yeah I have the 8+2 and a temperature software controlled fan mounted over the VRMs-- haven't had any VRM temp throttling since the fan upgrade. I am correcting my sig
Okay, so it is the ud3p. Yeah you're covered for anything that isn't a 9590/9370. Theoretically I think the board could handle one of those, but the BIOS support isn't there.
oh, ok. interesting. I just thought that basically all 8350s could hit 5ghz?
Not really, no. 8350s are all over the map. You might get a golden chip, you might not.
The "chips to get" are 8370, 8370e, 8320e, and (for those that want them) wk29 2014 9590s (and later). There were a lot of people who thought the 8310 would do better than the 8320e since it had the same TDP with higher base clocks, but limited sampling suggests that the 8310 has inferior voltage scaling past 4-4.3 GHz.
8370e,8370, 8320e and 8310 all should be vishera-k
I haven't seen the term "vishera-k" used but I think I know what you're getting at. I have my doubts about the 8310. I could be wrong though.
I know that, I ... think I was imprecisely asking about what details of the e-process chips lead to them physically being better
The short answer to that inquiriy is that I don't exactly know. The long answer is full of assumptions.
Basically, you've got two groups of Vishera chips now (at least): pre 8370 and post 8370. When the 8370 hit, we also saw:
8370e
8320e
8310 (new version; OEM chips with this name but higher TDP have showed up before)
8300 (new version; see 8310)
Some 9590s that are better than older 9590s but have the same stock settings
It really isn't clear whether or not AMD kept cranking out 8320s, 8350s, 9370s, 63xx, and 43xx chips after they started turning out the above processors. My instincts are telling me that they stopped making those, or cut down on the production runs.
What differentiates the "new" Vishera chips is that GF seems to have tweaked the 32nm process for lower power consumption overall, and in some cases, higher clockspeed potential. It is not clear if all these "new" chips are coming off the same wafers or if they have different performance tweaks based on the desired end product. I lean towards the latter, though I have no proof.
If I am correct, then AMD gets the "better" 9590s and 8370s off wafers from production runs that do not emphasize low-leakage characteristics, and they get the 8320Es and 8370Es from production runs that do emphasize low-leakage characteristics. If I am not correct, then all four chips come from the same production runs.
It is also my assumption that the 8310 and 8300 do not come from wafers that benefit from GF's recent improvements to the 32nm process, and that they are excess inventory of 8320s or 8350s that have been rebadged and sold as OEM chips with lower clockspeeds and lower TDPs.
The net effect of these "new" chips is basically this:
The 8300 and 8310 seem to fare about as well as 8320s have clasically fared. You may get a lucky chip, but you may also crap out in the 4.5-4.7 GHz range.
The 8320e and 8370e overall outperform the average 8350 in terms of maximum overclock on air/water and in terms of voltage at a given clockspeed. 8370e chips have validated on water @ 5.7 GHz, which is pretty sick. There are people out there running 5 GHz 8320es with ~1.44-1.46v vcore. It still takes a monster board to pull off this trick, and temps on these chips are still difficult to control sometimes, but overall power draw seems to be a lot lower than your typical older 9370/9590 and a bit lower than a lucky 8350 that can do the same thing.
The 8370 is argued by some to be the better chip (compared to the 8730e) past 5 GHz no matter what the cooling, and it is almost undisputed to be better for LN2 runs.
What the "new" 9590 brings to the table is mostly unclear, though it seems these things just do the same clocks as the old ones with less voltage and less power draw. They are still binned as high-leakage parts, so they will still suck up more juice than other FX chips at the same vcore and clockspeed. Whether the 8370e, 8370, or "new" 9590 makes for the ideal clockspeed champion of Visheras is a matter for some debate. Given Vishera's age, it is unlikely that many people really care about that anymore.
tl;dr the 32nm process tweaks have breathed a little bit of new life into AMD's stangant FX lineup. My guess is the 8310 and 8300 simply don't benefit from that, though again, I could be wrong. It could really be that the 8300 and 8310 are just downbins and that all the "new" Visheras are coming from the same wafers, but given the considerable differences in leakage characteristics between, say the 8320e and the new gen 9590s, I have my doubts about there being a common source for all these processors.
Facebook
Twitter