The thing is that both FX cpus are not a real 8 core cpu. That is why there was a lawsuit about AMD FX 8xxx and FX 9xxx.

@@zushikatetomotoshift1575 depends on how you define "core". 386 CPU didn't had FPU or decoder, but was definitly not a 0-core CPU... and exact core composition really doesn't matter, if you match single core and all core performance

@@user-cf6xu5tu4g Simply NO. You may exclude FPU with some mental gymnastics. But you can't exclude fetch or decode stage (or dispatch in suprescalar architectures). Those stages were also shared and are absolutely the core (pun not intended) functionality of a CPU core. I would go even further and call it a failed multithreading attemt (what intel calls hyperthreading). If they would "only" allow to schedule all instructions on any integer cluster, it would be a full multithreading and actually improve singlethreaded performance and therefore lowering the relative improvement of multithreaded applications ("only" is in quotes because it's not a trivial change)

Yep, proper FSB hard OC to about 20-25mhz more will show a big difference, otherwise going higher than 4.2-4.4ghz will not do much. But with hard FSB and memory OC those 5Ghz can show very good results. Too bad not many motherboards will be able to boost bus by a lot. But yeah, a typical fx oc mistake is to oc the memory, core clock and NB without touching the bus.

In some way it had the same issues as NetBurst. It even had a similar design philosophy. Long pipeline, high clock. Some weird core-and a-half NetBurst had a "full" ALU and a set of simple ALUs that could do two operations per clock, but 64-bit SSE units. Which is not what you want for 128-bit instructions. FX had two integer clusters with shared FPU and decoder units. That FPU block could be split into two 128-bit units or run as a single 256-bit unit. If the design had better throughput it would've been decent. And the later Excavator design, which wasn't widely available on desktop showed decent improvements. They released a couple Athlons on the architecture and those were competitive in their market. Sitting between Pentiums and i3 at the time, which seems right for the market they aimed at. And tose Excavator Athlons were 2 module/4 thread CPUs, a full 4 module/8 thread or even 6 module/12 thread CPU would've placed itself among the lower i5 chips without issue. I have a Pentium 4 here and could gain 15% performance just by increasing the FSB, even when keeping the CPU itself at the same clock. Both were bandwith-starved architectures. But both were good with the right kind of tasks. Which were tasks that are predictable and keep the pipeline filled. Stuff like video encoding or 3D rendering.

really?.....

It’s true. I used to run Folding@home to heat my room on cold nights. Worked like a space heater.

@@dannyy7654 hi...what's model fx .....?

Other general tips is that you want to start using higher LLC past 1.475v or 4.8ghz onwards, whichever comes first thanks to the bin. vDroop and overshoot becomes a killer as you start pushing 5ghz.

Good to know..Thank you.

Had a FX-8150/990FX Sabertooth/240AIO system a couple of years ago, did mess about with OC on it and HT,NB and RAM tuning does indeed make a bigger impact than just increasing the multiplier. I think i had it running at 4.75Ghz 1866Mhz CL9, remembering it didn't give much boost to performance beyond 4.75Ghz, but meesing around with the Ram and north brigde and ht and stuff following guides did make a significant difference both to stutters and higher fps in games.Retired the Bulldozer when the Pcie slot gave away from the motherboard -.-

yeah Bulldozer was much more sensitive to NB & IMC then people like to act like, the difference in 1% lows between 2600HT/2200NB - 1600mhz C8 and 2700HT/2600NB - 2000 C9 is massive and can be anywhere from 8% to 20% uplift in gaming workloads, by its nature Bulldozer is cache starved. so increasing core clocks, which in turn increases L1 & L2 cache hit rate + NB increasing L3 Cache hit rate + actually saturating the IMC has a stark uplift over stock or even core OC alone. @@bafon

not really 9590 with a real pig for power and a real furnace to heat your room up so it's not surprising that his 9590 is high on the vcore I owned a 9590 so i know they were no better or worse with the power saving features on or off they sucked both ways and even with the power saver features turned on they still roasted you in your home when gaming the power saving features only saved power when the system was idle not doing anything at all and they didn't have much power when pushed

Fancy seeing you here! 😅 Love your vids, can't wait to see the next one

The thing is that both FX cpus are not a real 8 core cpu. That is why there was a lawsuit about AMD FX 8xxx and FX 9xxx.

