# AMD FX-9590 + MSI GAMING 970



## landstad (Apr 5, 2015)

AMD FX-9590 + MSI GAMING 970

Will this combo work together ?
can we consider msi gaming 970 as a High end motherboard ?

Wich of these amd prossesor's would be the best choice ?
https://www.komplett.no/search?bn=1...rice:DESCENDING&subcategory=11204_Prosessorer


Thanks for all answears  preciate it ^^,


----------



## Ebo (Apr 5, 2015)

thats properly not going to work.
The highend chipset is 990FX and theres only a few MB's that support the power FX-9590 needs to work. Such as Asus Sabertooth and Gigabyte also has a few


----------



## m0nt3 (Apr 5, 2015)

The only 970 board which claims 220WATT CPU support is the Asrock 970 Fatality
http://www.asrock.com/mb/AMD/Fatal1ty 970 Performance/


----------



## landstad (Apr 5, 2015)

Ebo said:


> thats properly not going to work.
> The highend chipset is 990FX and theres only a few MB's that support the power FX-9590 needs to work. Such as Asus Sabertooth and Gigabyte also has a few


aigth.





m0nt3 said:


> The only 970 board which claims 220WATT CPU support is the Asrock 970 Fatality
> http://www.asrock.com/mb/AMD/Fatal1ty 970 Performance/




is the AMD FX-8370E the next best then ?
And whats the diffrence between E and black edition ? i know e i 3.3 ghz and black edition 4.0 ghz


----------



## Ebo (Apr 5, 2015)

The E type consumes a bit less power. thats all.
I would go for a Fx-8350, it can run almost as fast as the 9590


----------



## Batou1986 (Apr 5, 2015)

I would say make a better investment in an i5 and a z97 board and not have to worry about burning out VRM's with 220+w cpus that don't perform.


----------



## landstad (Apr 5, 2015)

Ebo said:


> The E type consumes a bit less power. thats all.
> I would go for a Fx-8350, it can run almost as fast as the 9590



okey.

what about the FX-8370 Black edition then ? compared to fx-8350.


Any suggestions on what SDD2.5 i should get ?


----------



## Ebo (Apr 6, 2015)

the E type consumes a bit less power thats all.
I would go for the FX 8350, it can run almost as fast as the FX 9590


----------



## Lionheart (Apr 6, 2015)

The FX8370-E Operates at 3.3ghz, that's why it has a lower TDP but it can turbo up to 4ghz 

The FX8370 is pretty much a FX8350, Both operate at 4ghz but the 8370 turbo's to 4.3ghz while the 8350 turbo's to 4.2ghz, nothing special. 

If I were you I would do what Ebo mentioned & get an FX8350 & overclock it a bit provided that you can spare some dosh for a decent CPU cooler or go with Batou1986's idea & get an Intel platform.


----------



## bubbleawsome (Apr 6, 2015)

Ebo said:


> the E type consumes a bit less power thats all.
> I would go for the FX 8350, it can run almost as fast as the FX 9590


At that point it would draw a ton of power too. If he is going to overclock it a ton he needs one of the high wattage boards.

I would go intel.


----------



## landstad (Apr 6, 2015)

Lionheart said:


> The FX8370-E Operates at 3.3ghz, that's why it has a lower TDP but it can turbo up to 4ghz
> 
> The FX8370 is pretty much a FX8350, Both operate at 4ghz but the 8370 turbo's to 4.3ghz while the 8350 turbo's to 4.2ghz, nothing special.
> 
> If I were you I would do what Ebo mentioned & get an FX8350 & overclock it a bit provided that you can spare some dosh for a decent CPU cooler or go with Batou1986's idea & get an Intel platform.


Oki


bubbleawsome said:


> At that point it would draw a ton of power too. If he is going to overclock it a ton he needs one of the high wattage boards.
> 
> I would go intel.


 look at the post a little down in that thread and say what you think about the pc i have on my hand.   
http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/crucial-bx100-250gb-2-5”-ssd-vs.211305/#post-3265323


----------



## Bill_Bright (Apr 6, 2015)

landstad said:


> AMD FX-9590 + MSI GAMING 970


Whenever looking for a compatible CPU, you should ALWAYS check the motherboard's website for the QVL - qualified vendors list - to see which CPU are compatible with that specific board.

Your CPU QVL can be found here.


