# FX 8350 Brick wall



## RCoon (Nov 8, 2012)

Ok so my 8350 arrived this morning, with hopes of knocking the bastard to 5Ghz... sadly not, currently running 4.62 at the moment with 1.45v cpu on an asus sabertooth, specs can be seen in my specsheet. I thought cooling it on a H80 would be fine, just seems to bluescreen and/or fail calculation tests on 6 cores.
havent changed much in the BIOS except removing turbo core, changing voltage to extreme and putting manual voltage on cpu. RAM is at 1866, multiplier of 23 and speed of 200.


----------



## cdawall (Nov 8, 2012)

Give it more voltage.


----------



## RCoon (Nov 8, 2012)

Got the bitch to 4.7Ghz on 1.45v core! didnt seem to break much heat either


----------



## m&m's (Nov 8, 2012)

Have updated your BIOS to the latest one?



cdawall said:


> Give it more voltage.



Yup it needs more volt!!! cadaca used 1.488V to get to 5GHz!


----------



## cdawall (Nov 8, 2012)

Remember you are clocking with 4 dimms as well which is hell on an IMC. You need to bump the CPU-NB as well as the CPU-Vcore up.


----------



## RCoon (Nov 8, 2012)

m&m's said:


> Have updated your BIOS to the latest one?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



yeah i downloaded the latest one, ill try 4.9 on 1.48v


----------



## cadaveca (Nov 8, 2012)

cdawall said:


> Remember you are clocking with 4 dimms as well which is hell on an IMC. You need to bump the CPU-NB as well as the CPU-Vcore up.



No. CPU-NB adjust not recommended.

Even, NB needs to stay same speed as ram when going over 2000 Mhz. 2133...2200 NB...2400 mem...2400 NB...


----------



## RCoon (Nov 8, 2012)

She crapped out on 4.9Ghz, calculation error, stuck nb and ht to 2400, cpu at 4.8ghz, vcore at 1.475 and cpunb at 1.25v. testing now


----------



## cdawall (Nov 8, 2012)

cadaveca said:


> No. CPU-NB adjust not recommended.
> 
> Even, NB needs to stay same speed as ram when going over 2000 Mhz. 2133...2200 NB...2400 mem...2400 NB...



CPU-NB voltage he needs to adjust it no matter what or the Sabertooth he is using will try and feed is 1.2v default or 1.5v on auto.


----------



## Jhelms (Nov 8, 2012)

cadaveca said:


> No. CPU-NB adjust not recommended.
> 
> Even, NB needs to stay same speed as ram when going over 2000 Mhz. 2133...2200 NB...2400 mem...2400 NB...



Pretty sure he meant voltage on the NB, in that case, yes a small bump does help increase stability. 

MOAR voltage!  For a stable 5ghz, my 8350 took more voltage than my cooling can support (close to 1.6V) or 5&6 would fail prime tests from errors. The sweet spot for my cooling seems to be 4.8ghz / 1.525V for stability - yes I do run c1e and cool and quiet at 4.8ghz. Past this I have to disable them. Anything over 4.8ghz and she is a nasty voltage pig (I named her v-pig lol) How does the voltage look under load vs idle? Does the sabertooth have load line calibration? have not worked with one or checked it out.

Also, back her down to 1600 on the ram. No real improvements to be had at 1866 other than instability and slower timings.


----------



## cadaveca (Nov 8, 2012)

cdawall said:


> CPU-NB voltage he needs to adjust it no matter what or the Sabertooth he is using will try and feed is 1.2v default or 1.5v on auto.



This is not older chips. These boards required BIOS updates for a reason, since these chips work differently.

CPU-NB only increased chip heat, provided no gains. I could also show the recommendation to not do so form AMD, but I'll let you just take my word for it instead, since every reviewer got that info.  Someone must have posted the guide by now...

now, i'd love to hear different in many cases, maybe I got a cherry chip or something, I dunno. doesn't seem like I did, honestly.


----------



## cdawall (Nov 8, 2012)

cadaveca said:


> This is not older chips. These boards required BIOS updates for a reason, since these chips work differently.
> 
> CPU-NB only increased chip heat, provided no gains. I could also show the recommendation to not do so form AMD, but I'll let you just take my word for it instead, since every reviewer got that info.  Someone must have posted the guide by now...



I am not talking about older chips I am talking specifically about the sabertooth 990FX and FX series chips. He needs to set it to around 1.225v manually or it will be feeding it 1.5v on auto.


