# Overclocking with a GA78LMT-USB3 rev6.0



## zygioks (Aug 10, 2016)

So I have clocked my fx at 4.2ghz now.
CPU Thermal margin is in 20ish area, so that's good. But what's worrying me is the TMPIN2 sensor on the mb.
It used to fluctuate to 75 celsius sometime, but I added a one intake fan at the bottom and it dropped to ~65-67.
On some forums I read that it's the vrm temp or the cpu socket temp. No one seems to agree. So what would be the safe temp? Also other says that it's a sensor to make cpu idle temps more sensible(cpu package temp +15celsius offset). So back to the question ,what temp would be safe?


----------



## Bill_Bright (Aug 10, 2016)

What is the load when you are reaching those higher temps?

It would be nice to get it down a little bit more, but that is still safe. Your CPU will throttle down in speed to cool off _before_ it gets to an unsafe temperature.

You might consider another case fan, or one that moves more air, and/or backing off the overclocking just a bit.


----------



## cdawall (Aug 10, 2016)

I wouldn't overclock that CPU on that motherboard if you want that motherboard to last any length of time.


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Aug 10, 2016)

try a fan on your Northbridge.


cdawall said:


> I wouldn't overclock that CPU on that motherboard if you want that motherboard to last any length of time.




agreed


put a fan to directly blow air on the northbridge.


----------



## cdawall (Aug 10, 2016)

CAPSLOCKSTUCK said:


> try a fan on your Northbridge.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Directly over mosfets...


----------



## little cat (Aug 10, 2016)

What is the point , 4.2GHz is the turbo speed of FX 6350


----------



## Bill_Bright (Aug 10, 2016)

cdawall said:


> I wouldn't overclock that CPU on that motherboard if you want that motherboard to last any length of time.


Sure, you can overclock on that board no problem - as long as you watch your temps, as you are doing. That board was designed to support overclocking with the proper CPU. Now it is not an extremist board so don't go too far. But I note that board supports EC AOD-ACC and Gigabyte's own EasyTune6.

That said, as with any board that supports overclocking from any maker, the warranty does not cover damages caused by overclocking. And high temps (even if not extreme) over long periods of time can increase aging of any electronics.

My mistake earlier - TMPIN2 is the normally the chipset temp, not CPU. A fan over the chipset may help, but you still need to extract that heat from the case. And again, at this point, we don't know if that is at idle, or full load. If full load, 67°C is not bad.

I also would not put total faith in one hw monitoring program. I would want to know what HWiNFO64 says.



little cat said:


> What is the point , 4.2GHz is the turbo speed


Ummm, where did you see which processor he has? All I see is FX but there are many.


----------



## little cat (Aug 10, 2016)

Bill_Bright said:


> Sure, you can overclock on that board no problem - as long as you watch your temps, as you are doing. That board was designed to support overclocking with the proper CPU. Now it is not an extremist board so don't go too far. But I note that board supports EC AOD-ACC and Gigabyte's own EasyTune6.
> 
> That said, as with any board that supports overclocking from any maker, the warranty does not cover damages caused by overclocking. And high temps (even if not extreme) over long periods of time can increase aging of any electronics.
> 
> ...


the right panel . 125W TDP


----------



## cdawall (Aug 10, 2016)

Bill_Bright said:


> Sure, you can overclock on that board no problem - as long as you watch your temps, as you are doing. That board was designed to support overclocking with the proper CPU. Now it is not an extremist board so don't go too far. But I note that board supports EC AOD-ACC and Gigabyte's own EasyTune6.
> 
> That said, as with any board that supports overclocking from any maker, the warranty does not cover damages caused by overclocking. And high temps (even if not extreme) over long periods of time can increase aging of any electronics.
> 
> ...



I don't care what the board "supports" that is a 4 phase 760G based motherboard that can't even handle a *stock *8350. He currently has an FX6350 installed which is a 125w CPU as well. This out of the box is the maximum that motherboard supports. The likely hood it survives any period of time with an overclocked 6 core under load is slim to non-existent. You are welcome to argue all you want however you are just plain wrong.



Bill_Bright said:


> Ummm, where did you see which processor he has? All I see is FX but there are many.



It's an FX6350 look a little harder.


----------



## zygioks (Aug 10, 2016)

That was temp under load (prime95). While playing tmpin2 gets to ~72. I now have an artic freezer pro 7 rev2. Tried to OC my fx to 4.3ghz, everything ran stable, but i got a bit worried, and checked the vrm heatsink. Well guess what it almost burned my finger. The temp was ~80celsius I would guess. So I backed the overclock to 4.1ghz at stock voltage.