----------



## suraswami (Apr 6, 2015)

landstad said:


> Oki
> look at the post a little down in that thread and say what you think about the pc i have on my hand.
> http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/crucial-bx100-250gb-2-5”-ssd-vs.211305/#post-3265323



Based on your system specs, I see you already have the MSI 970 gaming board.  If you want a CPU upgrade then go with the 8370E, I believe its also unlocked like the 8350 and will overclock equally to 4.4 minimum (ymmv).

Best upgrade would be to get a better video card, I would say get the NVidia 970 and probably a SSD.


----------



## Countryside (Apr 6, 2015)

If you really want 9590 then you should buy ASrock 990fx extreme9 

If you buy MSI970 go with 8350


----------



## GhostRyder (Apr 6, 2015)

landstad said:


> aigth.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 Well I have seen people put a FX 9590 inside the MSI Gaming 970, however from what I have heard while it will work it is not recommended because the VRM's get very hot and in some cases have throttled.  Even with an extra fan blowing on it, I would not recommend it for fear of losing in longevity of the board.  I would recommend the FX 8350 or 70 and overclocking to the high levels of 4.5ghz without seeing any problems.  You could also grab the FX 9370 which would probably max out the board and you could even put a higher base clock on it without to much concern though I would have a fan blowing on the VRM heatsinks it you could to help.

The 6+2 Phase setup is ok on the board but its just not going to be the king overclocking board for this platform.


----------



## VulkanBros (Apr 6, 2015)

I have been running the FX-9590 on a Sabertooth 990FX R2 since nov, 2013 - rock stable an overclockable


----------



## landstad (Apr 14, 2015)

I see the AMDFX 8370E 3.3 ghz, can overclock quite smooth, and high vaulves, saw one up to 5.1ghz

are that one a better choice than te "AMDFX 8370 4ghz" version. 

Is it better to have a cpu that runs on less Wattage, example 95w rather than 125w ? 

any thoughts ?


----------



## suraswami (Apr 14, 2015)

If you are going to keep stock then yes the 95w will run cooler and consume bit less power.  If you are overclocking then either one doesn't matter (though I have heard the 95w clocks better).

Either way, after you install it, join the FX owners club and you can get lot of inputs on how to OC that FX.

FX @ 4.2 to 4.4 is good for gaming as well as 'sane' power consumption.  More than that I don't see any benefits.


----------



## landstad (Apr 15, 2015)

suraswami said:


> If you are going to keep stock then yes the 95w will run cooler and consume bit less power.  If you are overclocking then either one doesn't matter (though I have heard the 95w clocks better).
> 
> Either way, after you install it, join the FX owners club and you can get lot of inputs on how to OC that FX.
> 
> FX @ 4.2 to 4.4 is good for gaming as well as 'sane' power consumption.  More than that I don't see any benefits.




thanks man
Okey...
do any other have some thougths?


"The sky's the limit with this processor's massive headroom. The world's first commercially available 5.0GHz processor."

qoute from sales text


----------



## newtekie1 (Apr 15, 2015)

What do you use the machine for?  Do you really need 8 cores?  Games certainly won't use 8 Cores, so if you are mainly gaming, I'd actually suggest an FX-6300.  From the website you posted it is quite a bit cheaper than the FX-8000 CPUs.  But you'll probably be able to clock the FX-6300 higher than any of the FX-8000 CPUs with your current board and cooler.  And for gaming, the higher clock speed with 6 cores is much better than a lower clock speed with 8 cores.


----------



## landstad (Apr 15, 2015)

newtekie1 said:


> What do you use the machine for?  Do you really need 8 cores?  Games certainly won't use 8 Cores, so if you are mainly gaming, I'd actually suggest an FX-6300.  From the website you posted it is quite a bit cheaper than the FX-8000 CPUs.  But you'll probably be able to clock the FX-6300 higher than any of the FX-8000 CPUs with your current board and cooler.  And for gaming, the higher clock speed with 6 cores is much better than a lower clock speed with 8 cores.




Mostly gaming, maybee some streaming. my thougths are If i'm gonna buy, I want the best. Overkill...
price does not bother me.  no worries on that subject.

usefull info. i'll consider buying fx 6000 series.

I'm also planing on to get a better gpu, that will work with the g-sync monitor's. Think i've asked this question before some where can't quite remember. i'm hopeless... haha 
any thougths ? r9 290x ? gtx 970/80 ?


