Help me decide on a FX-8xxx CPU

[AnitaPeterson]

Hello everyone,
I have a challenge for the AT hive mind.

I'd like to upgrade a Micro-ATX system to an eight-core CPU.
The motherboard is an ASRock N68C-GS FX. It's an AM3+ socket and - somewhat of a rarity! - it takes both DDR2 and DDR3, up to 8GB

The specs say it can accept 8-core CPUs , but only up to 95W.
The system is housed in a small enclosure, which will just about accept a beefy air cooler (the GAMMAXX 200T), but has no provisions for liquid cooling (no 120-mm fan outlet, only 100 mm).
I don't plan to overclock the system, either.

*edit* It won't be for intensive gaming (though I expect it will run most games at 1080p), but I will do video encoding on the machine, and expect it to run well over at least a couple of years. The whole thing will be paired with a Radeon 7770, so it should push 4K video as well (no gaming at 4K, of course).

Under these circumstances, what CPU would you pick?
Ebay has loads of FX-8xxx processors, from the FX-8300 to the FX-8320, including some I didn't know existed, like the 8120 or 8150.

Any experience with these CPUs? What would you pick - should I go for the cheapest item, or is there a hidden gem among these options?

 

[LTC8K6]

8320E or 8370E for 95W

8300 and 8310 are also 95W, but will probably use a bit more power than the later E chips.

They will all run about the same overall I guess.

Whichever is cheapest.

Check the BIOS for support of the chip you pick.

 

[Abwx]

A 3.2GHz 8320E is as not as efficient as a 3.3GHz 8370E, the latter has lower voltage, so both use exactly the same power, that is 65W on regular MT loading, like CineBench or Handbrake, and 80W in Prime95.

If CPU World data is accurate then the 8300 is as effcient as the 8370E since they use the same voltage/frequency settings at stock, dunno why the 8300 at 3.3 is sold cheaper than the 3.2 8320E...

 

[AnitaPeterson]

Thank you for your input - although it seems you don't really agree on the solution

But this brings me to the "why", so I updated my fIrst post, to clarify what I'll use it for.

 

[chrisjames61]

As someone who has literally dozens of FX cpu's my advice would be to make sure to stay away from a Zambezi cpu like an 8120 or 8150. The later Steamroller FX cpu's are better. A 6300 would be the best fit for your board which is a really lousy board. The mosfets would probably catch fire with an 8 core FX cpu. Even with an 8300 or 8320. In reality MicroATX boards and FX cpu's are like oil and water. To have a good experience with an FX cpu you really should have a full ATX 990FX board with robust power delivery section. Good case airflow and at least a good 120mm tower cooler.

 

[Deigarth]

That motherboard does not support any FX 8-core. Look at the CPU support list, the only FX CPUs it supports are the old Zambezi four cores and the slightly less old Vishera 4-core.

Then there is the Opteron 3380 (OS3380OLW8KHK) that is supported. That is indeed an eight-core at a supposedly 65W. And also dog slow (2.6GHz) and probably very hard to find.

 

[AnitaPeterson]

I mean... it says "Supports 8-core CPU" right on the motherboard. Take a look at the picture on the product page:
http://www.asrock.com/mb/NVIDIA/N68C-GS FX/

Were there any 8-core phenoms?

 

[Thunder 57]

I mean... it says "Supports 8-core CPU" right on the motherboard. Take a look at the picture on the product page:
http://www.asrock.com/mb/NVIDIA/N68C-GS FX/

Were there any 8-core phenoms?

There were not.

The CPU support list does include 8 core Opterons. That is probably what it meant. That is not even an AMD chipset, so I'm surprised it will take FX CPU's at all. I wouldn't expect it to run anything that isn't explicitly supported.

 

[SPBHM]

There were not.

The CPU support list does include 8 core Opterons. That is probably what it meant. That is not even an AMD chipset, so I'm surprised it will take FX CPU's at all. I wouldn't expect it to run anything that isn't explicitly supported.

there is nothing preventing an AM3+ socket from being combined with older chipsets, a decent number of boards using the cheap Nvidia chipset (rom 2007) with AM3+ support were made... the most obvious limitation is that Hyper Transport runs at a lower speed.... and PCIE is 1.1


asrock have a history for not updating their CPU support list and having bios available which support a lot more CPUs,

the board form the OP claims AM3+ support, even includes "FX" in the name, and have bios updates from 2012 (when FX 83xx/63xx were released) with "updated CPU code",



here is a geekbench of someone running the 8350 and 8300 with the same mode of motherboard
http://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/1914550
http://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/6766938

obviously DDR2 wont work with Am3+ CPUs.

 

[Thunder 57]

there is nothing preventing an AM3+ socket from being combined with older chipsets, a decent number of boards using the cheap Nvidia chipset (rom 2007) with AM3+ support were made... the most obvious limitation is that Hyper Transport runs at a lower speed.... and PCIE is 1.1


asrock have a history for not updating their CPU support list and having bios available which support a lot more CPUs,

the board form the OP claims AM3+ support, even includes "FX" in the name, and have bios updates from 2012 (when FX 83xx/63xx were released) with "updated CPU code",



here is a geekbench of someone running the 8350 and 8300 with the same mode of motherboard
http://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/1914550
http://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/6766938

obviously DDR2 wont work with Am3+ CPUs.

Honestly I wouldn't want to try it if it was myself. If you can get a 95W FX on the cheap, it may be worth it. I'd rather take that cost and put it towards an AM4 motherboard with a Ryzen 2200G or 2400G.