----------



## cadaveca (Nov 8, 2012)

cdawall said:


> I am not talking about older chips I am talking specifically about the sabertooth 990FX and FX series chips. He needs to set it to around 1.225v manually or it will be feeding it 1.5v on auto.



1.225V is not the default.


1.1V is. This is NOT FX-8150.

Hence, since you said 1.2215V, I make the comments I do. 1.225 V is too high, even for 2666 MHz ram.


----------



## RCoon (Nov 8, 2012)

still full of fail, only runs stable at 4.7 with 1.45vcore, tried upping voltage to 1.48 at 4.9ghz and nb volatage to 1.225 and i get errors on 5 and 7


----------



## cdawall (Nov 8, 2012)

cadaveca said:


> 1.225V is not the default.
> 
> 
> 1.1V is. This is NOT FX-8150.
> ...



 My bad. 



RCoon said:


> still full of fail, only runs stable at 4.7 with 1.45vcore, tried upping voltage to 1.48 at 4.9ghz and nb volatage to 1.225 and i get errors on 5 and 7



1.5v


----------



## RCoon (Nov 8, 2012)

gave her 1.5vcore and didnt even run stable for more than 1 second at 4.8ghz, even knocked the ram down to 1600
its 2am here, ill try again tomorrow evening xD


----------



## cdawall (Nov 8, 2012)

RCoon said:


> gave her 1.5vcore and didnt even run stable for more than 1 second at 4.8ghz, even knocked the ram down to 1600
> its 2am here, ill try again tomorrow evening xD



Sounds like a weak chip or the cooling can't hack it.


----------



## D4S4 (Nov 8, 2012)

isn't 1.4v+ a bit much for a 32nm cpu 24/7?


----------



## drdeathx (Nov 8, 2012)

Tune CPU/NB tp 1.3 volts or so that should help ya.


----------



## cdawall (Nov 8, 2012)

D4S4 said:


> isn't 1.4v+ a bit much for a 32nm cpu 24/7?



Not a SOI based one.


----------



## cadaveca (Nov 8, 2012)

D4S4 said:


> isn't 1.4v+ a bit much for a 32nm cpu 24/7?



1.4V was stock on my chip?


----------



## D4S4 (Nov 8, 2012)

interesting, i know i've been reading 1.4 was maximum safe daily use for my 45nm wolfdale. googled a bit and found that wolfdale is cmos, guess that's it. haven't known about this, thanks!


----------



## NC37 (Nov 8, 2012)

Turn off LLC, sounds like you have it on if you are needing that much voltage. Refer to my 8320 thread. I had to push 1.45v+ to get stable till I switched LLC off. Now I'm 1.3625v.


----------



## RCoon (Nov 8, 2012)

cdawall said:


> Sounds like a weak chip or the cooling can't hack it.



temps have never gone above 54.

And where is this LLC on an Asus mobo bios?


----------



## drdeathx (Nov 8, 2012)

RCoon said:


> temps have never gone above 54.
> 
> And where is this LLC on an Asus mobo bios?




Leave LLC alone. LLC will need LESS voltage(Less VDroop)......Make sure cool n quiet is disabled and C1E and as mentioned, put CPU/NB at 1.3 volts. I have overclocked these chips up to 6GHz on Dry ice. 5GHz + on water


----------



## RCoon (Nov 8, 2012)

drdeathx said:


> Leave LLC alone. LLC will need LESS voltage(Less VDroop)......Make sure cool n quiet is disabled and C1E and as mentioned, put CPU/NB at 1.3 volts. I have overclocked these chips up to 6GHz on Dry ice. 5GHz + on water



i have most of that crap disabled anyway, what about other voltages, multipliers etc?


----------



## Mathragh (Nov 8, 2012)

Ha! atleast you got over 4,6GHz. I got  my 8320 yesterday, and with the same motherboard, I could not get the chip stable at 4,6GHz, even with a core voltage of 1,53V, the 7&8th core would produce errors almost instantly when running prime.

I'm planning on returning it.


----------



## RCoon (Nov 8, 2012)

Mathragh said:


> Ha! atleast you got over 4,6GHz. I got  my 8320 yesterday, and with the same motherboard, I could not get the chip stable at 4,6GHz, even with a core voltage of 1,53V, the 7&8th core would produce errors almost instantly when running prime.
> 
> I'm planning on returning it.



