Maxing out my AM3+ socket

[kcducttaper]

I'm going to start this off by saying that, for 'hardcore' gaming, the AM3+ socket is ancient and a dinosaur. That said, I'm not a heavy gamer and am not looking to drop $2,000 on a new rig when I can still play current racing titles at 60 fps with high settings at 1080p. I'm looking to extend my AM3+ platform as long as I can to let the new tech become as awesome as possible before pulling the trigger in the next couple years (thinking Ryzen 3000 or better).

Here's my current rig's relevant specs:
AMD Phenom II x6 1100t overclocked to 4.0GHz on air
16GB (4x 4GB sticks) G.SKILL Ripjaws X Series DDR3 1600 MHz
Asus Sabertooth 990FX R2.0
Asus GTX 1070

I've considered grabbing an FX-8370, but the general consensus seems to be that they're not really any better than the 1100t due to it sharing cache across the cores where the 1100t is a true 6-core with a separate cache for each core. I could throw more memory at it, but I'm not anywhere near running out of memory, so that won't gain me any performance. Just wondering if there's anything else to do to effectively max out my socket or if I'm already there?

[upcoast]

Originally posted by Omega:

Disabling CoolnQuiet will do the exact same thing as setting Windows to high performance.

And why do I never hear people mention Intel Speedstep? It's litterally the same thing. 🤔

Disabling this will nuke your power efficiency.

When you're overclocking and gaming power efficiency is so far out in left field to the point of who cares.

Who cares about intel's speed step this is an FX cpu topic.

[Snow]

Originally posted by kcducttaper:

With the 1100t, I had dropped the memory profile to 1333, which caused the actual frequency to be a tad over 1600 after the FSB bumps. I don't know much about OCing memory, but I would get random freezes and BSODs with anything faster than that and I wasn't comfortable messing with voltages at the time. Checking the interwebz, it looks like the 1100t really didn't like anything over 1600 anyways. The FX seems to like faster memory much more than the 1100t.

1333MHz is what 1100t's[www.cpu-world.com] memory controller is rated for. FX-8350's[www.cpu-world.com] is rated for 1866, but it is absolutely capable of handling more than that, so you should have no problems as long as the sticks are good and single rank ones. Dual rank sticks don't handle OC that good, but it's not an issue, as dual rank ones are already a bit faster. What comes to loving faster memory - yeah, absolutely. FX-8350's L3 cache speed is tied to a memory speed, so by OCing memory and CPU-NB you're feeding more data for cores to process. When you reach a stable nice OC - then it makes sense to OC cores a bit as well.
This video got a lot of in-depth tests, just scroll a bit and check how all that affects the performance. 20:38 BF1 and RotTR for example - CPU-NB OC alone giving more performance than CPU OC. 25:43 and later - CPU OC vs CPU+CPU-NB+RAM OC, you'll see why it is that important to OC everything, not just cores.

[_I_]

pii imc depends on the rev
old c2 have a 1333 imc, can run 2 dimms at 1600+, but 3-4 dimms will be limited to 1333
newer c3 can run 4 dimms at 1600+

iirc the x6 have the better imc and can rum 4 dimms at 1600+
but pii likes tight timings vs high freq, you can often swap freq for cl as you keep them close to its rated freq/cl

[kcducttaper]

Oh hey! While I was popping around in CPU-Z looking for my version number, I found the CPU-Z "validate" button and it's spit out all of my specs right to a web page! Never did find the "c#" though... As you can see, my memory is running at 1672, so I'm betting it's the c3 flavor.
https://valid.x86.fr/jkz5ug

[_I_]

the x6 are Ex, yours is E0
its running 4x dimms at 836mhz = 1672
but at high timings, cl 11, your ram is rated for cl 8

https://www.gskill.com/en/product/f3-12800cl8d-8gbxm

Tested Speed: 1600MHz
Tested Latency: 8-8-8-24-2N

you are fsb overclocking
the x6 is unlocked, just set its fsb back to 200, ht to 2000,
and set the cpu multi to 20 x 200fsb = 4ghz
then put the ram to its rated speed and timings

[kcducttaper]

Oh, I know. The weird thing is, when I OC'ed it in college, that's basically what I did - just boosted the multiplier to 3.8GHz and called it a day. I then set it back to default for years because I just didn't need it OC'ed. This round, using the same hardware, I couldn't get it to OC much at all with the multiplier (or at least not nearly as far as I had it previously).I went the FSB route and it seemed much happier that way, so I just left it. I don't think I'll bother messing with my 1100t profile. I'll just let it be until I get my FX. I'm trying to remember why I would've bumped the timings though and I can't remember why I would've done that....

[upcoast]

Just pointing out that cl11 is counter productive for PII and fx it's an amd thing target tight timings cl8-9 at the most for ddr3.

