The 1055T is a 125W chip. What do you think it's usage will be at 4GHz?

Sorry cant find anything usefull on overheating VRM's.

That well known problem is the relatively lose connection between heatsink and vrm, and that sticky pad in between. If you want to improve it's contact, make sure to tighten it up with even screws.

There are three pages on Google of overheating Nb/vrms for formula z alone. They use low quality pads yes, but tightening them doesn't fix it nor does new pads. It uses low quality fets and this issue never really goes away.

Your 1055t has a 125w tdp. It has never drawn 125w's in its life. The fx chips changed that they draw 200+ watt without even batting an eye.

cdawallThere are three pages on Google of overheating Nb/vrms for formula z alone. They use low quality pads yes, but tightening them doesn't fix it nor does new pads. It uses low quality fets and this issue never really goes away.

Your 1055t has a 125w tdp. It has never drawn 125w's in its life. The fx chips changed that they draw 200+ watt without even batting an eye.

Absolutely. Prime 95 would pull at least 400 from the wall OCed on my 8350. That's some serious consumption. I couldn't complain about peformance, though. I did it on air cooling, too :D

Encoding using FMA was amazing.

cdawallThere is a massive difference between 5 minutes and 24/7 for months on end. Electronics happen to degrade over time especially when stressed...I have had every single crosshair board since the crosshair II and I have run them on at minimum dry ice. The CHVF-z is actually worse than the CHIV and CHVF (non-z) in the VRM section. This is a known thing. Something people who do more than talk about overclocking on the internet know about...For reference the stock 9590 is well known to pop the -z's at stock settings when used for prolonged periods of time.



The phenom X6 pulls A LOT less than a fx fully loaded. It typically pulls less than some at stock as a matter of fact...Please look into these chips a little more.

5.2Ghz and Higher I need water for sure, the air cooler fans rev to max at that point, and thats in Unigen benchmarks

Yeah, well, i never had any problems with Asus or Gigabyte boards in general. It's common sense when oc'ing and benching with linx, to always check your VRM's and other things that needs cooling. When running above spec it's a matter of time before things start giving up. The 9570 is a beast yes but it can be undervolted, there is a 60Watts of power margin to be saved when running stock. Depends on how strong your peace of silicon is or not.

its funny the overheating issues can be resolved by our hands, however the average joe wouldn't know what to do. when i put in overheating on chvfz it pulled up the NB as the first topics.

I may never get beyond 5.1GHz at this point because if Zen is what it needs to be the board,chip,ram,cooler are going into my wifes new rig to upgrade from an ancient p4

JismYeah, well, i never had any problems with Asus or Gigabyte boards in general. It's common sense when oc'ing and benching with linx, to always check your VRM's and other things that needs cooling. When running above spec it's a matter of time before things start giving up. The 9570 is a beast yes but it can be undervolted, there is a 60Watts of power margin to be saved when running stock. Depends on how strong your peace of silicon is or not.

Just because you never had issues doesn't mean they don't exist. You keep talking about a 1055T on a midrange board so obviously this top end stuff is a bit mute to you.

The good, the bad, and the ugly happens to everyone. For my history, there was only 1 board that was tempermental for me.
ECS-P4VXMS
Asus-P4S8X- board had compatibility issues with GPUs, needed a beta bios and a certain setting turned off.
MSI-NF2
DFI-NF2
Asus-SBTR2990FX

cdawallJust because you never had issues doesn't mean they don't exist. You keep talking about a 1055T on a midrange board so obviously this top end stuff is a bit mute to you.

How is the Crosshair IV not an high-end board and by your saying a midrange? It supports the 9570 and has a very beefy VRM. Thus from all the extra features such as quad-crossfire (if needed) i dont recall this board being a midrange or cheap at all.

So far it's bin the best oc'ing AM3+ motherboard in my experience, from a single-core sempron all the way up to 4.1GHz on a condensor running at -25 stressed with no issues. It boots up a HTT of over 340MHz which is crazy compared to other boards and best for CPU's with a locked MP.

Asus Crosshair IV-blew one under cold

Yeah there you have it. Your bad experience ofcourse suits all Crosshair IV motherboards thus being crap. I think you blew it up because you did some things wrong there buddy.

eidairaman1The good, the bad, and the ugly happens to everyone. For my history, there was only 1 board that was tempermental for me.
ECS-P4VXMS
Asus-P4S8X- board had compatibility issues with GPUs, needed a beta bios and a certain setting turned off.
MSI-NF2
DFI-NF2
Asus-SBTR2990FX

and then there is me just on AMD and not counting the massive stack of s754/939 stuff I grabbed

ECS K7S5A-pro-bad caps
MSI K7N2 Delta-bad caps
Machspeed K8M8MS-still works to this day
MSI K9A2 Platinum-blew a PCI-e slot and then eventually just died
Asus Crosshair II-no issues
Asus M4A78T-E-one of my favorite boards of all time. Blew mosfets on about 6 of them under DICe
Asus Crosshair III-still running a 1035T based rig for my folks
Asus Crosshair IV-blew one under cold
MSI 890FXA-GD65-still runnning an FX 4130 to this day
Asus Crosshair V-still running a 9370 to this day

JismHow is the Crosshair IV not an high-end board and by your saying a midrange? It supports the 9570 and has a very beefy VRM. Thus from all the extra features such as quad-crossfire (if needed) i dont recall this board being a midrange or cheap at all.

So far it's bin the best oc'ing AM3+ motherboard in my experience, from a single-core sempron all the way up to 4.1GHz on a condensor running at -25 stressed with no issues. It boots up a HTT of over 340MHz which is crazy compared to other boards and best for CPU's with a locked MP.



Yeah there you have it. Your bad experience ofcourse suits all Crosshair IV motherboards thus being crap. I think you blew it up because you did some things wrong there buddy.