----------



## Bill_Bright (Apr 15, 2015)

landstad said:


> If i'm gonna buy, I want the best. Overkill...
> price does not bother me. no worries on that subject.
> any thougths ? r9 290x ? gtx 970/80 ?


Then obviously you should get the Gigabyte GV-N980X3WA-4GD GTX 980. And for a limited time only, you get a Free Acer 27” G-Sync Monitor with purchase.


----------



## Johan45 (Apr 15, 2015)

New tekkie has it right, if you're using the 970 and not water cooling you'll do better at gaming with the 6xxx chips. Less heat and power draw so you "should" be able to clock it a bit higher.


----------



## Potatoking (Apr 15, 2015)

FX-6xxx wotn perform any better than your 1100t.
Get a better GPU first


----------



## suraswami (Apr 15, 2015)

Potatoking said:


> FX-6xxx wotn perform any better than your 1100t.
> Get a better GPU first



I probably would try the new GPU first.

When I upgraded my X6 1045T to FX 8320 I was also in the same dilemma, but BF3 and BF4 really benefited with FX.  Now I am running the FX 8350 with a better board with the same video card and no issues.  Now a days no time to play games, so will hold on to this setup for a while.


----------



## newtekie1 (Apr 15, 2015)

Potatoking said:


> FX-6xxx wotn perform any better than your 1100t.
> Get a better GPU first


At stock you are correct, but overclocked the FX wins.  The 1100t is already pretty close to the max for a Phenom x6, you might be able to push it to 3.6 _maybe_ 3.8GHz if he's lucky with his current cooler.  While the FX-6300 should be able to hit 4.8GHz, possibly 5.0GHz with his setup. Piledriver was about 10% slower in IPC than Thuban, and a 1GHz higher clock speed is about 20% higher clock, so the FX will perform better than the Phenom x6.  It isn't a huge jump, but it is something.


----------



## Potatoking (Apr 15, 2015)

I used to have 1090t and it clocked to 4.2 easy, 4.4 with custom loop.I also had one FX6300 that couldn't handle over 4GHz on all cores. 
Its a game of chance. 
If OP really needs more CPU power he has to go for Intel.
switching to overclocked 4970K will give maybe 20% gaming performance
270x to gtx970 will give almost 100% additional performance...


----------



## newtekie1 (Apr 15, 2015)

Potatoking said:


> I used to have 1090t and it clocked to 4.2 easy, 4.4 with custom loop.


Sure, under custom water I can see that.  But I'm talking in the situation of the OP with his cooler  Yes, he has an AIO, but his AIO doesn't really perform any better than a tower style air cooler(and is actually outperformed by some air coolers).



Potatoking said:


> FX6300 that couldn't handle over 4GHz on all cores.


With a decent cooler I call shenanigans on that.  Unless it was in an absolute shit motherboard.



Potatoking said:


> Its a game of chance.


Sure it is, but you'd have to get really unlucky to get an FX-6300 that bad.  For a CPU to not even be able to get to its boost clocks is kind of unbelievable.



Potatoking said:


> If OP really needs more CPU power he has to go for Intel.
> switching to overclocked 4970K will give maybe 20% gaming performance


Sure, and speed $600 for that, or go for a $100 upgrade to get 10%+.  If he is upgrading and wants to upgrade his CPU, then the FX-6300 is a good choice for the money.



Potatoking said:


> 270x to gtx970 will give almost 100% additional performance...


I agree, his money is better spent on a GTX970.  Be he already said he is looking to upgrade is GPU as well.  This thread is about his CPU upgrade.


----------



## landstad (Apr 16, 2015)

Bill_Bright said:


> Then obviously you should get the Gigabyte GV-N980X3WA-4GD GTX 980. And for a limited time only, you get a Free Acer 27” G-Sync Monitor with purchase.


That way out of the money ball park..


----------



## Johan45 (Apr 16, 2015)

I think where the FX benefits in gaming is the newer instruction sets. My 6350 even with a 1.3GHz advantage still couldn't top my 1090T scores in cinebench. 
http://hwbot.org/submission/2591774_johan45_cinebench___r11.5_phenom_ii_x6_1090t_be_8.98_points
http://hwbot.org/submission/2809989_johan45_cinebench___r11.5_fx_6350_8.38_points

I game with a 9370 at 4.7 with a GTX 770 and haven't had any issues with it yet. I play FPS for the most part and I know there are some games that are terribly coded out there that run on one core but not all of them are like that. I had my 6350 on an M5A99FX before I swapped and it worked jut as well at 4.6 with air cooling.