 

[Schmide]

At most get a Phenom II 1035t-1055t. Prob $40 ish on ebay. You're not going to the moon with this build, this will work well enough.

Edit: Prob not enough but that's the only path I would take with the Frankenboard.

 

[LTC8K6]

If it supports 95W FX-4300, and it does, it should support all the 95W FX chips, I'd think.

This reports support for the 8 core FX chips up to the 8300.

http://www.cpu-upgrade.com/mb-ASRock/N68C-GS_FX.html

 

[SPBHM]

Honestly I wouldn't want to try it if it was myself. If you can get a 95W FX on the cheap, it may be worth it. I'd rather take that cost and put it towards an AM4 motherboard with a Ryzen 2200G or 2400G.

the advantage is that he already have the board, and used DDR3 is cheaper than DDR4
also I would not recommend paying $100 for the FX

but the FX 6300 can be found for a lot less, and I would prefer one over PII which lacks SSE4.1 (which is a problem if you try playing some newer games, and makes slower in some software like HEVC videos)

 

[Abwx]

the board form the OP claims AM3+ support, even includes "FX" in the name, and have bios updates from 2012 (when FX 83xx/63xx were released) with "updated CPU code",

here is a geekbench of someone running the 8350 and 8300 with the same mode of motherboard
http://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/1914550
http://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/6766938

.

FX8300 was released in december 2012 and should have an adequate micro code for this MB, surely the same as the other 83xx, in (rare) reviews the 8300 apparentlyconsume the same as a 8320E and these are well under 95W.
At this point i would had no concern over the power capability of the MB, only about an eventual Bios issue.

https://www.hardware.fr/news/12829/fx-8300-amd.html

A 6300 would be the best fit for your board which is a really lousy board. The mosfets would probably catch fire with an 8 core FX cpu. Even with an 8300 or 8320..

Not at all, on MT and heavy Integer loading the FX6300 consume as much as a 8370E, about 66W for the former and 65W for the latter, the 8320 is out of the question since this is a 125W part and the less well binned of all FXs, along with the 6300 btw...

 

[amd6502]

That motherboard does not support any FX 8-core. Look at the CPU support list, the only FX CPUs it supports are the old Zambezi four cores and the slightly less old Vishera 4-core.

Then there is the Opteron 3380 (OS3380OLW8KHK) that is supported. That is indeed an eight-core at a supposedly 65W. And also dog slow (2.6GHz) and probably very hard to find.

If you can get the Opteron cheap and OC it to match 8300 3.3ghz base clock that will give you decent MT (u may need to get a 100w cooler)

An 8300 (or 6300) is best bet otherwise; any of the -e models are bound not to run as they re later releases. The likely come at a premium not worth it over the slower opteron ($50 https://www.ebay.com/itm/AMD-CPU-OS3365OLW8KHK-Opteron-X8-3365-AM3-2-3GHz-65W/202304446572 )

 

[Fanatical Meat]

Why bother? Seems like a lot of unknowns to make this work.
Why not buy a cheap current chip & motherboard and be done with it?
Or
Is this just one of those projects you want to do just because

 

[NTMBK]

This seems like a recipe for an unstable mess of a system that has subtle power issues and craps out after 6 months. Not worth the pain. A modern quad core i3 or Ryzen 3 would be quicker!

 

[LTC8K6]

I'd go with an FX-8300.

It's obviously not the fastest thing around today, but if you already have the board and the ram and a GPU, then it should do a good job for you.

 

[whm1974]

This seems like a recipe for an unstable mess of a system that has subtle power issues and craps out after 6 months. Not worth the pain. A modern quad core i3 or Ryzen 3 would be quicker!

Or get a Ryzen 2600 or Intel i5-8400 instead.

 

[NTMBK]

I'd go with an FX-8300.

It's obviously not the fastest thing around today, but if you already have the board and the ram and a GPU, then it should do a good job for you.

Except that CPU isn't listed as supported.

 

[LTC8K6]

Except that CPU isn't listed as supported.

Actually, users have reported that it works fine, I posted a link above.

Plus, the FX-4300 is on the support list, so there's no reason the 8300 would not be supported.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

This seems like a recipe for an unstable mess of a system that has subtle power issues and craps out after 6 months. Not worth the pain. A modern quad core i3 or Ryzen 3 would be quicker!

I agree with this, my cheap FX6300 system was a pain in the ass from day one. Constant problems with video, memory slots, USB ports dying and cooling.

 

[whm1974]

I agree with this, my cheap FX6300 system was a pain in the ass from day one. Constant problems with video, memory slots, USB ports dying and cooling.

Friends don't let friends buy cheap ass motherboards.

 

[NTMBK]

Actually, users have reported that it works fine, I posted a link above.

Plus, the FX-4300 is on the support list, so there's no reason the 8300 would not be supported.

Great, some users managed to get it to not blue screen for at least 20 minutes. I'm sure that it won't have any long term problems at all, and that random internet users definitely know more than ASRock's electrical engineers.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

Friends don't let friends buy cheap ass motherboards.

I know, I went cheap & didn’t seek AT advice. Big mistake.


Classic thing about it was I went amd for wife’s web/Facebook machine to save around $75.00. After all the various replament parts I spent approximately $125.00.
I ended up spending $50 more than starting with a proper i3 machine.

I replaced the crappy board with an Asus board, video crapped out on that one too, plus it had the super irritating thing on the box that stated 1080p video. I just assumed that would be DVI or HDMI. Nope it was analog only!
Crap like that should not be tolerated by amd. I know amd doesn’t make the board but they could have standards, like if you are going to use our logo you need to at minimum have DVI