Watercooled you can hit that with a regor core and a crosshair IV-F mind you that was the "gamer" board of the series and the extreme was the one aimed purely at overclocking. Hence the no fluff design

cdawalland then there is me just on AMD and not counting the massive stack of s754/939 stuff I grabbed

ECS K7S5A-pro-bad caps
MSI K7N2 Delta-bad caps
Machspeed K8M8MS-still works to this day
MSI K9A2 Platinum-blew a PCI-e slot and then eventually just died
Asus Crosshair II-no issues
Asus M4A78T-E-one of my favorite boards of all time. Blew mosfets on about 6 of them under DICe
Asus Crosshair III-still running a 1035T based rig for my folks
Asus Crosshair IV-blew one under cold
MSI 890FXA-GD65-still runnning an FX 4130 to this day
Asus Crosshair V-still running a 9370 to this day





Watercooled you can hit that with a regor core and a crosshair IV-F mind you that was the "gamer" board of the series and the extreme was the one aimed purely at overclocking. Hence the no fluff design

I do have a Skt 754 chip here (3200 I believe) with a K8VXE, going to try an R7 250 on it with Win 7. I have a spare Ultra 500W PSU lying around too

medi01390 clearly beat 970, in some games 980.

CasecutterWhile a 390X might have it beat (against a 970 yes) it's was not worth the $70 (20%)

Sorry... that wasn't the context. Categorically I was not trying to skew the perception. :oops:

Correctly the 390 or 970 are both competitive FpS depending on the game, while a 390 at 1440p might provide a slight advantage in its' available memory. That's said in the actual building of a system, the extra 30% need to move up from a 390 (20% from a 970 of $320ish) to the 390X (or more to a 980) is tough to justify.

CasecutterSorry... that wasn't the context. Categorically I was not trying to skew the perception. :oops:

Correctly the 390 or 970 are both competitive FpS depending on the game, while a 390 at 1440p might provide a slight advantage in its' available memory. That's said in the actual building of a system, the extra 30% need to move up from a 390 (20% from a 970 of $320ish) to the 390X (or more to a 980) is tough to justify.

and then there is 2160P when the 390/x destroy the 970/980

AotS nVidia glitch confirmed by AotS developers:
twitter.com/dankbaker/status/739880981612625920

cdawalland then there is 2160P when the 390/x destroy the 970/980

Hmm, let's see:
www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/R9_390_Nitro/23.html - 390 ~10% faster than 970.
www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/R9_390X_Gaming/30.html - 390x tied with 980.

bugHmm, let's see:
www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/R9_390_Nitro/23.html - 390 ~10% faster than 970.
www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/R9_390X_Gaming/30.html - 390x tied with 980.

Try something with drivers from this year

Wow, the 390X is 6% faster than the 980 now... /s

cdawallTry something with drivers from this year

bugWow, the 390X is 6% faster than the 980 now... /s

What about 1440p?
1080 is too low for these (and my neighbor's cat wonders, why TPU is testing GPUs at mostly CPU bound 900p resolution), but 4k is to high.

medi01What about 1440p?
1080 is too low for these (and my neighbor's cat wonders, why TPU is testing GPUs at mostly CPU bound 900p resolution), but 4k is to high.

The original assertion was that 390 destroys the 970 and the 390X destroys the 980 @2160p.

Tests at CPU bound resolutions are ok as they can expose driver inefficiencies. That and not everybody has a 1440 or 4k monitor. In fact, if we go by Steam numbers, less than 5% are gaming above 1080...

bugWow, the 390X is 6% faster than the 980 now... /s

And it's still faster... The 390 stomps the 970

cdawallAnd it's still faster... The 390 stomps the 970

Oh stop it already. If it's not at least 20% faster you won't even be able to tell the difference. Why all the "destroys" and "stomps"? The 390 is also slightly more expensive than the 970, so a little performance advantage is to be expected.

bugThe 390 is also slightly more expensive than the 970, so a little performance advantage is to be expected.

Well, 12% not sure how little that is, and as far as Price goes, 390 (not to be confused with 390x) is noticeably (about 30€) cheaper than 970.

For comparison, 980 is 16% faster than 970.

Haven't been in this thread for a while, and last page full of old chip OCing and Nvidia vs AMD? Once RX480 launches all cards in question will be less than $200 used, who the heck cares.....

PP MguireHaven't been in this thread for a while, and last page full of old chip OCing and Nvidia vs AMD? Once RX480 launches all cards in question will be less than $200 used, who the heck cares.....

I thought thread was about Zen ... not Polaris

G33k2Fr34kI think you meant two CPUs based on the same microarchitecture can be compared using IPC.

Who knows what he meant, but you're wrong, same instruction set, different micro architectures (and architectures both) cpus can have their instructions per clock count (IPC) compared.
Name says it all, how many x86/x64 instructions by average can a single core execute in a single clock tick (you do that measurement actually on a gazillion clock ticks then divide result with gazillion).
You gotta remember these are super scalar processors and single core is capable of issuing multiple less wide instructions simultaneously and some instructions read from different cache levels with different latencies, some from memory, some just process the instruction operands ... so scheduler has to calculate dependency and arrange mutually non-dependent short running and long running instructions of different instruction widths to execute in parallel (on that single core) in a way that at any given time maximum possible usage of all units is achieved (for example, doing several ALU instructions on cache while waiting on fetch from a memory controller).
You have a myriad of different algorithms there so every little optimization in cache, memory controller, branch prediction, pipeline depth reduction will certainly affect IPC. The whole architecture including the micro architecture.

cdawalland then there is 2160P when the 390/x destroy the 970/980

It hardly mattered as those weren't a appropriate purchases for entry 4K, except with a game or two.