----------



## landstad (Apr 16, 2015)

newtekie1 said:


> At stock you are correct, but overclocked the FX wins.  The 1100t is already pretty close to the max for a Phenom x6, you might be able to push it to 3.6 _maybe_ 3.8GHz if he's lucky with his current cooler.  While the FX-6300 should be able to hit 4.8GHz, possibly 5.0GHz with his setup. Piledriver was about 10% slower in IPC than Thuban, and a 1GHz higher clock speed is about 20% higher clock, so the FX will perform better than the Phenom x6.  It isn't a huge jump, but it is something.


I have 3,7ghz clock on the thuban now tho..

Okey thanks..


----------



## m0nt3 (Apr 16, 2015)

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/699?vs=203

About the best comparison I can find. The FX 6300 I think would have a slight edge in gaming after overclock.


----------



## landstad (Apr 16, 2015)

m0nt3 said:


> http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/699?vs=203
> 
> About the best comparison I can find. The FX 6300 I think would have a slight edge in gaming after overclock.


As i can see on that test is not that much of a diffrence tho, if i was going to buy fx6 it had to be fx 6350 i think.. But im stuck on wanting to buy the 8370 be


----------



## m0nt3 (Apr 16, 2015)

No point in the 6350 an extra cost for a few hundred MHz difference. Since the FX6300 has an unlocked multi you could easily bump it to the equivalent of a 6350.


----------



## landstad (Apr 16, 2015)

Okey..ty


----------



## m0nt3 (Apr 16, 2015)

For a comparison a FX 8320 vs 6300 same 3.5 GHz no difference in gaming performance (at least in the games listed) Something like BF multi-player may have a difference.

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/698?vs=699


----------



## landstad (Apr 16, 2015)

m0nt3 said:


> For a comparison a FX 8320 vs 6300 same 3.5 GHz no difference in gaming performance (at least in the games listed) Something like BF multi-player may have a difference.
> 
> http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/698?vs=699


Is it comfied that the 8370e clocks better than 8370 4ghz version? Asked earlyer but dindt get satisfied with answear.


----------



## m0nt3 (Apr 16, 2015)

Not likely, the 8370e runs at a lower clock speed with slightly lower voltage, but has the same turbo speed. If you are still talking about using the MSI 970 board, then you wil not get far with overclocking anyway. The VRM will not be able to handle it.


----------



## landstad (Apr 16, 2015)

m0nt3 said:


> Not likely, the 8370e runs at a lower clock speed with slightly lower voltage, but has the same turbo speed. If you are still talking about using the MSI 970 board, then you wil not get far with overclocking anyway. The VRM will not be able to handle it.


I have two fans on the vrm now tho, able to keep the vrm under 50c on full load


----------



## m0nt3 (Apr 16, 2015)

Not with an overclocked FX8000 series CPU, not enough power phases. If it could handle it, then MSI would list the 9370 and 9590 as compatible. An attempt could end up killing your motherboard and CPU.


----------



## landstad (Apr 16, 2015)

m0nt3 said:


> Not with an overclocked FX8000 series CPU, not enough power phases. If it could handle it, then MSI would list the 9370 and 9590 as compatible. An attempt could end up killing your motherboard and CPU.


I see...


----------



## landstad (Apr 16, 2015)

qoute from:
http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Mother...AM3-Gets-Something-New-Change/Power-and-Overc

"This board would actually complement AMD’s 95 watt TDP parts very well.  I could easily see this pushing the FX-6350 quite nicely and at a relatively low bundled price."


Wich board would be good for ocing the Fx8000 series tho ?
Or i could just buy the Fx-8000series (one of them)

and not overclock at all.  just keep it stock

Or buy a new mb and go for 9590.


----------



## ThE_MaD_ShOt (Apr 16, 2015)

Well my vote goes for the Gigabyte 990Fxa-UD3 rev 4. Very overclock friendly and accepts the 9590. I have 3 of the boards and all have been totally great. All are running oc'd 8350's at 100% load 24/7/365 and never a hiccup one.


