FX-60 Overclock Thread

Borgschulze said:
Us Canadians aren't greedy price gougers that's all :)
Click to expand...

www.pccanada.com is, from my personnal experience, the best place in Canada to shop online. Their prices are always lower than everyone else, and no price gouging. Look, AMD is expected to lower their prices on the 23th of this months. The next day or two, pccanada should have their prices right on track with AMD price list. This is what they did last time.

Oh, for everyone searching for an Asus A8N32-SLI Deluxe, they have them in stock at 245$CAN, which is 209$US these days.

I do not work for them, don't worry, but I like to salute the efforts of a fair and honest company.

Para
 
3 cpumarks ran simultaneously @ 3.5Gig..

screenshot1635xa.jpg


screenshot1649bw.jpg


8 with stock speed..

screenshot1670gy.jpg
 
Man I want a FX60 so bad as well, I would have plenty of fun OCing it as well.
 
I'm finding that small bumps in voltage cause massive heat spikes in this CPU - and I read that its a similar situation with other AMD dual core options.

At 2.8ghz i must raise the vcore to 1.425 to have the box boot completely. Lower vcore settings will boot to windows then bsod. - I'm on an Asus A8N SLI Premium - At 1.425 I can play any game without issue until the temps rise above 72C and I get shut down. At first I thought the crashes were from memory problems as I noted above but I recorded temperature settings in Asus probe and couldnt believe the temps were going that high. I'm currently using a Zalman Al-Cu flower cpu cooler, and it would appear that it is not up to the task. I have just ordered the newish Zalman 9900 (i think) to allow some extra cooling as I am not really interested in the extra effort watercooling entails, although I am not writing that method off completely.

At stock speeds & votage the CPU idles at ~42 and gets up to the high 50s dependnig on ambient temps under load. At 2.8 & 1.425 the cpu idles at 48-49 and hits the 73 degree barrier under load. Interestingly, I can play Quake 4 for hours on end at 2.8 and stay well within tolerance, but HL2: Lost Coast will crash my box by the time I get to the church. Do these temps make sense?
 
makes sense to me. isnt a quake 4 a gpu limited game while HL and other source games CPU limited?
 
Hi strikeout. Yeah, youre exactly right about the 2 games, but the high end temp for the FX-60 seems absurdly easy to get to. My concern is my bios misreporting temperatures; I shouldve been more clear in my post.
 
I'm definetly considering getting one of these. More due to the need of a dual core for multitasking than for superb gaming performance. But its been my experience that if you get the high end when its fresh, it will last you longer before you feel the need to upgrade. I know that with the nice OC's people have been getting, if for some reason I need to squeeze a few more months out of my CPU, I can OC the thing until I can upgrade to the next big thing.

I know the AM2 is due out within a few months, but I dont think it will be so much of a leap in performance that a s939 build right now wouldn't be worth it.

Very nice OC's everyone. :cool:
 
not worth it plain and simple

my 165 at 2.7Ghz outperforms it at stock for roughly $900-1000 less, and the overclocks on those top end CPU's are minimal unless you have phase, which as you have seen is not so great either

those are for them that have cash to throw around
 
a) how do you get the 165 for $100 or free?

b) there is no stock cpu that outperforms the FX-60. If I am wrong, please illuminate me.

c) the FX series is for people that want the performance out of the box. I do make good money and do not want to waste too much of my time risking the purchase of a lower clocked part or fiddling with settings to get to the same performance level.

Nice thread crap.
 
Opie said:
a) how do you get the 165 for $100 or free?

b) there is no stock cpu that outperforms the FX-60. If I am wrong, please illuminate me.

c) the FX series is for people that want the performance out of the box. I do make good money and do not want to waste too much of my time risking the purchase of a lower clocked part or fiddling with settings to get to the same performance level.

Nice thread crap.
Click to expand...

Get 2 of these :) dual "core" (2 cpus though) at 2.8
Opteron 254
 
habitual geek said:
not worth it plain and simple

my 165 at 2.7Ghz outperforms it at stock for roughly $900-1000 less, and the overclocks on those top end CPU's are minimal unless you have phase, which as you have seen is not so great either

those are for them that have cash to throw around
Click to expand...