----------



## Bill_Bright (Aug 10, 2016)

> I don't care what the board "supports"



Frankly, and with no disrespect intended, I could care less what you care about! I care about verifiable facts supported by published evidence. And the facts are (as seen by this published supporting evidence) you can overclock with that board if you control temps.


cdawall said:


> The likely hood it survives any period of time with an overclocked 6 core under load is slim to non-existent.


Non-existent? And yet, in spite of what you care about and your denials, it is surviving now. Funny how that works.

Now clearly, that is not a high-end gaming board. So I personally would not use it for overclocking. But if I wanted to OC with it, I would probably stick to the low and mid preset overclocking options available via EasyTune. And I would ensure an adequate flow of cool air flowing through the case and I would monitor my temps. But I would not hesitate to overclock at those levels, if overclocking was a desired goal.

I see where it is an FX6350 now. Thanks. And since the Turbo speed for that processor is FX6350 as little cat pointed out, I agree, what's the point? The OP's concern is with the temperature of his chipset.



zygioks said:


> So I backed the overclock to 4.1ghz at stock voltage.


And what are your temps now?


----------



## R-T-B (Aug 10, 2016)

Bill, and I mean this with respect, but frankly, you ARE wrong.  Don't be ashamed though, it happens to the best of us.

The OCing capabilities of that board are not intended to exceed TDP.  The TDP it can supply is 125W.  He's at that.  He should not be OCing.  This is all published and verifiable too, BTW.  The OCing features are intended for lower end CPUs here.


----------



## cdawall (Aug 10, 2016)

R-T-B said:


> Bill, and I mean this with respect, but frankly, you ARE wrong.  Don't be ashamed though, it happens to the best of us.
> 
> The OCing capabilities of that board are not intended to exceed TDP.  The TDP it can supply is 125W.  He's at that.  He should not be OCing.  This is all published and verifiable too, BTW.  The OCing features are intended for lower end CPUs here.



Nah I know nothing about overclocking fx chips it's cool let him live in his world.


----------



## zygioks (Aug 10, 2016)

Bill_Bright said:


> Frankly, and with no disrespect intended, I could care less what you care about! I care about verifiable facts supported by published evidence. And the facts are (as seen by this published supporting evidence) you can overclock with that board if you control temps.
> Non-existent? And yet, in spite of what you care about and your denials, it is surviving now. Funny how that works.
> 
> Now clearly, that is not a high-end gaming board. So I personally would not use it for overclocking. But if I wanted to OC with it, I would probably stick to the low and mid preset overclocking options available via EasyTune. And I would ensure an adequate flow of cool air flowing through the case and I would monitor my temps. But I would not hesitate to overclock at those levels, if overclocking was a desired goal.
> ...



TMPIN2 @ 72 celsius (while gaming). While stress testing the cpu it fluctuates ~62.
CPU @ ~45 (25c thermal margin left)


----------



## EarthDog (Aug 10, 2016)

cdawall said:


> I wouldn't overclock that CPU on that motherboard if you want that motherboard to last any length of time.


Exactly... I wouldn't O/C on that board. If I was forced to, I would make sure there is additonal cooling on the back of the socket, and the VRMs. But clearly, this board is not made for such things with its meager 4 phase VRM...(and if you think a software suite that overclocks working on this board is proof... well, yikes is all i have to say there).


----------



## cdawall (Aug 10, 2016)

EarthDog said:


> Exactly... I wouldn't O/C on that board. If I was forced to, I would make sure there is additonal cooling on the back of the socket, and the VRMs. But clearly, this board is not made for such things with its meager 4 phase VRM...(and if you think a software suite that overclocks working on this board is proof... well, yikes is all i have to say there).



I actually have that exact board with a 4350 in a work pc. With just the quad at 4.5 and a 120mm on the vrms. I'm on board three.


----------



## zygioks (Aug 10, 2016)

cdawall said:


> I actually have that exact board with a 4350 in a work pc. With just the quad at 4.5 and a 120mm on the vrms. I'm on board three.



And how's the temperatures?


----------



## cdawall (Aug 10, 2016)

zygioks said:


> And how's the temperatures?



CPU temps were lower than yours. They don't matter in this situation the mosfets can't handle the load.


