Newegg.com - A great place to buy computers, computer parts, electronics, software, accessories, and DVDs online. With great prices, fast shipping, and top-rated customer service - once you know, you Newegg.
If you are reading this message, Please click this link to reload this page.(Do not use your browser's "Refresh" button). Please email us if you're running the latest version of your browser and you still see this message.
Showing Results: Most Recent
Pros: Lots of cores
Half as many floating point modules
Replaced my heater in my computer room
Low wattage version of the FX-8320, works great in 970/760g chipset motherboards
Cons: If you don't disable Active Power Management in the BIOS it seems to throttle such that it never pulls more than "~70 watts" (see other thoughts)
Expensive compared to other models that are similar and run better
Other Thoughts: AMD really messed up their active power management to no end. It's unmodifiably locked to (according to HWinfo64 while running Intel Burn Test) around 70 watts. Since I overclocked it, I obviously disabled it, but it doesn't even let the thing push past 2.8ghz under full (100%, load no more, IBT something or other) load. Under half load it goes nuts at stock settings (3.2ghz / 4ghz turbo) and runs games / pushes turbo rather properly. Because of this, I must overclock it without turbo (not losing much really, since the turbo is only fully adjustable in AMD Overdrive and not in the BIOS of my ASRock 990FX Extreme9). I keep all of the power saving settings in BIOS turned off except for Cool'n Quiet (so it can adjust ghz in steps like a normal CPU without turbo and stuff), set it to 4.2ghz @ 1.25 VID with 50% LLC, only ever gets toasty (CM Seidon 120v cooling it, push/pull fans) if I run Intel Burn Test, and not very toasty (62C or so max). Battlefield 3 runs very well along with everything else, and for much cheaper than most Intel processors in its price range.
With the BIOS option of "one core per unit" in number of active cores, I was able to overclock this further than normal at a lower VID (it still got super toasty).
With standard all cores active, I managed:
4.5ghz @ 4.15 ish vcore
With one core per unit, I managed:
4.7ghz @ 1.395 ish vcore
It ran Battlefield 3 much worse, but Starcraft 2 slightly better (low thread count games will see small performance gains while games optimized for AMD 8 core processors will see a decent loss), and it generated significantly less heat (lasted like 5 minutes running Intel Burn Test before I killed it, instead of like 2 minutes with all cores @ 4.5ghz).
Pros: CPU 12 phase VRM design, long life even with high voltage AMD 8-core CPUs
Big heatsinks on the 12+2 phase VRMs
Option to "disable one core per unit" in the BIOS: for an FX-8xxx that effectively makes it a core-i5 and theoretically allows for higher overclocking headroom (see other thoughts!)
... Lots of... fan headers?
I no longer need a heater in my computer room (CPU/GPU help that as well)
Cons: Pulls some major wattage itself
Wattage = heat generation
PCI-e x16 2.0
Other Thoughts: I plugged in an FX-8320e to this thing and messed with some overclocking. I managed 4.5ghz at above 1.4v and decided my CPU cooler simply was not enough (CM Seidon 120v, lol). Then I tried the "one core per unit" option (something similar to that, don't remember specifically) and managed 4.7ghz @ just under 1.4v (VID 1.385 or so, vcore pushing 1.395, LLC @ 50%), which was a notable improvement in single threaded / up to 4 thread / floating point computation performance. It managed to push out a few more frames per second playing Starcraft 2 (only uses 2+1 worker thread or something like that) but lost quite a bit of FPS in Battlefield 3 (all of which was over 100 anyway); however, it did all of this at much more respectable temperatures (unlike 4.5ghz @ 1.41 ish vcore). While I don't recommend this for general use or probably at all (especially considering consoles are using what is basically a significantly cut down / lower wattage version of an FX-8xxx series chip), it's at least interesting and might be useful if you only want to play Starcraft 2, WoW, or Diablo 3 (oh Blizzard, move on to more than 2 primary threads :P).
Another thing, PCI-e x16 2.0 will technically bottleneck a GTX 780 by around like 1% (considering the game is optimized for lots of threads / AMD 2x integer core as floating point module design) if you're playing something that can fully utilize a GTX 780 (Battlefield 3/4 or such).
Pros: Powers stuff (3+ months)
Quiet (haven't tried the red fan button)
Cons: Not 80-plus platinum?
Other Thoughts: Running an AMD Athlon 740, Radeon HD 7850 (slight OC), single 7200 RPM HDD, M/K, basic speakers this thing pulls at max around 220 watts from the wall (tested with a killawatt meter). Idling, I only use around 75 watts average, low end 60 watts high end 85 watts.
Given my idle wattage, it runs outside efficiency range (being under 20%) and I may be wasting money. So maybe I should have bought a smaller power supply. Regardless, it's for a gaming computer that I turn off regularly, so I'll save more money on the 80-plus rating than I'll lose on the idle time (only about 20% of the time it's on).
Display Name: Austin S.
Date Joined: 07/07/12
Some manufacturers place restrictions on how details of their products may be communicated.