----------



## landstad (Apr 16, 2015)

How 


ThE_MaD_ShOt said:


> Well my vote goes for the Gigabyte 990Fxa-UD3 rev 4. Very overclock friendly and accepts the 9590. I have 3 of the boards and all have been totally great. All are running oc'd 8350's at 100% load 24/7/365 and never a hiccup one.


how is the vrm doing? What cooler do you use?  What do you use them for?


----------



## landstad (Apr 16, 2015)

landstad said:


> How
> 
> how is the vrm doing? What cooler do you use?  What do you use them for?


How is this board your talking about compared to sabertooth and asrock and v formula?


----------



## ThE_MaD_ShOt (Apr 16, 2015)

Gigabyte updated the vrm cooling on the rev 4 boards to use a heatpipe design and they run nice and cool. All three are using Aio's h110i, Enermax Liqtech 240 and the third is a Gamer Storm Maelstorm 240. The crunch WCG.

I have no experience with the other boards but I would myself put it right up there with and i truly feel it is the best bang for the buck for a Am3+ board. The first one has been running and crunching going on 3 yrs now.


----------



## landstad (Apr 16, 2015)

ThE_MaD_ShOt said:


> Gigabyte updated the vrm cooling on the rev 4 boards to use a heatpipe design and they run nice and cool. All three are using Aio's h110i, Enermax Liqtech 240 and the third is a Gamer Storm Maelstorm 240. The crunch WCG.


Okey. Did you see my last post?


----------



## ThE_MaD_ShOt (Apr 16, 2015)

Yes and edited my post to answer.

For $110 at Newegg you are not going to beat it.


I'll put it like this, you can see all the rigs I use for crunching in my sig. Now my main rig is listed under system specs (Selene). That should tell you something.


----------



## m0nt3 (Apr 17, 2015)

I would also vote for the Gigabyte 990fxa-ud3, although I have the sabertooth, I recently did a build with the gigabyte board and was pretty impressed for its price, but make sure its a newer revision as stated.


----------



## suraswami (Apr 17, 2015)

I have the UD3, I would not buy it again.


----------



## Bill_Bright (Apr 17, 2015)

suraswami said:


> I have the UD3, I would not buy it again.


That's hardly helpful.  Why won't you buy it again? Didn't like the color of the RAM slots?

I make most of my builds with Gigabyte boards and have for over 10 years because they work and they keep working. I was sold on Gigabyte long ago when the board on my main computer started freezing and a visual inspection revealed several leaky caps. The board was 3 1/2 years old (6 months out of warranty) but I called Gigabyte anyway and they sent me a brand new board - at no charge. 

The quality of their products is certainly the main reason I buy Gigabyte. But the quality of their after-sales support is what keeps me going back and recommending Gigabyte. I like ASUS too, but if two boards met my requirements, I would pick the Gigabyte. And I like their graphics cards too.

Actually, when it comes to quality and reliability, most of the big makers are pretty equal. I've had reliable builds with MSI, ASRock, SuperMicro, Intel, Foxconn, Chaintech, and BioStar too. It pretty much boils down to the features you want, and the brand name you are comfortable with.


----------



## m0nt3 (Apr 17, 2015)

suraswami said:


> I have the UD3, I would not buy it again.


Do you have an older revision?

Edit: I see you have rev 4 listed. What is your issue?


----------



## ThE_MaD_ShOt (Apr 17, 2015)

suraswami said:


> I have the UD3, I would not buy it again.


Why wouldn't you buy it again? What is your issues? 

Like I have said, I have 3 of the boards, 2 rev 4's and a rev 1.1 and all three preform flawlessly and all three are oc'd and I have never had an issue. Also I bought 2 of them used (rev 1.1 and one of the rev 4) and one was from a mining rig.


----------



## suraswami (Apr 17, 2015)

Bios is buggy, S3 worked for about 6 months and it stopped working now, have to live with Hibernate now.  Earlier 970 chipset giga also similar issue, Giga 790GX AM2+ board even at stock settings not so good with 1045T.  2 x 760G boards won't report CPU temps properly, when under load either annoy you with beeps or throttle the CPU, I am not even talking about a FX cpu, a basic PII X2 555.  Cheap ECS and MSI boards work way better.

Yes board quality is very good, but what good is the board if bios is not competent enough?