----------



## Bill_Bright (Aug 10, 2016)

R-T-B said:


> Bill, and I mean this with respect, but frankly, you ARE wrong.


And yet, I say again, people are overclocking with these boards. So how am I wrong? I am not saying I would do it, but the claim was it couldn't happen - it was "non-existent", the boards would not last. And that is just not true - if done properly.

TBH, I am not a fan of overclocking anyway. IMO, it is just a_ "marketing" gimmick_ these days. Engineers don't design these products to be overclocked. They design to the capabilities of the materials and devices, or to design specs. The marketing weenies then "dummy down" the specs and default settings to allow users to "dummy up" and feel good about it.

I'm an old fogey. Back when I started out playing around with computers in the mid-70s, if you wanted to overclock, you had cut through traces on the motherboard and solder in jumpers to change voltages and timings. That was a real challenge because cheap motherboards were $100s. And no doubt, motherboard makers would not accept under warranty a board you've been soldering on. You could not simply reset the BIOS and start over. Even to update the BIOS meant changing out the PROM at first. It was a big deal when we could erase a BIOS using a high energy UV light so we could reflash it.

Now days, everything is done with simple BIOS settings or through an overclocking program. If I want more power, I save my pennies and buy it.


----------



## R-T-B (Aug 10, 2016)

The board won't last.  The overclocking is intended for lower wattage CPUs.



> It was a big deal when we could erase a BIOS using a high energy UV light so we could reflash it.



I actually have one of these.

Geeze, I'm getting old.


----------



## Bill_Bright (Aug 10, 2016)

Oh, BTW, while more power phases generally means greater distribution of the power, thus lower heat in each phase, a quick look at that specific motherboard here show a nice bank of heatsinks on the regulators and a hefty heatsink on the chipset. So again, with adequate cooling (which is absolutely critical) through the case, these can, and to the point, are being overclocked without problems.

If you had this specific board and it didn't last, then you pushed it too far, did not provide adequate cooling, fed it lousy quality power, got a lemon, or some combination of the four.


----------



## zygioks (Aug 10, 2016)

Bill_Bright said:


> Oh, BTW, while more power phases generally means greater distribution of the power, thus lower heat in each phase, a quick look at that specific motherboard here show a nice bank of heatsinks on the regulators and a hefty heatsink on the chipset. So again, with adequate cooling (which is absolutely critical) through the case, these can, and to the point, are being overclocked without problems.
> 
> If you had this specific board and it didn't last, then you pushed it too far, did not provide adequate cooling, fed it lousy quality power, got a lemon, or some combination of the four.


Overclock was stable, I was just worried about temps.


----------



## EarthDog (Aug 10, 2016)

AS we said zyg, look into cooling that VRM and the back of the CPU socket to cool things down. The VRM, though it has a heatsink on it, is really getting put under a lot more stress than its rated to, hence more heat/the temps you are seeing. This is why those in the know are encouraging to either back off the overclock period, or make sure you have ADDITIONAL cooling on the VRM area and back of the socket if you choose to push on that board.


----------



## cdawall (Aug 10, 2016)

Bill_Bright said:


> Oh, BTW, while more power phases generally means greater distribution of the power, thus lower heat in each phase, a quick look at that specific motherboard here show a nice bank of heatsinks on the regulators and a hefty heatsink on the chipset. So again, with adequate cooling (which is absolutely critical) through the case, these can, and to the point, are being overclocked without problems.
> 
> If you had this specific board and it didn't last, then you pushed it too far, did not provide adequate cooling, fed it lousy quality power, got a lemon, or some combination of the four.








This is a massive heatsink? Are you literally joking me? Am I being trolled?


----------



## Bill_Bright (Aug 10, 2016)

cdawall said:


> This is a massive heatsink?


Come on! What is your problem? I said "hefty", not massive. Big difference. It is you in denial. People, including the OP, are overclocking with this board - unless you are calling them all liars.

Now as far as I am concerned, the point is moot. I already said it is not something I would do, so if you want to keep arguing, stand in front a mirror otherwise, you are just driving this OT.


EarthDog said:


> This is why those in the know are encouraging to either back off the overclock period, or make sure you have ADDITIONAL cooling


Which is exactly I said way back in post #2 before others starting having a bunch of cows all over the place.


----------



## cdawall (Aug 10, 2016)

Again you can believe what you want, buy pushing a 6 core 125w CPU on that motherboard is living on borrowed time. I literally have one and it is a cheap throw away board, I have been through more than one with just a 4350@4.5ghz which will use less wattage than the ops chip at 4.2. So you can keep saying things and saying other people are wrong, but you are incorrect period.

