simply isn't strong enough to create the massive draws capability of an R series amd gpu or higher grade gtx. It's basically not much more draw than a HDD. That CX will be fine.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


I also DO NOT agree with Karadjgne logic and encourage you to read my PSU fact in my signature.
For a start quality and efficiency go hand in hand and don't let anyone tell you different.
The CX line were never a good quality nor efficient PSU and manufactured purely for the budget conscious builder and would not last it's warranty period IMO. A failing PSU can destroy MB components when it fails.
I always advocate a larger than required Wattage by 20-30% than the bare minimum and no harm whatsoever would come from doing so.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Bare minimum would be a 350w psu. 400w if you feel like quibbling. Take that 20-30% larger and you are still nowhere near the 850w you advised.

Quality and efficiency do not go hand in hand. There's literally hundreds of Gold rated, Gold advertised, Gold supposed psu models out there that are considerably worse than the Corsair CX line. Look up the TT TR2 Gold, or maybe the Apevia 700w Beast Gold rated. I'd put them up against my Seasonic M12-II (yes its a Bronze and group regulated, so there goes your idea of efficiency and quality) any day of the week and come out smiling.

The reason the CX line is not good for gaming pc's (it's just fine for a standard home use pc, the intended purpose being a OEM replacement) is due to the massive, instant power draws that gaming gpus can and do demand. The 1050 barely pulls more than a hdd, it simply doesn't have the capacity to hit those massive draws that destroy lesser quality psus. The pc itself will struggle to pull over 350w at best under any usage, at stock values it'll be closer to 250w. That CX is just fine for that kind of loading.

Quote:
a Gold rated power supply is higher quality (of components) because it needs to reach a higher efficiency.

BS. All the components come from the same sources. The reason Gold psus are higher efficiency is ADDED circuitry in the platform. You could take capXon 85° electrolytic primary caps and stick them in a Gold rated psu and get the exact same efficiency as the exact same platform using Rubycon 105° solid aluminium primaries. Efficiency is all about the platform design, not all that much about components quality. Build quality is about components. It's what separates an Apevia Gold and a Seasonic Gold, Thermaltake Gold and SuperFlower Gold.

You could literally build a awesome quality psu out of nothing but Rubycon or Nippon Chemicon solid aluminum caps, a couple of the best coils you could find, have outstanding quality components, perfect soldering... all on a 2-bit basic pcb that'll give outputs so far out of ATX specs they'd not qualify as even being good enough to power a 10yr old HP Presario, but that psu would last 20yrs. Or take a SuperFlower Leadex platform and fill it full of the junkyest, cheapest components money could buy, get great efficiency and output specs... and the psu would be lucky to last 6 months
 
Upvote 1 Downvote
You can keep coming back all you like Karadjgne with over complicated opinion theory and outdated explanations.
I stick to what I know as fact and will let the OP decide what is best for him.

I have built many high end systems and IMAO the PSU is the lifeblood of your system and should not be underestimated as you seem to prescribe.
The Furums are full of posts with PSU issues from those with little knowledge as to how important the PSU is and your misguided information does little to help.
I don't intend a war of words and that's all I have to say on the subject.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
As soon as you figure out that an fx 8350 and gtx1050 don't qualify (no slight intended towards op) as a HIGH end system, them Mebe I'll consider your opinion on exactly what is fact and what isn't.

I've been building, tinkering, modding pc's for 30 years, both amateur and professionally, I too have built my fair share of high end pc's, so that fact of yours means Jack. The forums are also full of posts from ppl with quality psus, that have issues, high end pc's that have issues, IT professionals stumped by odd issues, not just ppl with little knowledge.

And don't throw words like misguided information around, there isn't any reason a fx 8350 and gtx1050 would ever need a 850w psu. None. If anything, a 850w psu would be a detriment to that kind of load as it'll be mostly seeing 25% or lower loads, the worst efficiency range for a psu. Fact.
 
Upvote 1 Downvote
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom