# AMD FX-8350 Overclocked to 8.176 GHz with 8 Cores Enabled



## btarunr (Oct 25, 2012)

Last week's 7.443 GHz overclocking feat of the AMD FX-8350 certainly wasn't the last of it, for the chip. Korean overclocker NAMEGT achieved a clock speed of 8176.47 MHz, with all eight cores enabled, and both DRAM channels populated. 8176.47 MHz was achieved with a base clock of 281.94 MHz, multiplier of 29X, and 1.932V to fuel the chip. ASUS ROG Crosshair V Formula-Z motherboard and Samsung-made DDR3 memory was used. The best performing chip was binned from two 12-chip trays. Cooling it all was trusty liquid nitrogen. Find the CPU-Z validation here, and HWBot certification here.





*View at TechPowerUp Main Site*


----------



## HumanSmoke (Oct 25, 2012)

Solid feat !


----------



## Jhelms (Oct 25, 2012)

Good lord almighty! NICE


----------



## BarbaricSoul (Oct 25, 2012)

All 8 cores/threads at 8.1ghz , now I'm impressed


----------



## KainXS (Oct 25, 2012)

I wish I could get a cherry picked chip like that  -_-


----------



## darkangel0504 (Oct 25, 2012)

8 cores !!!


----------



## rakesh_sharma23 (Oct 25, 2012)

ALL 8 Cores... very impressive...


----------



## sbsixth18 (Oct 25, 2012)

*awesome...*

whoa...all 8 cores ?
I'm gonna cry...


----------



## entropy13 (Oct 25, 2012)

AMD FTW!!! Intel sucks!!! Herp derp!!!


----------



## bim27142 (Oct 25, 2012)

and the power consumption please?


----------



## xBruce88x (Oct 25, 2012)

now THAT is impressive!


----------



## No_Asylum (Oct 25, 2012)

Again ... completely, totally and utterly pointless.  When you can do 7+ghz, and actually USE the computer, with an enclosed case for more than 1 day, THEN I'll be impressed.


----------



## xBruce88x (Oct 25, 2012)

bim27142 said:


> and the power consumption please?


----------



## eidairaman1 (Oct 25, 2012)

No_Asylum said:


> Again ... completely, totally and utterly pointless.  When you can do 7+ghz, and actually USE the computer, with an enclosed case for more than 1 day, THEN I'll be impressed.



Well this proves what the chips are capable of. good goin. btw no asylum you're just jealous. cry us a river


----------



## wingzero (Oct 25, 2012)

entropy13 said:


> AMD FTW!!! Intel sucks!!! Herp derp!!!



happy fanboy lol


----------



## btarunr (Oct 25, 2012)

bim27142 said:


> and the power consumption please?



It's nobodycares Watts, unthusiast.


----------



## DannibusX (Oct 25, 2012)

So the argument shifts from "Meh, unimpressive, when a chip is capable of doing that with more than one core, THEN I'll be impressed." to "Meh, when a chip is capable of doing that for everyday computing THEN I'll be impressed."

Interesting.

When a chip is capable of doing this with all 8 cores for everyday tasks while turning my hand into a vagina, THEN I'll be impressed.


----------



## entropy13 (Oct 25, 2012)

Would be interesting to see at least some benchmarks, even at lower speeds. Then we'll see how much better AMD is than Intel because Intel sucks and AMD is the best there is!!! AMD r0x0rs!!! Intel sux0rs!!! AMD FTWTFWT!!!!!!!!11111oneoneoneneoneo


----------



## [H]@RD5TUFF (Oct 25, 2012)

pointless


----------



## Nordic (Oct 25, 2012)

For all those who say it is pointless. It is functionally pointless but do you not have an interest in knowledge for knowledge sake. Do you not find this information interesting what so ever? If you did not why did you even click , on the link.

I think this is pretty impressive and I certainly wonder what kind of benchmark scores it could get at a slower score. If bd could do 8ghz on 2 cores and piledriver can do 8ghz on 8 cores...

What can this exact chip do on 2 cores if it can go that fast on 8?


----------



## lyncer777 (Oct 25, 2012)

[h]@rd5tuff said:


> pointless



go amd go amd go !!!


----------



## cdawall (Oct 25, 2012)

[H]@RD5TUFF said:


> pointless



Just like your post. First you all complain AMD isn't clocking all cores, that happens and its still pointless huh? Wouldn't be pointless if it was a 3770K. Both AMD and Intel do this. In fact Intel was the first to do this don't go selling yourself short Intel was the first to start disabling half the processor to clock. Even those old Pentium 4's and Celerons had many many things disabled. Starting with internal error correcting.


----------



## suraswami (Oct 25, 2012)

did it finally crush Intel?


----------



## Lionheart (Oct 25, 2012)

james888 said:


> For all those who say it is pointless. It is functionally pointless but do you not have an interest in knowledge for knowledge sake. Do you not find this information interesting what so ever? If you did not why did you even click , on the link.
> 
> I think this is pretty impressive and I certainly wonder what kind of benchmark scores it could get at a slower score. If bd could do 8ghz on 2 cores and piledriver can do 8ghz on 8 cores...
> 
> What can this exact chip do on 2 cores if it can go that fast on 8?



Because most likely they're a bunch of Intel fanboys who like to belittle anything AMD related......Pretty sad & immature if you ask me -_-


----------



## Massman (Oct 25, 2012)

xBruce88x said:


> http://img.techpowerup.org/121025/Capture010-xBruce88x.png



Actually, power consumption will be a lot lower because of the temperature. Wouldn't surprise me if it's only like 150W load (and cpu-z screens are idle anyway).


----------



## hellrazor (Oct 25, 2012)

But can it play Crysis?


----------



## Nordic (Oct 25, 2012)

Fanboys regardless of where it is directed is just ridiculous


----------



## sbsixth18 (Oct 25, 2012)

some credits to ASUS ROG Crosshair V Formula-Z...


----------



## cdawall (Oct 25, 2012)

sbsixth18 said:


> some credits to ASUS ROG Crosshair V Formula-Z...



No kidding if that was the boot up vcore even with a low clock that is a hell of a power draw for those mosfets.


----------



## Assimilator (Oct 25, 2012)

This, finally, is impressive stuff from AMD. But ouch @ 1.932 volts on the core!


----------



## HTC (Oct 25, 2012)

james888 said:


> For all those who say it is pointless. It is functionally pointless but do you not have an interest in knowledge for knowledge sake. Do you not find this information interesting what so ever? If you did not why did you even click , on the link.
> 
> *I think this is pretty impressive and I certainly wonder what kind of benchmark scores it could get at a slower score. If bd could do 8ghz on 2 cores and piledriver can do 8ghz on 8 cores...
> 
> What can this exact chip do on 2 cores if it can go that fast on 8?*



Agree.

Personally, even if @ ... say ... 7.5 GHz or something, i would like to know how it performs when compared to stock: interested in knowing the performance VS GHz increase.

Later, and for comparison purposes, i would like this (@ lower speeds, if necessary) *compared by percentage VS stock speeds* against other offerings from both AMD and Intel: would be interesting to know not how much better / worse a processor is but how much it's gains from a fixed overclock percentage.


I'd say this particular chip should be able to do @ least 0.5 GHz more if using only 1 module, but that's an estimation on my part.


----------



## NC37 (Oct 25, 2012)

Like to see some 8320 clocking. Much more useful right now to find out how well those clock. If they hit the same as the 8350s then more money saved!


----------



## Prima.Vera (Oct 25, 2012)

Good. How long it lasted before got fried?


----------



## DaMobsta (Oct 25, 2012)

No_Asylum said:


> Again ... completely, totally and utterly pointless.  When you can do 7+ghz, and actually USE the computer, with an enclosed case for more than 1 day, THEN I'll be impressed.



I'm okay with you not being impressed, but am simply annoyed that you would call it "completely, totally and utterly pointless". 

Finding the limits of current tech is no mean feat, and without pushing the limits, how are you supposed to know if there has been any progress at all?


----------



## btarunr (Oct 25, 2012)

Prima.Vera said:


> Good. How long it lasted before got fried?



It never got fried.


----------



## Dent1 (Oct 25, 2012)

All 8 cores enabled 

Where is Trickson, I demand trickson come in here and talk crap about AMD. 

When AMD break the record with only 1 core enabled he is all up in the thread talking negative. Now 8 cores are enabled he is nowhere to be found!