99% of people here don't use S3, so you guys won't see the bug.  Overclocking the FX with UD3 also has issues, I have my ranting in the FX owner thread, have to find it tho.

If I have the need for another premium board, I am going to try out MSI or Asus to see how good/bad they are.


----------



## m0nt3 (Apr 17, 2015)

suraswami said:


> Bios is buggy, S3 worked for about 6 months and it stopped working now, have to live with Hibernate now.  Earlier 970 chipset giga also similar issue, Giga 790GX AM2+ board even at stock settings not so good with 1045T.  2 x 760G boards won't report CPU temps properly, when under load either annoy you with beeps or throttle the CPU, I am not even talking about a FX cpu, a basic PII X2 555.  Cheap ECS and MSI boards work way better.
> 
> Yes board quality is very good, but what good is the board if bios is not competent enough?
> 
> ...


 
I have had issues with resume from sleep, even on my asus board, at least when having anything other than auto for overclocking settings. But you're right, I don't care to use it.


----------



## Johan45 (Apr 17, 2015)

One newer board that seems to be doing OK is the Asrock Fatal1ty 970, this user at OCN has had pretty good luck with it for a low price alternative. http://www.overclock.net/products/a...-am3-am3-super-alloy-motherboard/reviews/7102
Here it is at the EGG for $90 + a $10 rebate http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813157577


----------



## Bill_Bright (Apr 17, 2015)

suraswami said:


> 99% of people here don't use S3


Not sure about that. That said, the BIOS is code written by someone other than the motherboard maker.

FTR, I use hybrid sleep mode on all my W7 and W8 systems (6 and all with Gigabyte boards) and they work fine. That said, going into and coming out of sleep has not worked perfectly consistently since Windows 95 days - PC or notebook, regardless the OS (Linux or Windows) and regardless the motherboard maker.  And that leads to my point. I don't think you can blame the BIOS. The BIOS is a program in "firmware" so the settings really cannot result in intermittent behavior. That points to the OS, hardware drivers, or something else beside the BIOS and motherboard - to include some wayward program that is "tasking" the system (although it does not rule out a "Wake on..." setting in the BIOS).

And sleep mode requires the cooperation of many components and software to work properly. And getting all those components to work properly together is the responsibility of the OS, not the BIOS.

The only time I "shutdown" my computer is when I leave town, or if I have to open up the side panel for cleaning or maintenance. And the only time I reboot my computer is when some Windows or security program update requires it. So my computer goes into hybrid sleep mode several times a day, often for weeks on end with no problems - waking up just where I left off. But every once in awhile, I may come back after a couple hours and find my computer is still awake. My monitors are sleeping, but not the computer.

But every single time that happens all I have to do is reboot the computer, and all is good again. That does not suggest a BIOS problem.


----------



## suraswami (Apr 17, 2015)

Bill_Bright said:


> Not sure about that. That said, the BIOS is code written by someone other than the motherboard maker.
> 
> FTR, I use hybrid sleep mode on all my W7 and W8 systems (6 and all with Gigabyte boards) and they work fine. That said, going into and coming out of sleep has not worked perfectly consistently since Windows 95 days - PC or notebook, regardless the OS (Linux or Windows) and regardless the motherboard maker.  And that leads to my point. I don't think you can blame the BIOS. The BIOS is a program in "firmware" so the settings really cannot result in intermittent behavior. That points to the OS, hardware drivers, or something else beside the BIOS and motherboard - to include some wayward program that is "tasking" the system (although it does not rule out a "Wake on..." setting in the BIOS).
> 
> ...



Dude, I totally understand what you are saying.  S3 sleep was working for 6+ months on the UD3 and suddenly stopped working.  Here is what I did to prove S3 on this board is broken (after 6 months of use),

Took a fresh SSD, installed OS, drivers and all crap I use.  Tried Sleep, it goes to sleep but when waking up it will reboot the machine will not go into wake state.  Moved the SSD without changing anything to a Spare MSI 790FX board (windows complained and updated drivers blah blah), S3 worked flawlessly.  So its not the OS, its the crappy board.  S5 works flawlessly tho, I have to live with it.  Since I have a SSD its not driving me crazy yet.

Its not only S3 that is broken, OCing is also broken.  You go and change the multi on the unlocked FX to higher or lower number (disabling turbo), PC will double boot everytime you do a restart, start - cut off power for 1 sec and then boot again.  But if you don't touch multi, just OC thru HTT no issues.  Similarly touch any of the voltage settings, when the CPU is idling and frequency is dropped to lowest, the voltage still stays at full.