[Snow]

Originally posted by kcducttaper:

I couldn't get it to OC much at all with the multiplier (or at least not nearly as far as I had it previously).I went the FSB route and it seemed much happier that way

Originally posted by Snow:

A lot of FX mobos tend to ignore multiplier values on CPU-NB, so adjust via bus frequency.

And that's despite having a top-tier AM3+ mobo, so keep it that way - use FSB to overclock and multipliers to downclock things you don't need that high.

Originally posted by kcducttaper:

I'm trying to remember why I would've bumped the timings though and I can't remember why I would've done that....

Most likely it was a bit unstable with lower latency, and instability most likely was caused by CPU-NB and HT being a bit too high. Reduce the CPU-NB and HT multipliers just a little bit and then try to reduce memory latency, should work. Increasing the memory voltage might work too.

Originally posted by _I_:

you are fsb overclocking
the x6 is unlocked, just set its fsb back to 200, ht to 2000,
and set the cpu multi to 20 x 200fsb = 4ghz
then put the ram to its rated speed and timings

For some stupid software reason most of the AM3+ mobos show all kinds of weird when it comes to multipliers, especially CPU-NB above default mult. FSB is not just the only solutions in such cases, but also the one making most sense, as all the CPU clock, CPU-NB clock, HT clock and RAM clock lead to a performance improvements.

[Wichtelman]

is it really that much more expensive to get a ryzen 5 2600 with mainboard and ram?
if you sell all your old parts except your gpu and add the difference... a second hand i7 3770k/4770k system would also be pretty decent and you could keep your ram...

did you tell which cpu cooler you use?

[Snow]

Originally posted by upcoast:

Just pointing out that cl11 is counter productive for PII and fx it's an amd thing target tight timings cl8-9 at the most for ddr3.

To my knowledge timings were that important way back when CPUs didn't have L3 cache. The actual delay is CL/FREQ*2000 nanoseconds. So if increasing the latency is required to reach higher clocks - it's likely worth it. 2133MHz CL10 results in 9.38 ns delay, and 1600MHz CL8 is 10.00 ns delay. And considering how FX loves L3 cache speed boost - frequency over latency any day.

[upcoast]

Originally posted by Snow:

Originally posted by upcoast:

Just pointing out that cl11 is counter productive for PII and fx it's an amd thing target tight timings cl8-9 at the most for ddr3.

To my knowledge timings were that important way back when CPUs didn't have L3 cache. The actual delay is CL/FREQ*2000 nanoseconds. So if increasing the latency is required to reach higher clocks - it's likely worth it. 2133MHz CL10 results in 9.38 ns delay, and 1600MHz CL8 is 10.00 ns delay. And considering how FX loves L3 cache speed boost - frequency over latency any day.

It's the way it is with PII and FX it's just the way it is, intel makes no never mind.

It's getting tiring reading your misinformation.

So you own and use an FX8xxx daily for gaming???

[MA☝Omgwtfbbqstfu™]

Whether you like it or not you have to go fx because phenom 2's lack the sse4 instruction sets.
Sometimes devs are lazy and won't consider this, sometimes they patch to fix, other times they ignore the problem.

[_I_]

Originally posted by upcoast:

Originally posted by Snow:

To my knowledge timings were that important way back when CPUs didn't have L3 cache. The actual delay is CL/FREQ*2000 nanoseconds. So if increasing the latency is required to reach higher clocks - it's likely worth it. 2133MHz CL10 results in 9.38 ns delay, and 1600MHz CL8 is 10.00 ns delay. And considering how FX loves L3 cache speed boost - frequency over latency any day.

It's the way it is with PII and FX it's just the way it is, intel makes no never mind.

It's getting tiring reading your misinformation.

So you own and use an FX8xxx daily for gaming???

he ordered an fx8

[ShadowLID]

The FX8350 on newegg right now is only $64.99 I would grab that and a very good cpu cooler and overclock that puppy as close to 5+ghz as you can. The FX8XXX cpus are still very good for price to performance and they are doing very well with modern games because most ports are being threaded for 8 threads due to console have very weak 8 threaded APUs. I think your plan is perfect grab a $65 CPU and wait it out until Ryzen 3xxxx comes out. I jumped the gun and went with a 2700X but intend to upgrade to the last and best of the AM4 cpus when that time comes and if its a good enough performance jump. I have a AMD FX 8320E in a spare gaming PC i put together for when my niece and nephew come to stay the night and it keeps up with all games we play, ive got a modest OC of 4.3ghz on it. It will do more but I dont need the heat or have the time to fine tune a OC for a PC that gets used 1 every 3 months.

[MA☝Omgwtfbbqstfu™]

Originally posted by kcducttaper:

So this is strange. I can get an FX 8350 for $65 shipped on NewEgg. Used 1100T's are going anywhere from $75 to $125 shipped on ebay. What's up with that?

Restricted upgrade options for the oldest systems,pII supported ddr2-3, FX doesn't.