Some questions about AMD CPUs

Pyotr

New Member
Hihi.
I'll start off by saying I don't want this to turn into some thread for biased fanbois of either Intel or AMD, and I know fairly well Intel's processors are considered better. There are just a few things I would like some facts about. Not even saying the answers will convince me one way or another about deciding about a processor for my build. Because I just want some info, really.

Most questions are about things I have heard from people, not read about it much.

1. Are all Bulldozer CPUs the exact same, but with different stock clocks/overclocks and number of cores? Because doesn't that mean the "best" thing would be to buy an FX-8120 (8 cores) and just overclock it to the same speed as an FX-4170 (4.2 GHz at stock if I recall correctly)? Yeah, needs some cooling of course, but how viable would it be? Am I missing something?

2. How much could I overclock a Bulldozer core? I know it differs from chip to chip, but.. The FX-4170 is clocked to 4.2 GHz at stock, and if the CPUs all have the same type of cores, does that mean it's close to the limit already? Or could you actually push it "much" higher with good success? And could I bring the 8 core models to that clock?

3. How "bad" is the heat and/or possible heat issues when overclocking? Not to start a flamewar or shitfeast, but people complained Ivy Bridge was hot, so how does Bulldozer compare to those? I'm thinking both overclocked and stock.

4. How severe is the high power requirements? Would I need 750W for an FX-8120, a single 670GTX graphics card and all other doodads, or would 650W be enough?

5. AMD motherboards seem to support 1866MHz RAMs. Is that what to go for when going AMD?

If I'm not clear enough, don't be afraid to ask for clarification. :)
 
1. Are all Bulldozer CPUs the exact same, but with different stock clocks/overclocks and number of cores? Because doesn't that mean the "best" thing would be to buy an FX-8120 (8 cores) and just overclock it to the same speed as an FX-4170 (4.2 GHz at stock if I recall correctly)? Yeah, needs some cooling of course, but how viable would it be? Am I missing something?
As far as I understand it yes. They all clock fairly well. 4.2 is certainly achieveable on any of the bulldozer CPUs.

2. How much could I overclock a Bulldozer core? I know it differs from chip to chip, but.. The FX-4170 is clocked to 4.2 GHz at stock, and if the CPUs all have the same type of cores, does that mean it's close to the limit already? Or could you actually push it "much" higher with good success? And could I bring the 8 core models to that clock?
If I am reading this right, no. Just because the 4170 is at 4.2 does not mean that the all will top out at around 4.2. 4.5 should be plenty achieveable on just about any of them. That is assuming a board that has good power control, and a top chip. Not every chip will OC well, so don't assume an amazing OC.

3. How "bad" is the heat and/or possible heat issues when overclocking? Not to start a flamewar or shitfeast, but people complained Ivy Bridge was hot, so how does Bulldozer compare to those? I'm thinking both overclocked and stock.
I have no idea on this one. I have not herd anyone complaining about them being extremely hot.

4. How severe is the high power requirements? Would I need 750W for an FX-8120, a single 670GTX graphics card and all other doodads, or would 650W be enough?
not bad at all. Many complain about their power requirements, but as much as they use, it is still far below netburst and older processors. a 650 will certainly run it just fine with a GTX 670.

5. AMD motherboards seem to support 1866MHz RAMs. Is that what to go for when going AMD?
They support them yes, but a set of 1600 with tight CAS8 would run just the same with 99% of programs. You likely would not see the difference in RAM speeds.

If I'm not clear enough, don't be afraid to ask for clarification. :)
You were very clear I think.
 
They support them yes, but a set of 1600 with tight CAS8 would run just the same with 99% of programs. You likely would not see the difference in RAM speeds.
But, with equal price, shouldn't I go for 1866 just because I can? :D
Thanks a lot for your answers, very useful. :)
 
really you won't "see" any difference hardly for any of the speeds, DDR3 is so fast really just benchmarks are the only real difference.
 
I can't use those prices, I'm on the other side of the atlantic ocean. ;) Where I am, the prices are pretty much the same (maybe 10-15% difference, and considering RAM prices right now..). I know I won't see a difference, but at least I'm not breaking anything. :) And it always feels better bragging about higher numbers.
 
Well in my defense, I have no idea where you are, and it is top time for activity on the forum on both sides of the ocean.

It won't break anything to use them, and bragging rights are only as good as the knowledge of the people you are bragging to.
 
It's true. I'm in Sweden yay! Also known as one of like 3 countries in the EU that don't use the euro as a currency. Maybe I should update my profile to actually show that. Not that you needed a defense of course. :)
bragging rights are only as good as the knowledge of the people you are bragging to
That's ok, I know plenty of people who don't know anything about computers. They will be super impressed! :D

Internet sarcasm aside though, I really appreciate your answer. :)
Is 4.5 achievable on most i5 3570K too, or can you push that even higher on most chips?
 
I would not say so. I can barely maintain 4.5 on my 2600k. you can get close, within 200 MHz probably, but it is a stronger architecture, so it would outpace a similarly clocked AMD.
 
Yes, that is possible with a 3570k.

The bulldozer does have a 1866 memory controller, so it can support it and supports it better than older processors. But yeah, won't notice a difference.
 
Back
Top