And my issue? I don't want this place to turn into another toms. People like you that give bad advice over and over again drive me insane.


----------



## ThE_MaD_ShOt (Aug 11, 2016)

I am just going to say that I have had 2 of those boards that ran Fx 8350's at 4.2 under full load 24/7 365 for over a year crunching with no issues. I did have a fan on the vrms. Maybe I just got lucky.


----------



## EarthDog (Aug 11, 2016)

That's a 125W CPU at stock speeds (4.2Ghz is turbo..bringing all cores to turbo won't do much power wise). I bet it would do OK there...


----------



## EarthDog (Aug 11, 2016)

Bill_Bright said:


> Which is exactly I said way back in post #2 before others starting having a bunch of cows all over the place.


You forgot the rest of my statement... 


> This is why those in the know are encouraging to either back off the overclock period, or make sure you have ADDITIONAL cooling *on the VRM area and back of the socket if you choose to push on that board.*



A case fan really doesn't hold a candle to the spot cooling of the VRMs and back of the socket needed when you are pushing AMD chips. Particularly on a subpar VRM for the job. If this guy is going to push on that CPU where he is, that type of cooling is strongly suggested. Not to mention, in your first post, it appeared you were talking about CPU temps... later confirmed by your admitting later in the thread you thought it was the CPU temp in the first place.

That said, yes, you did say to back off on the O/C and to get a case fan...  to lower CPU temps. The concern we all have however, is with spot cooling the VRM and the socket so he can lean on it as he is with no throttling and worry the board will have a premature end to its life.


----------



## Bill_Bright (Aug 11, 2016)

Thanks but no, I did not forget the rest of your statement. Increasing the flow of cool air through the case by adding more case cooling increases the efficiency of every heatsink inside the case - that was my point. You are right, I was thinking CPU temps at that time, but that does not change anything. Increasing cooling through the case and decreasing clock speeds decreases the stress on just about everything inside the case.

How else would you add, "ADDITIONAL cooling *on the VRM area and back of the socket"*? The only other way would be some Mickey Mouse solution like tie wrapping a fan on top of the VRM heat sinks. Okay, it would work, though doesn't do much for aesthetics, however - as I note many enthusiasts are. But that fan does not do anything for the back of the board where a case fan will - assuming proper cable management and case fan placement.

The correction solution? Do better homework and apply sound purchasing wisdom when selecting your components BEFORE you buy. If you intend to buy a power hungry processor and push it, buy a board made to support it - get the right tool for the job.

I note motherboard designers purposely cluster those heat generating and heat sensitive devices around the CPU socket for a reason - so they can take advantage of the air turbulence created by the expected "downward firing" OEM cooler. Sadly, I have seen too many times were alternative cooling users neglect those cooling requirements when they replace the downward firing cooler with a water or side firing solution. That is not the motherboard maker's fault.


cdawall said:


> People like you that give bad advice over and over again drive me insane.


Bad advice? People like me? I have a reputation and 10 years of awards as seen by the link in my sig in recognition of providing sound advice. People like me? I don't launch puerile personal insults when I can't or won't defend my position with supporting evidence, like people like you.  It is people like you who intentionally misquote and twist what others say, like changing hefty into "massive" to make themselves look more applicable. And it is people like you who use extreme exceptions, then apply them to the masses in an attempt to prove a point. There are always exceptions but exceptions don't make the rule.

If you keep buying budget boards then push them to extremes , what does that say about your wisdom when it comes to purchasing decisions? Not much to me. And then how does that lack of good wisdom apply to the advice you give?

Again, I said I personally would not OC with this board! And I recommended decreasing the clock speeds. So how is that bad advice? It's not. So you accusing me of such is just you launching another one of your personal, puerile attacks on others when you don't get your way! 

Again, you are the one in denial of the facts. This is not a new model board. It has been around over 4 years. There are lots of users who overclock with this board. If you refuse to accept that, then again, it is you who are in denial.

Now, _please_! Let's move on.