Edit:

eidairaman1: Wow Trickson has changed? Never saw this coming. Congratulations Trickson.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Oct 25, 2012)

Dent1 said:


> All 8 cores enabled
> 
> Where is Trickson, I demand trickson come in here and talk crap about AMD.
> 
> When AMD break the record with only 1 core enabled he is all up in the thread talking negative. Now 8 cores are enabled he is nowhere to be found!




This is what he said in the other topic



trickson said:


> I came around I am sure the other trolls will as well. I am seeing some really nice stuff from AMD.


----------



## D4S4 (Oct 25, 2012)

btarunr said:


> It never got fried.



i wonder how long it could live with some phase change cooling at, i dunno, 6-7ghz if kept around 30-40 degrees celsius or lower. if it can last a year, this is quite awesome actually.


----------



## dj-electric (Oct 25, 2012)

What's up with those kinds of threads here on TPU lately? a lot of posts are plain stupid even in MY low standards.

Cmon, 8 full cores overclocked past 8Ghz, that's not a trivial thing


----------



## eidairaman1 (Oct 25, 2012)

Dj-ElectriC said:


> What's up with those kinds of threads here on TPU lately? a lot of posts are plain stupid even in MY low standards.
> 
> Cmon, 8 full cores overclocked past 8Ghz, that's not a trivial thing



this is a great feat considering all cylinders are firing now. This is satisfactory in the stock level too. Hopefully AMD is really working hard on SR to get it working faster in today and tomorrows apps without the clock speeds. (be nice to see a fast 2 GHz Chip)


----------



## librin.so.1 (Oct 25, 2012)

To You all hard Intel fanboys shouting "pointless!":

Tell me please, what's the overclock record for the Ivy? ...Exactly.
So, correct if I'm wrong, but doesn't that mean Piledriver has much better overclockability potential then Ivy?


----------



## eidairaman1 (Oct 25, 2012)

Vinska said:


> To You all hard Intel fanboys shouting "pointless!":
> 
> Tell me please, what's the overclock record for the Ivy? ...Exactly.
> So, correct if I'm wrong, but doesn't that mean Piledriver has much better overclockability potential then Ivy?



no need to add to the flamebaiting bro, they see how far they have been pushed, like everyone else who has entered this topic, its just jealously.

Honestly PD does perform better especially in the temperature dept. Only further steppings should improve it


----------



## Dent1 (Oct 25, 2012)

Vinska said:


> correct if I'm wrong, but doesn't that mean Piledriver has much better overclockability potential then Ivy?



Actually it does. 

It means under liquid nitrogen a binned Piledriver has better overclocking potential than Ivy Bridge. 

Until somebody counters this record on an Intel rig my above statement will be true. And the Intel Fanboy's cringe when I say it.


----------



## 1d10t (Oct 25, 2012)

eidairaman1 said:


> no need to add to the flamebaiting bro, they see how far they have been pushed, like everyone else who has entered this topic, its just jealously.
> 
> Honestly PD does perform better especially in the temperature dept. Only further steppings should improve it



yep...i'm sure PD will do better from my current setup 





with little luck,i might set with just the same 4% vcore increase,40% more Bclk while gaining a whooping 60% clock...that 6 Ghz for daily


----------



## eidairaman1 (Oct 25, 2012)

1d10t said:


> yep...i'm sure PD will do better from my current setup
> 
> [url]http://valid.canardpc.com/cache/banner/2452905.png[/url]
> 
> with little luck,i might set with just the same 4% vcore increase,40% more Bclk while gaining a whooping 60% clock...that 6 Ghz for daily



already has lol especially since 8 GHZ with all modules and cores enabled lol


----------



## FYFI13 (Oct 25, 2012)

suraswami said:


> did it finally crush Intel?



Nah, now it's equal to Phenom II on gaming.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Oct 25, 2012)

FYFI13 said:


> Nah, now it's equal to Phenom II on gaming.



um i think at 5GHz the PD now beats out the Phenom II...


----------



## FYFI13 (Oct 25, 2012)

eidairaman1 said:


> um i think at 5GHz the PD now beats out the Phenom II...



Yeah, if Phenom II runs at 3,4GHz... I'm not talking about well multi-threaded games like Battlefield 3, take a look at S.T.A.L.K.E.R. Call of Pripyat. An overclocked Phenom II 980 (@4.4GHz) beats the crap out of all Piledozers.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Oct 25, 2012)

FYFI13 said:


> Yeah, if Phenom II runs at 3,4GHz... I'm not talking about well threaded games like Battlefield 3, take a look at S.T.A.L.K.E.R. Call of Pripyat. An overclocked Phenom II 980 (@4.4GHz) beats the crap out of all Piledozers.



ya and that is a chip that is getting strained, plus not all 980s oc to that level, most PHIIs go about 3.8-4.1GHz


----------



## FYFI13 (Oct 25, 2012)

eidairaman1 said:


> ya and that is a chip that is getting strained, plus not all 980s oc to that level, most PHIIs go about 3.8-4.1GHz



Well, mine Phenom II 965 did quite well at 4,4GHz and it goes now for 92 euro here in Europe


----------



## eidairaman1 (Oct 25, 2012)

FYFI13 said:


> Well, mine Phenom II 965 did quite well at 4,4GHz and it goes now for 92 euro here in Europe
> 
> [url]http://valid.canardpc.com/cache/banner/2300583.png[/url]



what cooling and where are your system specs dude


----------



## FYFI13 (Oct 25, 2012)

eidairaman1 said:


> what cooling and where are your system specs dude



Corsair H80 with stock fans, other parts you can see in the link + Zalman 850HP power supply.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Oct 25, 2012)

FYFI13 said:


> Corsair H80 with stock fans, other parts you can see in the link + Zalman 850HP power supply.



good system i might say.

I built my bro one with a x2 555BE, unlocked it to B55/955 BE (Stock cooler for that CPU)

I might eventually build a 8350 based or A105800K based machine


----------



## FYFI13 (Oct 25, 2012)

eidairaman1 said:


> good system i might say.
> 
> I built my bro one with a x2 555BE, unlocked it to B55/955 BE (Stock cooler for that CPU)
> 
> I might eventually build a 8350 based or A105800K based machine



Thank you  Actually i'd buy an FX8350 if it was compatible with my AM3 mainboard, it's a good overclocker, does it's job on highly threaded apps and so on but if i can get 3470K for the same price my choice will be clear, unfortunately.


----------



## Dent1 (Oct 25, 2012)

FYFI13 said:


> Nah, now it's equal to Phenom II on gaming.



...And 2x better than it in everything else. 



FYFI13 said:


> Well, mine Phenom II 965 did quite well at 4,4GHz and it goes now for 92 euro here in Europe
> 
> [url]http://valid.canardpc.com/cache/banner/2300583.png[/url]





FYFI13 said:


> Yeah, if Phenom II runs at 3,4GHz... I'm not talking about well multi-threaded games like Battlefield 3, take a look at S.T.A.L.K.E.R. Call of Pripyat. An overclocked Phenom II 980 (@4.4GHz) beats the crap out of all Piledozers.



Very few Phenoms II will reach 4.4GHz, TBH that architecture typically caps out at 3.8-4.1GHz. If yours clocks higher you are in a lucky minority.

More bulldozers and Piledrivers reach 4.5-5GHz  than Phenom IIs do 4.1 GHz


----------



## WhiteLotus (Oct 25, 2012)

I will say this is certainly impressive. Now make them come out of that out of the box and I might go and buy one.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Oct 25, 2012)

FYFI13 said:


> Thank you  Actually i'd buy an FX8350 if it was compatible with my AM3 mainboard, it's a good overclocker, does it's job on highly threaded apps and so on but if i can get 3470K for the same price my choice will be clear, unfortunately.



did your board actually come with a bios update because I know AM3 supports AM3+ CPUs but AMD doesnt guarantee it, so its up to board makers to make that decision. I mean Asus and I believe Gigabyte did without a socket change. Hey what ever works for you bro, I just feel this helped AMD actually. If i was going intel Id be going skt 2011 with a IVB-E


----------



## nt300 (Oct 25, 2012)

DannibusX said:


> So the argument shifts from "Meh, unimpressive, when a chip is capable of doing that with more than one core, THEN I'll be impressed." to "Meh, when a chip is capable of doing that for everyday computing THEN I'll be impressed."
> 
> Interesting.
> 
> When a chip is capable of doing this with all 8 cores for everyday tasks while turning my hand into a vagina, THEN I'll be impressed.


This is testiment that we can push the CPU very high on air and water with all 8 cores. Good work for AMD


----------



## FYFI13 (Oct 25, 2012)

Dent1 said:


> ...And 2x better than it in everything else.



Agreed, but... I need CPU for gaming, video editing and transcoding only. Last two tasks are being done by GPU so all i need from CPU is good frame-rate in games and Piledozers failing at it.



eidairaman1 said:


> did your board actually come with a bios update because I know AM3 supports AM3+ CPUs but AMD doesnt guarantee it


Nope, unfortunately... The best i can throw in is Phenom II 1100T.

Edit. i swear the God there was post between mine two


----------



## nt300 (Oct 25, 2012)

FYFI13 said:


> Agreed, but... *I need CPU for gaming, video editing and transcoding only.* Last two tasks are being done by GPU so all i need from CPU is good frame-rate in games and Piledozers failing at it.


And how does Piledriver fail? Benchmarks show it is quite competative and the cost is the best bang for the money.


----------



## FYFI13 (Oct 25, 2012)

nt300 said:


> And how does Piledriver fail? Benchmarks show it is quite competative and the cost is the best bang for the money.



On some single threaded games it needs to be overclocked to match Phenom II performance (which is ~60% cheaper) and that isn't good in any way. I was hoping from PD at least same IPC as Phenom's had.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Oct 25, 2012)

FYFI13 said:


> Agreed, but... I need CPU for gaming, video editing and transcoding only. Last two tasks are being done by GPU so all i need from CPU is good frame-rate in games and Piledozers failing at it.
> 
> 
> Nope, unfortunately... The best i can throw in is Phenom II 1100T.
> ...



ya your prev post there were two who had posted before i did,

nt300 i know your a lil irked, but honestly PD was a interim update- it is still the same design series as BD, its probably good now but it will probably be SR that totally replaces PHII in everything. Eventually PHII chips will runout and what will we have then, PD based FX CPUs and PD based Athlons to replace BD and Stars in the AM3+ market. Im sure AMD isnt finished improving the chips, they will keep refining them with newer steppings of PD till SR is ready to go.


FYFI13- there was no guarantee Single thread IPC would improve drastically. Im sure SR does it better than PHII and BD/PD.


----------



## Dent1 (Oct 25, 2012)

FYFI13 said:


> On some single threaded games it needs to be overclocked to match Phenom II performance





FYFI13 said:


> Last two tasks are being done by GPU so all i need from CPU is good frame-rate in games and Piledozers failing at it.




I've seen Piledriver fail in gaming compared to Intel. But I haven't seen many indepeth reviews of the Piledriver vs Phenom II in gaming.

Show me the review of Piledriver vs Phenom II in gaming please.


----------



## de.das.dude (Oct 25, 2012)

sweet lord of sex kittens


----------



## Mindweaver (Oct 25, 2012)

WOW! Now this is really good news!


----------



## NHKS (Oct 25, 2012)

IMPRESSIVE indeed!.. 

apparently, NAMEGT had 24 tasty 8350's at disposal of which the best achieved this feat.. talk about cherry picking the cherries.. 

I hope quality yields will be common (so that conventional cooling can achieve 5GHz or more easily) considering that PD is on a mature 32nm..


----------



## Dent1 (Oct 25, 2012)

FYFI13, you've gone silent 

I'm sure you are still digging out the Piledriver vs Phenom II gaming benchmarks. 

It's OK. I know you won't repond or reply to my request.


----------



## de.das.dude (Oct 25, 2012)

FYFI13 said:


> *On some single threaded games *it needs to be overclocked to match Phenom II performance (which is ~60% cheaper) and that isn't good in any way. I was hoping from PD at least same IPC as Phenom's had.



hey, no one told its still the 90s


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Oct 25, 2012)

KainXS said:


> I wish I could get a cherry picked chip like that  -_-



Me too , very impresed, another totally polarising thread


----------



## baggpipes (Oct 25, 2012)

Looks good to me.... 







http://www.overclockers.com/amd-fx-8350-piledriver-cpu-review


----------



## brandonwh64 (Oct 25, 2012)

baggpipes said:


> Looks good to me....
> 
> http://www.overclockers.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/oc-fx-8350-3dmvantage.jpg



So it takes 4.9Ghz to reach close to the same score as a 3770K at stock? I maybe reading this graph wrong


----------



## Dent1 (Oct 25, 2012)

brandonwh64 said:


> So it takes 4.9Ghz to reach close to the same score as a 3770K at stock? I maybe reading this graph wrong



So it takes an overclocked $219 processor to dust a $319 processor. I must be reading it wrong too 

I'm going to start posting cinebench, so we can see the FX dust the Ivy Bridge all day.



Edit:



Takes a 4.8GHz for the 3570k to beat the FX-8350 (4GHz)

I must be reading the graph wrong?


----------



## brandonwh64 (Oct 25, 2012)

Who cares about cinebench?


----------



## Dent1 (Oct 25, 2012)

brandonwh64 said:


> Who cares about cinebench?



Who cares about 3D Mark Vantage. I stopped caring about synthetic points years ago.

Edit:



brandonwh64 said:


> Then why get upset and stary saying things like "OH NO HE DIDN"T don't make me get out the cinebenches!" I only asked a simple question and didn't need the mad black woman attitude.



Come on, it wasnt just a question. We could all hear the sarcasm as you said it. If there was no sarcasm. My bad.


----------



## entropy13 (Oct 25, 2012)

Who cares if the Pentium is better in Skyrim? It's just Skyrim!










Who cares if the i5 2400 is better in Batman: Arkham City? It's just Batman: Arkham City!










Who cares if the i5 2400 is better in Civilization V? It's just Civilization V!




> Pop over to the gaming scatter, though, and the picture changes dramatically. There, the FX-8350 is the highest-performance AMD desktop processor to date for gaming, finally toppling the venerable Phenom II X4 980. Yet the FX-8350's gaming performance almost exactly matches that of the Core i3-3225, a $134 Ivy Bridge-based processor. Meanwhile, the Core i5-3470 delivers markedly superior gaming performance for less money than the FX-8350. The FX-8350 isn't exactly bad for video games—its performance was generally acceptable in our tests. But it is relatively weak compared to the competition.
> 
> This strange divergence between the two performance pictures isn't just confined to gaming, of course. The FX-8350 is also relatively pokey in image processing applications, in SunSpider, and in the less widely multithreaded portions of our video encoding tests. Many of these scenarios rely on one or several threads, and the FX-8350 suffers compared to recent Intel chips in such cases. Still, the contrast between the FX-8350 and the Sandy/Ivy Bridge chips isn't nearly as acute as it was with the older FX processors. Piledriver's IPC gains and that 4GHz base clock have taken the edge off of our objections.



http://techreport.com/review/23750/amd-fx-8350-processor-reviewed/14

Who cares if it's still behind in gaming? It's just gaming!


----------



## Dent1 (Oct 25, 2012)

entropy13 said:


> http://techreport.com/r.x/amd-fx-8350/skyrim-fps.gif
> http://techreport.com/r.x/amd-fx-8350/skyrim-99th.gif
> 
> Who cares if the Pentium is better in Skyrim? It's just Skyrim!
> ...



Article says it matches the Core i3-3225 in gaming. 

However I've never seen anyone say the Core i3-3xxx series "is behind in gaming". One standard for Intel another for AMD.

One great thing about that review is it shows the Piledriver handily beat out the Phenom II in gaming, contrary to the misinformation FYFI13 said.

+1 for the article, it was an interesting read.


----------



## Irony (Oct 25, 2012)

"If an 8 Core can hit 6Ghz with an H100 i'll post pictures of my hot fiance naked." - pestilence

I think it might be doable


----------



## Dent1 (Oct 25, 2012)

Irony said:


> "If an 8 Core can hit 6Ghz with an H100 i'll post pictures of my hot fiance naked." - pestilence
> 
> *I think it might be doable*



Your fiancee or the overclock?

I know bad joke. The* Irony *that I would use your words against you.


----------



## FYFI13 (Oct 25, 2012)

Dent1 said:


> FYFI13, you've gone silent
> 
> I'm sure you are still digging out the Piledriver vs Phenom II gaming benchmarks.
> 
> It's OK. I know you won't repond or reply to my request.



Sorry, i've been busy. I just tried to find that review and i can't, but i'm not surprised to be honest as i've spent almost all tuesday on reading reviews. I'll give another go once i'm home.


----------



## cdawall (Oct 25, 2012)

Irony said:


> "If an 8 Core can hit 6Ghz with an H100 i'll post pictures of my hot fiance naked." - pestilence
> 
> I think it might be doable



Hand me one and a board I guarantee I can do it with an H70.


----------



## Irony (Oct 25, 2012)

cdawall said:


> Hand me one and a board I guarantee I can do it with an H70.



Lol; tell him to get his camera ready


----------



## m1dg3t (Oct 25, 2012)

Incredible! 8 cores @ 8Ghz ++ is an AMAZING feat! 

Crank it 'till it Hz boyz!


----------



## Pehla (Oct 25, 2012)

btarunr said:


> Last week's 7.443 GHz overclocking feat of the AMD FX-8350 certainly wasn't the last of it, for the chip. Korean overclocker NAMEGT achieved a clock speed of 8176.47 MHz, with all eight cores enabled, and both DRAM channels populated. 8176.47 MHz was achieved with a base clock of 281.94 MHz, multiplier of 29X, and 1.932V to fuel the chip. ASUS ROG Crosshair V Formula-Z motherboard and Samsung-made DDR3 memory was used. The best performing chip was binned from two 12-chip trays. Cooling it all was trusty liquid nitrogen. Find the CPU-Z validation here, and HWBot certification here.
> 
> [url]http://www.techpowerup.com/img/12-10-24/231a_thm.jpg[/URL]




8.some ghzx8cores= 64,some ghz!!!  i think this chip outperform his price!!not that am complaining or something...cheap cpu happy people!!


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Oct 25, 2012)

Pehla said:


> *8.some ghzx8cores= 64,some ghz!!!*  i think this chip outperform his price!!not that am complaining or something...cheap cpu happy people!!



FAIL. Thats not how it works LOL


----------



## Steevo (Oct 25, 2012)

MxPhenom 216 said:


> FAIL. Thats not how it works LOL



^Most useless comment ever. Thanks for playing.^


----------



## ChaoticG8R (Oct 26, 2012)

Steevo said:


> ^Most useless comment ever. Thanks for playing.^



I think it's a close 2nd....you decided to take the #1 spot yourself!!







I think its pretty amazing, can't deny that those numbers are super sexxy.  Too bad it would appear that performance is still behind Intel, and AMD's current growth pattern doesn't really show them catching up to Intel anytime soon....thus Intel will still be able to keep their prices up and do not necessarily have to become more competitive.  This is why prices rarely vary away from the MSRP Intel lists throughout the lifespan of their products....So we lose as consumers, just saying....


----------



## cdawall (Oct 26, 2012)

ChaoticG8R said:


> I think its pretty amazing, can't deny that those numbers are super sexxy. Too bad it would appear that performance is still behind Intel, and AMD's current growth pattern doesn't really show them catching up to Intel anytime soon....thus Intel will still be able to keep their prices up and do not necessarily have to become more competitive. This is why prices rarely vary away from the MSRP Intel lists throughout the lifespan of their products....So we lose as consumers, just saying....



Depends on the benchmark


----------



## nt300 (Oct 26, 2012)

FX 8350 is definitely an improvement over the FX 8150. This s positive and shows AMD is on the right track, we can only imagine the Steamroller to add to the performance.


----------



## Goodman (Oct 26, 2012)

Man! 8+ghz on 8 cores... never though i see the day...

Guess it could run benchmarks at ~7ghz on 8 cores?
Would be nice to see that

Anyways really great overclock


----------



## ensabrenoir (Oct 27, 2012)

Im excited!!!!  This is a great feat !  Im drooling in anticipation!!  One can only imagine what intel will unleash if it takes Amd seriously.   If this be the end of the desktop era.....Both sides should go all out and end it with a BOOOOOOOM!!!!!!!


----------



## trickson (Oct 27, 2012)

I sure wished I could get one!


----------



## ensabrenoir (Oct 27, 2012)

trickson said:


> I sure wished I could get one!



True enthusiast/ nut here.....When i didnt want to run up a credit bill I've cashed in aluminum cans and scrap copper/ steel to get extra funds for my "hobby"{surprised at how much i get for junk) And most importantly sell off old parts


----------



## eidairaman1 (Oct 27, 2012)

trickson said:


> I sure wished I could get one!



well if AMD did this and was a wake up call for them, they probably aint going to slack off on SR. Dont get me wrong Id rather have great chips on a Mature Process than a young process


----------