I heard they dont clock as high as 8350's in any case, though the funny thing with this 8350 is it requires less vcore for 4.7Ghz (1.45v) than my 6200 at 4.7GHZ (which wasnt 24/7 stable for p95, at 1.475v) guess this new gen is slightly better on the power consumption. I just kinda expected to be able to push it to 4.8Ghz and beyond without even breaking a sweat.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Nov 8, 2012)

RCoon said:


> I heard they dont clock as high as 8350's in any case, though the funny thing with this 8350 is it requires less vcore for 4.7Ghz (1.45v) than my 6200 at 4.7GHZ (which wasnt 24/7 stable for p95, at 1.475v) guess this new gen is slightly better on the power consumption. I just kinda expected to be able to push it to 4.8Ghz and beyond without even breaking a sweat.



Early Adoption


----------



## jihadjoe (Nov 8, 2012)

^ I'd say good binning on AMD's part. 8320 silicone is identical to 8350, with clocks being the only differentiator. The best chips than can go past 4.2GHz are probably in the 8350 bin.

Also Anand only got 4.8 out of his 8350, and I'd like to think he's fairly competent at this overclocking thing. 5GHz may well be the exception rather than the norm.


----------



## cdawall (Nov 8, 2012)

jihadjoe said:


> ^ I'd say good binning on AMD's part. 8320 silicone is identical to 8350, with clocks being the only differentiator. The best chips than can go past 4.2GHz are probably in the 8350 bin.
> 
> Also Anand only got 4.8 out of his 8350, and I'd like to think he's fairly competent at this overclocking thing. 5GHz may well be the exception rather than the norm.



Probably just immature bios. Give it time clocks will climb.


----------



## VulkanBros (Nov 8, 2012)

Hmmm....I can run my 8150 stable at 4.7 GHz - at 1.46 v....(prime95)

Diff. is my Sabertooth is a R2.0 ..... (and a Antec 920 cooler - see spec.)

I should get my 8350 monday......will be fun to see if there is much diff. to the 8150.....


----------



## Mathragh (Nov 8, 2012)

VulkanBros said:


> Hmmm....I can run my 8150 stable at 4.7 GHz - at 1.46 v....(prime95)
> 
> Diff. is my Sabertooth is a R2.0 ..... (and a Antec 920 cooler - see spec.)
> 
> I should get my 8350 monday......will be fun to see if there is much diff. to the 8150.....



3 times hurray for the 1k posts marker you just crossed!

and yeah, its just the luck of draw i guess. My current 8120 is doing OK, but the 8320 i got was probably not made for overclockers/better as a 6 core.


----------



## qubit (Nov 8, 2012)

RCoon said:


> Ok so my 8350 arrived this morning, with hopes of knocking the bastard to 5Ghz... sadly not, currently running 4.62 at the moment with 1.45v cpu on an asus sabertooth, specs can be seen in my specsheet. I thought cooling it on a H80 would be fine, just seems to bluescreen and/or fail calculation tests on 6 cores.
> havent changed much in the BIOS except removing turbo core, changing voltage to extreme and putting manual voltage on cpu. RAM is at 1866, multiplier of 23 and speed of 200.



I think you should cut your losses and go Intel, as AMD is really crap nowadays - there's a reason that 8350 was cheap. As overclocking is quite important to you, I think you should get a 2600K or 2700K: my 2700K overclocks like a banshee and it's only getting started at 5GHz. I run it at 4.7GHz though, because I don't have watercooling and the CPU has to last a long time before I upgrade it. If you go Ivy Bridge, prepare to be limited by excess heat due to that silly thermal paste Intel used on them.

I think this says it all, especially the highlighted bit:



jihadjoe said:


> ^ I'd say good binning on AMD's part. 8320 silicone is identical to 8350, with clocks being the only differentiator. The best chips than can go past 4.2GHz are probably in the 8350 bin.
> 
> *Also Anand only got 4.8 out of his 8350, and I'd like to think he's fairly competent at this overclocking thing. 5GHz may well be the exception rather than the norm.*


----------



## Aquinus (Nov 8, 2012)

cadaveca said:


> 1.225V is not the default.
> 
> 
> 1.1V is. This is NOT FX-8150.
> ...





drdeathx said:


> Leave LLC alone. LLC will need LESS voltage(Less VDroop)......Make sure cool n quiet is disabled and C1E and as mentioned, put CPU/NB at 1.3 volts. I have overclocked these chips up to 6GHz on Dry ice. 5GHz + on water



Pretty sure that 1.3v for the IMC is way too much voltage for the 8350. I trust Cadaveca's answer considering he tests and reviews this stuff on a regular basis.