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Aug 11, 2016)

I had an earlier revision of that board








i overclocked an Athlon ii x4 640 with it......3rd in the world at R15...........


up from  3.0ghz  to 3.5ghz

http://hwbot.org/submission/3097601_capslockstuck_cinebench___r15_athlon_ii_x4_640_(propus)_359_cb/


----------



## EarthDog (Aug 11, 2016)

SPOT cooling is what I was talking about, Bill. I JUST said case fans don't hold a candle to what we are talking about (they will help alone and will help with SPOT cooling the VRMs)! A setup like 'tie wrapping a fan on top of the VRMs" and double sided tape on fan on the back of the socket is EXACTLY what we are talking about that should be used for this kind of board to prevent/eliminate throttling and help the board last! I'm not saying it will tank in a month.. but  the cooler the better, especially for a board that is really pushing well  past what it was designed for. 

EDIT: Ya know what I just noticed, Bill? In your link about the VRM cooling, the second board they added the additional cooling to is none other than the board the OP is talking about!!! No Joke! 



> I know this works with most boards, *here's my old Gigabyte 78LMT-USB3 Rev.5 with fans mounted on the VRM's* and north-bridge and south-bridge.


----------



## Bill_Bright (Aug 11, 2016)

EarthDog said:


> double sided tape on fan on the back of the socket is EXACTLY what we are talking about


"_Back_" of the socket? Sorry ED - maybe I need more coffee but  I am not picturing this. I hate to run this further OT, but I am not aware of a case with that much room behind the motherboard to support a fan on the back of the VRM socket. Even cases with an open motherboard mounting panel with access to the back of the CPU socket leaves limited room before the case's exterior side panel gets in the way. Are you talking about an open case design - like a test bench case? That will surely work, but then so will a big desk fan blasting on the motherboard.


----------



## cdawall (Aug 11, 2016)

CAPSLOCKSTUCK said:


> I had an earlier revision of that board
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Lol just because nobody has run that benchmark on that chip. That cpu also uses way less power than an fx.



Bill_Bright said:


> "_Back_" of the socket? Sorry ED - maybe I need more coffee but  I am not picturing this. I hate to run this further OT, but I am not aware of a case with that much room behind the motherboard to support a fan on the back of the VRM socket. Even cases with an open motherboard mounting panel with access to the back of the CPU socket leaves limited room before the case's exterior side panel gets in the way. Are you talking about an open case design - like a test bench case? That will surely work, but then so will a big desk fan blasting on the motherboard.



Yes the back of the socket it helps ironically lower socket temps and mosfets temps. If you were and actual enthusiast you would know things like this. In all honesty whatever part swapper awards you have are starting to sound like 10 years of participation trophies to me. Guess what not everyone is a winner and you in particular are not right.


----------



## EarthDog (Aug 11, 2016)

Bill_Bright said:


> "_Back_" of the socket? Sorry ED - maybe I need more coffee but  I am not picturing this. I hate to run this further OT, but I am not aware of a case with that much room behind the motherboard to support a fan on the back of the VRM socket. Even cases with an open motherboard mounting panel with access to the back of the CPU socket leaves limited room before the case's exterior side panel gets in the way. Are you talking about an open case design - like a test bench case? That will surely work, but then so will a big desk fan blasting on the motherboard.


Yes, back of the socket. You can get tiny 40x15mm fans and have it in a case as well. This is quite common in the overclocking world of AMD with FX CPUs, both on low end boards (to prevent/eliminate throttling) and on high end boards really pushing things with FX octos. We have seen more than a handful of times, people dump 125/140W CPUs into boards that "support" the CPU, and throttle at stock speeds, not even talking overclocking. A few airflow adjustments, including case , VRM spot cooling, and sometimes adding a small fan on the socket resolves those issues, particularly on boards, like the OP is using, running out of spec. Now, his isn't terrible, but, I would add the VRM spot cooling at least to run his overclock.


----------



## Sempron Guy (Aug 11, 2016)

bill is a funny guy, hope he learns something new today


----------



## Bill_Bright (Aug 11, 2016)

EarthDog said:


> This is quite common in the overclocking world of AMD with FX CPUs


I have seen this used with CPUs many times because many case motherboard panels are cut out, as I noted above, leaving significant space for the fan, and for the fan to have space to pull air in. But not on the back of the VRM sockets - which is what I thought/think your comment above suggests. If talking specifically about the back of the CPU socket, then I totally understand and agree - that would certainly help.



cdawall said:


> If you were and actual enthusiast you would know things like this.
> In all honesty whatever part swapper awards you have are starting to sound like 10 years of participation trophies to me.


See, there you go with the childish personal insults again. My awards are not for parts swapping and if you think it has to do with participation, as in post count, that just shows an ignorance of the program. You got a problem, dude, and it ain't me. I see no productive purpose to continue this with you, so I won't.