3.6Ghz on a SS is pretty amazing for a 2.6Ghz FX. and where can you can an Opty for $100 or free?
 
Opie said:
a) how do you get the 165 for $100 or free?

b) there is no stock cpu that outperforms the FX-60. If I am wrong, please illuminate me.

c) the FX series is for people that want the performance out of the box. I do make good money and do not want to waste too much of my time risking the purchase of a lower clocked part or fiddling with settings to get to the same performance level.
Click to expand...


a)
FX-60 at Monarch = $1159, Newegg = $1199, ZZF = $1088, Tigerdirect = $1199 = $1161 average

Opty 165 at Monarch = $317, Newegg = $355, ZZF = $333, Tigerdirect = $349 = $338

difference = $823

okay, i didnt do the exact math the first time, excuse me, okay it's only 823 cheaper on average.....big deal, thats still way too much, you will never get $823 of performance out of it, so good luck

b) i said my Opty 165 @ 2.7Ghz outperforms it, for a fraction of the cost, yes you can overclock a FX-60, but because of it's price you will never get a return on the investment, consider the guy that doesn't overclock and spends $1100 on this CPU, and then me who spends $330 and overclocks, there's much larger value because i could buy three of these basically for the price of that one FX-60

c) theres no risk in overclocking unless you are an imbasil and just "overclock it to the MAX!!!" like a dummy without knowing what you are doing, overclocking is almost safe for a dummy these days

Opie said:
Nice thread crap.
Click to expand...

i suppose a differing view is a thread crap, but as long as they agree with you it's not......
 
habitual geek said:
b) i said my Opty 165 @ 2.7Ghz outperforms it, for a fraction of the cost, yes you can overclock a FX-60, but because of it's price you will never get a return on the investment, consider the guy that doesn't overclock and spends $1100 on this CPU, and then me who spends $330 and overclocks, there's much larger value because i could buy three of these basically for the price of that one FX-60
Click to expand...
there's the flaw in your logic. a bunch of the guys who have the money to buy the fx-60's actually go through 3-4 of them and sell all but the best clocking one ;)
 
(cf)Eclipse said:
there's the flaw in your logic. a bunch of the guys who have the money to buy the fx-60's actually go through 3-4 of them and sell all but the best clocking one ;)
Click to expand...


thats not a flaw in my logic, my logic makes perfect sense, thats a flaw in their pockets....lol :cool:
 
"b) i said my Opty 165 @ 2.7Ghz outperforms it, for a fraction of the cost, yes you can overclock a FX-60, but because of it's price you will never get a return on the investment, consider the guy that doesn't overclock and spends $1100 on this CPU, and then me who spends $330 and overclocks, there's much larger value because i could buy three of these basically for the price of that one FX-60"
Click to expand...

You said your Opty at stock at 2.7 outperformed it to which I called BS. I'd rather have a chip that was likely able to do 3ghz than one I was hoping would hit 2.6.



"i suppose a differing view is a thread crap, but as long as they agree with you it's not......"
Click to expand...

This is a thread about overclocking the FX-60, not about how smart you are for your thrifty buying habits. Re-read the title.
 
Opie said:
You said your Opty at stock at 2.7 outperformed it to which I called BS. I'd rather have a chip that was likely able to do 3ghz than one I was hoping would hit 2.6.
Click to expand...

you called BS.........you have no clue, FX-60 is exactly the same chip as the 165 @ 2.7Ghz with two distinct differences, the FX-60 runs 2.6Ghz, and the FX-60 has an unlocked multi, thats it, the FX's aren't magical in any other way, the only reason they are so nice is because of the unlocked multi



Opie said:
This is a thread about overclocking the FX-60, not about how smart you are for your thrifty buying habits. Re-read the title.
Click to expand...

the discussion for posts before mine was about the cost of the chip and the debate over the cost and such....dont go there OPIE
 