----------



## RCoon (Nov 8, 2012)

qubit said:


> I think you should cut your losses and go Intel, as AMD is really crap nowadays - there's a reason that 8350 was cheap. As overclocking is quite important to you, I think you should get a 2600K or 2700K: my 2700K overclocks like a banshee and it's only getting started at 5GHz. I run it at 4.7GHz though, because I don't have watercooling and the CPU has to last a long time before I upgrade it. If you go Ivy Bridge, prepare to be limited by excess heat due to that silly thermal paste Intel used on them.
> 
> I think this says it all, especially the highlighted bit:



Well considering i can run everything at 60fps or higher on the cpu at this stage along with my two 570's i see no point in spend £150 extra for frames my monitor wont show (it's a 60hz one), I'm merely trying to reach the full potential of the chip. I also happen to do heavy video encoding on Premiere CS6, so Piledriver is where it's at. Not to mention it can match the same performance in a select few tasks anyway.
I tend to consider these things before buying a processor, and i certainly wouldnt buy an intel when theres an architecture upgrade coming from them very shortly, making the cpu and mobo purchase from intel a very short bridged upgrade.


----------



## qubit (Nov 8, 2012)

RCoon said:


> Well considering i can run everything at 60fps or higher on the cpu at this stage along with my two 570's i see no point in spend £150 extra for frames my monitor wont show (it's a 60hz one), I'm merely trying to reach the full potential of the chip. I also happen to do heavy video encoding on Premiere CS6, so Piledriver is where it's at. Not to mention it can match the same performance in a select few tasks anyway.
> I tend to consider these things before buying a processor, and i certainly wouldnt buy an intel when theres an architecture upgrade coming from them very shortly, making the cpu and mobo purchase from intel a very short bridged upgrade.



Ok, if it gives you enough performance for your daily tasks and you're reasonably happy with it, then stick with it. Your OP and further posts wer just talking about how unhappy you were with the overclock, so I was responding in that context.

Intel trounces AMD in pretty much everything. So, Premiere CS6 is actually better on AMD? I'm surprised and a bit skeptical to be honest and would like to see a benchmark comparison, if you have one. A fair comparison would be with a 3770.

Haswell is indeed coming out next year and you're right, it will be much better than IB. However, Intel haven't given any precise indications when it will be released, so I don't think you can consider it as "shortly", hence any Intel purchase now would be hedging your bets. Regardless, our hobby is an expensive one and it doesn't take much to make one want to upgrade!


----------



## RCoon (Nov 8, 2012)

qubit said:


> Intel trounces AMD in pretty much everything. So, Premiere CS6 is actually better on AMD? I'm surprised and a bit skeptical to be honest and would like to see a benchmark comparison, if you have one. A fair comparison would be with a 3770.



A fair comparison would be anything that is within the identical price range of the processor, i.e. bang for buck.
Also all you have to do is check any tech review site to see the multithreaded performance of a piledriver in comparison to all others in software the utilises it. Sadly yes, the software is not there, very few program for multithreaded performance, but it is the future, regardless as to how far off. Even XMedia recode runs like shit off a shovel.

EDIT: Just thought to clarify, i am comparing this CS6 Premiere performance with chips of the same price range, not the 3770k as it is almost twice the price, therefore they are not in the same price league.

Before the 8350 came out, i was about to switch to a 3570k, then discovered i can meet my requirements for cheaper without changing the board!

In a vaccuum and a perfect scenario, yes the 3770k is total baller champ at gaming etc, but sadly with my 24inch 60hz monitor the performance is almost pointless for the price


----------



## nt300 (Nov 8, 2012)

RCoon said:


> She crapped out on 4.9Ghz, calculation error, stuck nb and ht to 2400, cpu at 4.8ghz, vcore at 1.475 and cpunb at 1.25v. testing now


You problem is heat related imo. Get those looped water coolers. FXs don't like heat. And wat ever you do don't go over 1.225v for the CPU-NB voltage or she will fry.


----------



## RCoon (Nov 8, 2012)

nt300 said:


> You problem is heat related imo. Get those looped water coolers. FXs don't like heat.



check my specs, specifically the cooling section


----------



## 3870x2 (Nov 8, 2012)

nt300 said:


> You problem is heat related imo. Get those looped water coolers. FXs don't like heat. And wat ever you do don't go over 1.225v for the CPU-NB voltage or she will fry.