@ Sempron Guy - Sure am glad you didn't join a technical discussion for the sole purpose of disparaging another poster. Oh wait! That's exactly what you did.  Thanks for trying to help the OP. Good job.


----------



## EarthDog (Aug 11, 2016)

Of course I was talking CPU socket, Bill... I don't think a VRM "socket" is a part on a motherboard in the first place, LOL!  


So, anyway, now that this conversation has come full circle...to the OP:

To overclock on that board, for best results, you will want to spot cool the VRM's on the front to prevent/remove potential throttling. If you are seeing throttling issues still, confirm case airflow is ok, and consider adding a fan on the back of the CPU socket. If you still see it, back down on the O/C or get another board made for it. I would not run that board without for best results.


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Aug 11, 2016)

cdawall said:


> That cpu also uses way less power than an fx.



not when its o/c ed it doesnt.


----------



## EarthDog (Aug 11, 2016)

At 1.44V and 3.5GHz, you are not using 125W from a 95W CPU. The OP is STARTING with a 125W CPU and overclocking it. Significant difference.


----------



## cdawall (Aug 11, 2016)

CAPSLOCKSTUCK said:


> not when its o/c ed it doesnt.



As a person who has quite the overclock on both I can tell you that even at 5+ my phenom II's never touched a stock 9370 in wattage consumed.




Bill_Bright said:


> See, there you go with the childish personal insults again. My awards are not for parts swapping and if you think it has to do with participation, as in post count, that just shows an ignorance of the program. You got a problem, dude, and it ain't me. I see no productive purpose to continue this with you, so I won't.



You can just admit you are wrong and out of your depth. That would be a productive thing to do.


----------



## Bill_Bright (Aug 11, 2016)

EarthDog said:


> Of course I was talking CPU socket, Bill... I don't think a VRM "socket" is a part on a motherboard in the first place, LOL!


You say "_of course"_, but note not only did you just comment before on my mixing up CPU with VRM, your single sentence makes no reference to the CPU. You said, "_A setup like 'tie wrapping a fan on top of the VRMs" and double sided tape on fan on the back of the socket is EXACTLY what we are talking about". _

Even now, after a couple more cups of coffee, that can easily be read as you meant the back of the VRM socket. I have never seen that and I don't like to assume I know what someone means, as I am often wrong. So that is why I asked for clarification in my reply, just in case I might learn something new. Sorry if that caused confusion.


----------



## EarthDog (Aug 11, 2016)

Ok, bill.

I'd believe you if there was such thing as a vrm socket or if I was a complete idiot. But since that doesnt exist and im not an idiot........well, seems obvious at this point.


----------



## zygioks (Aug 12, 2016)

Should I just get a better board and a cooler or go Intel/AMD Zen way?


----------



## EarthDog (Aug 12, 2016)

I'd upgrade to Intel...


----------



## Bill_Bright (Aug 12, 2016)

zygioks said:


> Should I just get a better board and a cooler or go Intel/AMD Zen way?


Are you unhappy with the performance of your computer now? If not, there's no need to do anything beyond what you have done. But if you are not happy, then upgrade. And while AMD makes great, reliable processors, I too would go Intel. But if just concerned about this temperature, then we are back to the original suggestions - look at your cooling alternatives and maybe backing off your overclocks. Migrating to a SSD would show some performance gains too - without having to deal with a total rebuild (which is pretty much where a different motherboard takes you).


EarthDog said:


> I'd believe you if there was such thing as a vrm socket or if I was a complete idiot. But since that doesnt exist and im not an idiot........well, seems obvious at this point


The point is obvious - now - so not sure the reason to edit your post to add this sentence the next day.

But since you did...

It is easy to assume everyone reading this thread and our posts fully understands our comments and has the same amount of expertise. I learned long ago to not make such assumptions. Forum threads are not two-way conversations. It's a "forum", an open place where many can gather, share and learn from each other - or just lurk about. It should not be a place to ridicule and criticize others who come to learn, to disparage those who may not be as experienced, may not speak English as their native tongue, or are just having difficulty following the jargon.

There could be many following this thread who are just watching, trying to learn who stumbled on this thread via Google - people who are not regulars and don't know us, or us them. People who have never put together a computer or know the difference between a socket, slot, header, or "surface" mounts point. Lots of devices on the motherboard are mounted in sockets. How many times have you heard someone refer to the whole computer as "my CPU"? Or a hard drive as their "memory".