​@@zushikatetomotoshift1575 Settling out of court does not actually admit to failure this time. It closed the case, paid some money in California only. They moved on rather than keep fighting those who cannot understand that a "core" is.

@@hrayz It was a shared cores system so the 8 cores was shared by two logic cores.

Major clue was the L2 cache.

The problem was that most games back then didn't utilize more than 2 cores, so even an i5(3570k launched 6 months earlier) would trash it and the price difference was 12$. The FX only redeeming quality was good performance in productivity tasks for cheap, but for games it was horrible. Sure, later these CPUs started to shine once games would use more than 2 cores and would actually keep up or even beat the core i5/i7s, but that came a bit too late.

Yet I still skipped Zen and hopped on the bandwagon with Zen+ (2600)

@@RuruFIN I only upgraded to Zen 3 with a Ryzen 5 5600 this year and i was stuck on the K10 architecture before that (That's the Phenom II generation) Let's just say that i IMMEDIATELY noticed the massive boost in performance compared to the Phenom II 1055t!

@@GUCFan I got a 5800X 3 months ago after using a 3600 for 3 years. The 3600 is still in use on my media system :)

zen+ was not really good either i upgraded from i7 4790k to ryzen 7 2700x and my performance was worse in gaming i think zen2 was the real deal@@RuruFIN

zen+ was not really good either i upgraded from i7 4790k to ryzen 7 2700x and my performance was worse in gaming i think zen2 was the real deal@@RuruFIN

RX 6600 on the used market is really damn cheap. Probably the best value there is right now for the lowest budget possible. I got my 6700 XT for 275€ which is the best 1080p card for the price right now. Also using a 5600x which I purchased from the same fella for 100€. You can get great deals on the used market and you absolutely can lower the 6600 price by quite a bit by selling your RX 580.

Using my "new" 5600x cpu with a rx 7600 gpu Beautiful performance with no bottleneck

Reverse card.

But my 11900K do thinks, what your Razen cant- warm my legs im winter 😎

What do these cpu's pull in idle?

Like i know am4 idle performance is ASS. Since chiplets is ass. I think am3+ is still monolythic cpu's?

@@durschfalltv7505 less than 45W... around about 35-40W

​​@@durschfalltv7505 with c6 and offset voltage 81w with static voltage 91w idle. The only power saving fx needs is C6 for comparison intel i5-3470 has 43w idle

​@@durschfalltv7505 with c6state and offset voltage 81w with static voltage 91w

I used my 8350 for many years (5+) as my main PC before getting the Ryzen 1700X. The bulldozer is still in use in my room as my backup system with a RX 580-8GB. Great 1080p setup.

Back then I just upgraded my quad core Phenom 2 to hexa core and skipped Bulldozer/Piledriver entirely. Finally when first gen Ryzen came out I upgraded to the 1700. By that time the Phenom 2 x6 was really showing its age.

What you on about??FX chips are the best for gaming on winter season...

8320e was good for its price. Especially after thorough tuning.

@@Greenberet.i cooked an egg on the case itself too!

Isn't the x58 a 1311 intel socket?

@@timmanboy1 1366 yes

I’m really astonished at how amd can achieve such dramatic change in cpu generation after bulldozer

The 9000 series weren't a good buy. The fx 8320 was 130-140$ then those 9000 series came out and you could easily overclock it to 4.0-4.1Ghz on a 45-50$ board or to 4.5-4.8Ghz on a 60-70$ board with a Hyper-212. FX CPUs were there for the value and to play games with more than 60fps and for that they were perfect from 2011-2017.

And while I was using this setup I tried different memory, and almost all ram taked 2133 MHz with different timings.