He has an H80.

My 945 is 23/35c load on 3.6.  The H80 is more than sufficient, and is a leader in single component watercooling.  

If temps were the only issue here, he could go close to 7.0.  I wish it were that easy.  Cooling is never the problem when trying to get clocks immediately unless there is an issue with your system.  Cooling is more the long term solution.


----------



## RCoon (Nov 8, 2012)

3870x2 said:


> He has an H80.
> 
> My 945 is 23/35c load on 3.6.  The H80 is more than sufficient, and is a leader in single component watercooling.
> 
> If temps were the only issue here, he could go close to 7.0.  I wish it were that easy.  Cooling is never the problem when trying to get clocks immediately unless there is an issue with your system.  Cooling is more the long term solution.



I am curious. With my current setup, is the 850w power supply sufficient for all of this clocking? all the hardware i have in, both gpus are at 1.0v, though i always assumed 850w was reasonable for a processor and 2 gpu overclocks, with the added internal extras, cooling, hdds etc.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Nov 8, 2012)

RCoon said:


> I am curious. With my current setup, is the 850w power supply sufficient for all of this clocking? all the hardware i have in, both gpus are at 1.0v, though i always assumed 850w was reasonable for a processor and 2 gpu overclocks, with the added internal extras, cooling, hdds etc.



depends on the make of PSU actually.


----------



## qubit (Nov 8, 2012)

RCoon said:


> A fair comparison would be anything that is within the identical price range of the processor, i.e. bang for buck.
> Also all you have to do is check any tech review site to see the multithreaded performance of a piledriver in comparison to all others in software the utilises it. Sadly yes, the software is not there, very few program for multithreaded performance, but it is the future, regardless as to how far off. Even XMedia recode runs like shit off a shovel.
> 
> EDIT: Just thought to clarify, i am comparing this CS6 Premiere performance with chips of the same price range, not the 3770k as it is almost twice the price, therefore they are not in the same price league.
> ...


You raise a good point there: performance at the price. Really, this question can be looked at two ways and they're both valid. Intel's equivalent design to the 8350 is the 3770, so it's fair to compare them and we know that Intel wins and it all gets a bit depressing for AMD. However, the AMD CPU is priced much lower, competing with Intel chips much lower down the range (I don't know which model off the top of my head) so that's a fair comparison too.

I'd say you made a sound choice, considering all the variables eg cost, mobo change etc. So, my advice? Don't push that chip too hard and go for longevity to get your money's worth. Then, when Haswell comes out, you can upgrade at your leisure.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Nov 8, 2012)

qubit said:


> You raise a good point there: performance at the price. Really, this question can be looked at two ways and they're both valid. Intel's equivalent design to the 8350 is the 3770, so it's fair to compare them and we know that Intel wins and it all gets a bit depressing for AMD. However, the AMD CPU is priced much lower, competing with Intel chips much lower down the range (I don't know which model off the top of my head) so that's a fair comparison too.
> 
> I'd say you made a sound choice, considering all the variables eg cost, mobo change etc. So, my advice? Don't push that chip too hard and go for longevity to get your money's worth. Then, when Haswell comes out, you can upgrade at your leisure.



ya Major corps go with the cheaper priced chips most of time


----------



## RCoon (Nov 8, 2012)

qubit said:


> You raise a good point there: performance at the price. Really, this question can be looked at two ways and they're both valid. Intel's equivalent design to the 8350 is the 3770, so it's fair to compare them and we know that Intel wins and it all gets a bit depressing for AMD. However, the AMD CPU is priced much lower, competing with Intel chips much lower down the range (I don't know which model off the top of my head) so that's a fair comparison too.
> 
> I'd say you made a sound choice, considering all the variables eg cost, mobo change etc. So, my advice? Don't push that chip too hard and go for longevity to get your money's worth. Then, when Haswell comes out, you can upgrade at your leisure.



That was pretty much what i was hoping for  fully intending to switch to intel once this chip has seen its better days, 1 year maybe 2 years down the line, then make the graphics switch over from nvidia to ati (their drivers and card value seems to be doing really well recently). Then again it's always switching game, will just have to see how IVB-E and ati 8XXX series turns out, i know nvidia 7XX is just a refresh from the tech releases.

I dont even know what IVB processors you can get for £150/$190, not sure i'd want to know  And yeah, I think I'll roll with my 4.7Ghz for now. Much appreciated debate!