I know I have never seen VRMs mounted in sockets in any "modern" motherboard. But I also know Newegg in the US alone, for example, sells nearly 700 different motherboards that are currently in production from 14 different manufacturers! Surely there are 100s more sold globally and 1000s more motherboards in use in users computers that are no longer in production. I've seen many 100s of different motherboards come through my shop. Motherboards in all shapes and sizes, crossover boards, tiny mobile ITX to monstrous EATX, and unique dedicated purpose boards. In no way I have seen all. Can you, EarthDog, really assume not a single one uses VRM sockets? I sure can't.

We see in other electronics, some VRMs are mounted in sockets. So there's no reason they can't be in computers. In fact, they have in the past, for example, in IBM PS/2 computers as seen here. I've been maintaining electronics since the mid 70s. I've repaired computers with these boards. NO WAY have I seen it all to assume something is "obvious" all the time.

IMO, it is our responsibility as helpers to write our posts so everyone of all skill levels reading can follow - not just those participating in the thread who's skillsets are already known. That's were I come from when I submit posts. I don't assume that only the forum regulars are reading, that only those with advanced expertise and experience visit this site.

So forgive me for not assuming and automatically understanding what you _intended_. Forgive me for not assuming you were "_obviously_" talking about the back of the CPU socket in the same sentence you were talking about a fan on top of the VRMs - when I (and now you!) know for a fact, there have been motherboards with VRMs mounted in sockets, and there's no reason there can't be any now.


----------



## cdawall (Aug 12, 2016)

zygioks said:


> Should I just get a better board and a cooler or go Intel/AMD Zen way?



I wouldn't waste money on am3+ it is a dead platform. Run this until Zen hits or buy an Intel now and be happy even after Zen comes out. My fx9370@5 on a crosshair v was a joke compared to the 5820k I replaced it with.

I have been clocking amd for over a decade now and the fx series is by far the worst consumer grade chip they have released. In the server world they held their own, but they never should have been released for consumers.


----------



## EarthDog (Aug 12, 2016)

Bill_Bright said:


> Are you unhappy with the performance of your computer now? If not, there's no need to do anything beyond what you have done. But if you are not happy, then upgrade. And while AMD makes great, reliable processors, I too would go Intel. But if just concerned about this temperature, then we are back to the original suggestions - look at your cooling alternatives and maybe backing off your overclocks. Migrating to a SSD would show some performance gains too - without having to deal with a total rebuild (which is pretty much where a different motherboard takes you).
> The point is obvious - now - so not sure the reason to edit your post to add this sentence the next day.
> 
> But since you did...
> ...


Added For Clarity bill...simple. vrm socket isn't remotely common WITHIN THE CONTEXT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT...come the fuck on bill. Why are you always such a didactic prick?

Unsubscribed...any thread with this ass is a thread I don't need to be in...


----------



## Bill_Bright (Aug 12, 2016)

More personal insults. You can add for clarity, but others can't. Sad.


----------



## zygioks (Aug 12, 2016)

cdawall said:


> I wouldn't waste money on am3+ it is a dead platform. Run this until Zen hits or buy an Intel now and be happy even after Zen comes out. My fx9370@5 on a crosshair v was a joke compared to the 5820k I replaced it with.
> 
> I have been clocking amd for over a decade now and the fx series is by far the worst consumer grade chip they have released. In the server world they held their own, but they never should have been released for consumers.



Yep exactly my thoughts. When I purchased it I already knew that am3+ was dead, but money was an issue, so I went with this set (about a year ago). It still runs ok. Just those 2gb of vram is a bottleneck in the R9 285.


----------



## cdawall (Aug 12, 2016)

zygioks said:


> Yep exactly my thoughts. When I purchased it I already knew that am3+ was dead, but money was an issue, so I went with this set (about a year ago). It still runs ok. Just those 2gb of vram is a bottleneck in the R9 285.



You would be very surprised how much better it runs with a better CPU. My minimum framerate jumps 10+ FPS average was 10+ as well depending on game, biggest change was how much smoother it worked.


----------



## HD64G (Aug 12, 2016)

6350 is enough to handle R9 285, so I would wait for 6 months yntil Zen is out. Prices might become better for high performance cpus.


----------



## cdawall (Aug 12, 2016)

HD64G said:


> 6350 is enough to handle R9 285, so I would wait for 6 months yntil Zen is out. Prices might become better for high performance cpus.