Guys...chill out :) Yes, its the same core with opty X2...But it was speed binned higher thus it can run 2.8/2.9G with stock voltage. Actually it can be hard coded to FX62 only without 940 pins for AM2.
Its so much fun to game and rip dvd and download at the same time :)
Also, when it scales to 3.3Ghz....everything run so damn fast.
 
centvalny said:
Guys...chill out :) Yes, its the same core with opty X2...But it was speed binned higher thus it can run 2.8/2.9G with stock voltage. Actually it can be hard coded to FX62 only without 940 pins for AM2.
Its so much fun to game and rip dvd and download at the same time :)
Also, when it scales to 3.3Ghz....everything run so damn fast.
Click to expand...

agreed, its a great chip, i just cant see spending that much on one when near similiar performance can be gotten so much cheaper, thats all i am saying
:D
 
habitual geek said:
you called BS.........you have no clue, FX-60 is exactly the same chip as the 165 @ 2.7Ghz with two distinct differences, the FX-60 runs 2.6Ghz, and the FX-60 has an unlocked multi, thats it, the FX's aren't magical in any other way, the only reason they are so nice is because of the unlocked multi



the discussion for posts before mine was about the cost of the chip and the debate over the cost and such....dont go there OPIE
Click to expand...


Way to go geek. You judge with no idea as to what youre talking about. Your chip is stock 2.2, not 2.7, but you've exaggerated every point you've tried to make so far, so why stop now. I know what I bought, and I know what you bought. You bought the same chip I did binned for 2.2. You took as risk that it would oc to 2.7; not all do and some go higher. I didn't take the risk and I run at 2.8 with no effort. It cost more, so what. I'll be able to resell it in 6 months for at least 75% of what I paid for it; that pattern has held true for every FX chip I've owned: investments a wash and mine's still faster so :p
 
You guys just never stop with the god damn comparisons between your beloved Opterons and the FX series right? How many times do you have to be told that just because you are cheap/poor and have to buy a low end chip and then overclock does not mean that the FX series is a bad choice for everyone.

Many people look for top performance and don't care about money. Your Opteron 165 that you got for 290 that overclocks to 2.7ghz is great. Good for you. But there are people that are richer/will pay for the extra performance that will get the FX-60 and oc it to 3.3ghz which is 600mhz than you.

Please. Stfu. Give the OP some useful information about the FX-60, don't bring your own stories of thrift and overclocking success in here, perhaps you guys should start a thread titled... "The Opteron overclocking database and how great a value these chips are."
 
As expected:( ..It wont post @..

picture0680ld.jpg


4 leds on....no go..

picture0690zv.jpg


No problem @....

picture0714sk.jpg


Well, back to square one....search for the golden ones continue;)
 
Opie said:
Way to go geek. You judge with no idea as to what youre talking about. Your chip is stock 2.2, not 2.7, but you've exaggerated every point you've tried to make so far, so why stop now. I know what I bought, and I know what you bought. You bought the same chip I did binned for 2.2. You took as risk that it would oc to 2.7; not all do and some go higher. I didn't take the risk and I run at 2.8 with no effort. It cost more, so what. I'll be able to resell it in 6 months for at least 75% of what I paid for it; that pattern has held true for every FX chip I've owned: investments a wash and mine's still faster so :p
Click to expand...

well, just because it needs to be said, the Opty165 is stock 1.8Ghz, running 2.7Ghz now, the Opty150 was stock 2.4Ghz, was running 2.8Ghz, do your homework. I'm done.

Nice work Cent!! SOrry about the side tracking, I'm done with that discussion......
 
damn 3.5?! That's freaking insane... If only I could skip one car payment -=)

GL to everyone on these, I'm hoping to see some big numbers!
 
centvalny said:
No problem @....

picture0714sk.jpg


Well, back to square one....search for the golden ones continue;)
Click to expand...
i dunno... that's better than all the fx-60's cold bugs i've seen so far added together ;)
 
Conclusion :) ....This is the best AMD cpu for now. Regardles of oc it or not, it has staggering power to do just about any application..... X2 :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top