Thanks for sharing mete. I'm not having much luck when pairing FX chips with fast memory. Voltage was manually set to 1.531V 🙂

To make use of 2400 you need to crank that north bridge and hyper transport . My 9590 screamed with 2600 mhz nb and 2600 htt . 5.4 ghz shd it clobbered everything I thew at it . I love fx systems

​@@nexus_techyour board choice is pretty bad to . It's not a true 8+2 phase it's a 6 phase

do they even have the required instructions? pretty sure the anticheat updated killed old cpus, even if they were fine before just because missing avx instructions

I remember the claim that FX would age better than SandyBridge/IvyBridge/Haswell. Just wait for games to actually use all of these threads. But in the end FX aged like the Q6600. By the time the width was used by games, they were too slow with or without so many cores. And interesting that an i5-750 would outperform it. That means my LGA775 board should do the same. Nehalem didn't have any big improvements on the core itself, it was mostly the frontend that was improved. At the same clock an i5-750 and a Q9650 were pretty much equal.

@@HappyBeezerStudios lga775 rocks dude sad thing most games now require SSE4 and AVX to run so you gotta get lucky for some commuinity patch, like doom eternal, it literally runs flawlessly with a GTX 1050 for such old cpu but for some reason requires SSE4/avx instructions, so you end up cracking the game in the end

The company was on life support

Definitely seems to be something wrong with your OC. Just watched another channel testing Cyberpunk 2077. 1080p High @STOCK he got an average of 59 FPS on a 3070. Plus if your 9590 is coming in behind an 8350 it's got some issues.

The thing is that both FX cpus are not a real 8 core cpu. That is why there was a lawsuit about AMD FX 8xxx and FX 9xxx.

99fxa

The thing is that both FX cpus are not a real 8 core cpu. That is why there was a lawsuit about AMD FX 8xxx and FX 9xxx.

Absolutely true.

@@zushikatetomotoshift1575 They are and aren't. They are by the fact that they have two physically separated integer pipelines, but are not by the combined FPU. AMD made a semi-superscalar architecture. What trully killed it was Global Foundry's abysmal, 2-3 years delayed 32nm process node. Global Foundry promised AMD 2 billion transistors for an 8 core at 125W in 2009, insteat they gave AMD 1.2 billion transistors at 125W in 2011-2012.

I hope you got you money from that lawsuit.

They didn’t lose the court case, they settled to avoid a legal process. Court case also happened in one state in one country. Why exactly hasn’t the EU sued them? This thing obviously has 8 cores. 8 pieces of shit cores. And even if you don’t want to call it a a true 8 core, calling it a 4 cores 8 thread is just a lie. This thing doesn’t have HT/SMT The best way to call the cpu is a 4 module cpu with 2 cores per module.

Hello mate, I'm not sure what is wrong, I went over settings over and over, can't find anything that would cause slower performance. Bad luck 🙂

​@@nexus_techit's your board

Hello mate! Thanks, but the core voltage was set to 1.531V in BIOS, usually around 1.525v in OS

Lies, the 2700k goes for $20/25 lol

False. That was a nuisance lawsuit with no basis in fact, and it was settled for a small amount to get rid of it. The Bulldozer architecture had two integer cores and one floating point core per module. Four modules means eight integer cores and four floating point cores.

@@TrueThanny Not false cause if false they would have not paid the people including me. If false again then why Did AMD lose?

@@zushikatetomotoshift1575 They didn't lose. They settled for a small amount to make the case go away so they could concentrate on the future. Settling a lawsuit is not losing that lawsuit. If it will cost more to litigate a case to point of victory than to settle and make the case go away sooner, then it makes sense to just settle.

@@zushikatetomotoshift1575if it was true than every country on the planet would have sued. Instead a single court case happened in one state in one country. Companies settle out of court all the time to avoid legal fees. And judgement against them when ignorant juries might side against them It’s pretty obvious this thing has 8 cores. The cores are physically there. They just both suck ass and share resources with another core. The best example I can think of are conjoined twins. They count as 2 people right? No one would say they are one person. But obviously if you hired them to do a job, they wouldn’t perform as well as 2 separate employees.