Not really. I don't care what GPU it is they will all start scaling like this..


----------



## zygioks (Aug 12, 2016)

cdawall said:


> You would be very surprised how much better it runs with a better CPU. My minimum framerate jumps 10+ FPS average was 10+ as well depending on game, biggest change was how much smoother it worked.


What was your cpu?


----------



## cdawall (Aug 12, 2016)

zygioks said:


> What was your cpu?



9370@5 to 5820K @4.7, both using a pair of 7950's and a heft overclock, 16GB of ram and an SSD.


----------



## HD64G (Aug 13, 2016)

cdawall said:


> Not really. I don't care what GPU it is they will all start scaling like this..



Agreed but not many game engines scale and depend so much on the CPU side as to the GPU side. Especially for single GPU setups and resolutions from 1080P and above with high settings and above. I don't have the time to search and post reviews about CPU ( as per core, MHz) game scaling but it is easy to find some.


----------



## cdawall (Aug 13, 2016)

HD64G said:


> Agreed but not many game engines scale and depend so much on the CPU side as to the GPU side. Especially for single GPU setups and resolutions from 1080P and above with high settings and above. I don't have the time to search and post reviews about CPU ( as per core, MHz) game scaling but it is easy to find some.



Normally I am fully for that but more and more engines need a cpu that has decent single core IPC unluckily the fx is back there with the first gen i7's


----------



## Keshwin (Sep 14, 2016)

Sooo sorry to bump an old thread..albeit a somewhat entertaining read!!

I currently have this mobo in question with an fx8320 running stock. Its in an nzxt s340 case with a 140mm fan mounted at the top front pulling air in, and 2x 120mm at the rear and top pushing out.

Cpu cooler is the noctua nh-d14, so the inner circular fan does draw some air over the mobo, but alas doesnt blow down onto the mobo as the noisey stock cooler once did.

My question is...could I safely oc to 4ghz (fx 8350 clock speed)? Based on what I have read so far...I think alot of you would say no, but I guess there is no harm in asking!

Any input is of course greatly appreciated!


----------



## cdawall (Sep 14, 2016)

I wouldn't suggest it, but you do you. There appear to be people in this particular thread who don't believe AMD chips draw much power. 


If you were to use the 4ghz as a turbo mode and ran the voltage as close to the minimum for stability as humanly possible it would probably survive for a while before the mosfets failed. This assumes you aren't running anything too terribly stressful.


----------



## Keshwin (Sep 14, 2016)

cdawall said:


> I wouldn't suggest it, but you do you. There appear to be people in this particular thread who don't believe AMD chips draw much power.
> 
> 
> If you were to use the 4ghz as a turbo mode and ran the voltage as close to the minimum for stability as humanly possible it would probably survive for a while before the mosfets failed. This assumes you aren't running anything too terribly stressful.



Thanks for the advice. I think il take your advice and leave it be 

On a final note, is my stock 8320 pushing the limit of that mobo, or could I expect that setup to last a couple of years?


----------



## cdawall (Sep 14, 2016)

Keshwin said:


> Thanks for the advice. I think il take your advice and leave it be
> 
> On a final note, is my stock 8320 pushing the limit of that mobo, or could I expect that setup to last a couple of years?



95w version should be fine, 125w still okish as long as you don't plan on leaving it rendering video for the next couple years.


----------



## zygioks (Sep 14, 2016)

Was able to reach 4.4ghz @ 1.37v stable on this board FX6350


----------



## Recon-UK (Sep 14, 2016)

You need a board with circuitry like this.


----------



## zygioks (Sep 14, 2016)

Recon-UK said:


> You need a board with circuitry like this.


lmao, this one serves me well, i will still switch when zen comes out. And if it's shit, im going the intel way.


----------



## Recon-UK (Sep 14, 2016)

LMAO?
I was serious it's not meant for any kind of OC.


----------



## zygioks (Sep 14, 2016)

Recon-UK said:


> LMAO?
> I was serious it's not meant for any kind of OC.


Yeah, not for 125w cpus, but im still pushing it.The vrms don't get that hot since I fixed my airflow a bit.


----------



## cdawall (Sep 14, 2016)

zygioks said:


> Yeah, not for 125w cpus, but im still pushing it.The vrms don't get that hot since I fixed my airflow a bit.



I guarantee as an owner of that board with a 120mm attached to the mosfet cooler itself that it gets hot still.


----------