----------



## RCoon (Nov 8, 2012)

eidairaman1 said:


> ya Major corps go with the cheaper priced chips most of time



OCZ GameXStream OCZ850GXSSLI ATX12V v2.2 and EPS12...

That one! Only from a British reseller, i hope there's little difference between the two


----------



## os2wiz (Nov 9, 2012)

RCoon said:


> Ok so my 8350 arrived this morning, with hopes of knocking the bastard to 5Ghz... sadly not, currently running 4.62 at the moment with 1.45v cpu on an asus sabertooth, specs can be seen in my specsheet. I thought cooling it on a H80 would be fine, just seems to bluescreen and/or fail calculation tests on 6 cores.
> havent changed much in the BIOS except removing turbo core, changing voltage to extreme and putting manual voltage on cpu. RAM is at 1866, multiplier of 23 and speed of 200.



I have a similar experience. I was able to boot with 4.8GHZ but it bluw screened and was not stable. I dropped down to 4.4 GHZ.  I haveFX-8350, GSkill DDR 3 2133 running at 1866 and an H100 cooler. MY cpu voltasge 1.40 v , north bridge-cpu at 1.275 v.


----------



## RCoon (Nov 9, 2012)

os2wiz said:


> I have a similar experience. I was able to boot with 4.8GHZ but it bluw screened and was not stable. I dropped down to 4.4 GHZ.  I haveFX-8350, GSkill DDR 3 2133 running at 1866 and an H100 cooler. MY cpu voltasge 1.40 v , north bridge-cpu at 1.275 v.



Did you not even reach 4.6Ghz? Mine is still at 4.7 stable, i would think with a voltage increase you will more than easily be able to hit 4.6 stable.


----------



## os2wiz (Nov 9, 2012)

nt300 said:


> You problem is heat related imo. Get those looped water coolers. FXs don't like heat. And wat ever you do don't go over 1.225v for the CPU-NB voltage or she will fry.



I find that very unlikely. Raja from Asus ROG tech support who is the absolute guru on Crosshair motherboards said 1.30 volts is the limit for cpu-nb.  Of course this guy has a Sabertooth but it is the same chipset and mosty likely the same settings limits as Crosshairs. I have never set my CPU-NB clock that low and I have never fried my chip.


----------



## cadaveca (Nov 9, 2012)

os2wiz said:


> I find that very unlikely. Raja from Asus ROG tech support who is the absolute guru on Crosshair motherboards said 1.30 volts is the limit for cpu-nb.  Of course this guy has a Sabertooth but it is the same chipset and mosty likely the same settings limits as Crosshairs. I have never set my CPU-NB clock that low and I have never fried my chip.



Piledriver or Vishera, is not like other FX chips, or Phenom X6 or X4. NB speed cannot be set independently like those chips, and this time is directly related to memory speed.

The CPU-NB, up to 1.3 V is fine, sure, but you should not NEED to increase CPU-NB at all, all the way up to 2666 MHz memory(I am not sure on higher since my memory does not go higher).

AMD says :



> 
> 
> 1. Set the CPU Water-cooler fan speed to “Extreme” (if not already) to maximize the cooling using your latest ASUS bios, try the following BIOS settings:
> 
> ...


----------



## os2wiz (Nov 9, 2012)

cadaveca said:


> Piledriver or Vishera, is not like other FX chips, or Phenom X6 or X4. NB speed cannot be set independently like those chips, and this time is directly related to memory speed.
> 
> The CPU-NB, up to 1.3 V is fine, sure, but you should not NEED to increase CPU-NB at all, all the way up to 2666 MHz memory(I am not sure on higher since my memory does not go higher).
> 
> AMD says :




Very interesting. I had not realized that the Vishera overclocking criteria were so different. ASUS really hasn't said a lot about it at all. Good thing you picked up those criteria from AMD.
    That what I like about these forums here. WE have some very inquisitive members here who browse everytrhing they can get their hands on . You are a good teacher. We all can learn, especially myself.


----------



## cadaveca (Nov 9, 2012)

Memory controller is now fully 128-bit, hence the major difference. Previous chipshad dual 64-bit memory controller (that could be "ganged" together as 128-bit controller, or "unganged" as dual 64-bit) on 128-bit bus. Independent NB speed helped adjust for dual controllers, it seems, while with a singular 128-bit controller, it's best to adjust NB speed according to memory speed, so that the controller matches memory in the most optimal way.

At least, that's how I understand it.  That change is why the controller is more efficient than Bulldozer, I imagine?


----------