On the 790GX giga board, S3 sleep and wake will work but after few days, it will make the SSD crawl slower than a snail, OS will be stalled to a point it will not respond, have to shut off power and power back on, it will work again until the next freeze point.

ECS board on my server never missed a beat, sleep, wake, sleep... from June 2008 and yes its OCed too, running a PII 810.

I don't want to hijack this thread, we can take this to the FX OC thread, where Johan tried to help me out but I gave up on this board.

May be you are lucky but I am done with Gigashit!!


----------



## Bill_Bright (Apr 17, 2015)

Sorry, but you didn't prove anything. Why? Because of this,  





> windows complained and updated drivers blah blah


And once again, the BIOS is written by the BIOS maker. And finally, since it worked for 6 months, unless you flashed the BIOS and then it broke, that again does NOT point to the board, but rather elsewhere.

So it is clear you don't like Gigabyte and that's your choice. But sorry, you need to pick a different reason.


----------



## landstad (Apr 19, 2015)

A guy told that the FX-8000 series don't overclock well on the MSI GAMING 970..
Any have some information on that ?




suraswami said:


> If you are going to keep stock then yes the 95w will run cooler and consume bit less power.  If you are overclocking then either one doesn't matter (though I have heard the 95w clocks better).
> 
> Either way, after you install it, join the FX owners club and you can get lot of inputs on how to OC that FX.
> 
> FX @ 4.2 to 4.4 is good for gaming as well as 'sane' power consumption.  More than that I don't see any benefits.



Could you link me the FX owner club site ?





m0nt3 said:


> Not with an overclocked FX8000 series CPU, not enough power phases. If it could handle it, then MSI would list the 9370 and 9590 as compatible. An attempt could end up killing your motherboard and CPU.



Now I have a 3.7 ghz clock with the thuban, and on full load, blend test.. the vrm was never over 50c, would it be much of an diffrence on the 8350/8370 etc? Is it confirmed ?if so i can wreck the thougth on buy it.. and focus on new motherboard.






Look at this

"
The FX-8370e is a little bit more interesting, but we are hitting the same wall as the regular 8370.  It is a lower voltage device that runs at a base clock of 3.3 GHz.  Taking the voltage up by about 0.03v and it quickly and easily hits 4.5 GHz.  It only hit 4.7 GHz with an extra 0.06v applied.  I believe that the binning process on these chips are not necessarily friendly to high overclocks, but rather more efficient performance with all four modules and reasonable clockspeeds.

I may have been able to achieve better results with a more robust motherboard than the MSI 970 Gaming.  The board proved very stable throughout testing, but I would not doubt that I could have achieved some extra speed with the Asus Crosshair V F-Z.  Still, that board will be a very popular option for those looking for max features at the lowest possible price for the AM3+ socket market.

http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Proces...70-and-FX-8370e-Review/Power-and-Overclocking
"


----------



## krusha03 (Apr 19, 2015)

If you are gonna buy a new cpu and mb you might as well go intel. You just got this PC and if it's running well why change it?


----------



## landstad (Apr 19, 2015)

krusha03 said:


> If you are gonna buy a new cpu and mb you might as well go intel. You just got this PC and if it's running well why change it?



Intel is intresting, migth do that...

I don't know.. In battle field i'm not able to get good fps. only 30-40. on low setting..

And after I got my 144hz screen. The fps has dropped dramaticly in cs go aswell. and in war of thunder also.

The most logic thing would be to buy a better prossesor and gpu tho  Or just keep it, as it is at this point, and wait for skylake 
Do anyone know what prices will be on skylake ?

See the edit of the previous post.


OFFTOPIC,  Is it best to shut down pc every evening before i got to sleep.. or can it just idle.. any thougths on that subject ?


----------



## suraswami (Apr 20, 2015)

I think your board supports CF at 8x+8x, may be if you get a cheap used 270X you can try it out.  But like I mentioned before NV 970 GPU would give you better performance even with your current CPU and board.

And one more thing if you are going FX 8 core and non NV high end video card, consider buying more wattage good PSU.

If you are going Intel, then no worries with PSU.

http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/amd-fx-ocers-club.153443/page-170


----------

