Games crash at splash screen with 8120.

You think that AMD will be able to work around whatever is causing the crashing since there's a lot of people reporting the same thing? Or are they expecting the software companies to alter what they are doing to work around the processor? I hope it's a bug that can be patched out with a new bios or something.

I'll run those stress tests tonight. About to pawn some noobs with my new found power!
 
cageymaru said:
You think that AMD will be able to work around whatever is causing the crashing since there's a lot of people reporting the same thing? Or are they expecting the software companies to alter what they are doing to work around the processor? I hope it's a bug that can be patched out with a new bios or something.

I'll run those stress tests tonight. About to pawn some noobs with my new found power!
Click to expand...

Well, that I know of, only Shogun 2 has been proven to be a consistent/reproducible problem, on bulldozer - I haven't heard of any other games or applications having issues, like you're having. I mean, you're having problems in games I can run perfectly fine, with the same CPU, so that's why I think you're having other, deeper issues.

Definitely do the tests...If memtest86 fails, then test 1 module at a time...If they both fail, try sticking your old CPU back in and test them again. If it passes that way, then the memory controller on your new CPU is probably bad.

I know its all a massive pain in the arse, but unfortunately, these things happen :(
 
wow this sounds like when AMD first released mobos for the FX processor back in the day. Trust me i used to be a fan boy for amd now im not.. I have stuck with my q9550 at 3.61 for 3 years. Very happy.. AMD is way behind.. I am sure if intel wanted to right now they would put AMD out of business . But they wont due to the fact that they would become a monopoly. Well enjoy you got what you deserved a processor thats almost as fast as a core i5 with issues
 
Has nothing to do with being a fanboy. Why does it always have to come to that?

Fine. I will explain the whole situation. My dad died earlier this year and left me a decent insurance claim, and all of his things. So I decided a computer upgrade would be a nice thing to enjoy, in his memory, since we both shared a hobby in computers. He had just built a new Athlon II based system, in January, as that is what best met his needs and budget. So by inheriting his computer, and already owning a PII 945, it made sense to just stick to AMD; get a new mobo/CPU/RAM and then be able to spawn 2 additional computers from spare parts. When I bought this motherboard, I didn't even know about bulldozer. After it arrived, however, it dawned on me that AM3+ was new, and so was 990fx - previously I was more or less bankrupt, so hadn't been keeping up with the times on new tech. When I discovered bulldozer, it made my decision seem even better, by having an upgrade path.

Fast forward, bulldozer launches and is disappointing. Well, I already have the motherboard and having another CPU around never hurts, even if its not that great. So I got one, to try it out and have a new toy to tinker with. It is definitely faster for my workloads than the 1100t was. With the 4.5ghz overclock, its matching the 1100t's stock speeds, in single/lightly threaded workloads, and outright decimates it in multithreaded workloads. So I'm happy with the chip, overall.

There you go. Happy now? Not everything boils down to just being a f*$#*ng fanboy. Geeze.

For the OP, he upgraded from a 555 - this is most certainly an upgrade in every way, especially with an overclock.

Good grapes, people. Get over it.

EDIT: also, correct me if I'm wrong, but Intel can't do anything to AMD, unless they want to loose x86-64. They purchase licenses for that from AMD, as far as I know.
 
Sorry to hear about you losing your dad...just wanted to inject a bit of humanity in this thread.
The only thing that concerns me with overclocking the FX processors is the power drain seems very high much more than I would have expected.
 
Mr Spocko said:
Sorry to hear about you losing your dad...just wanted to inject a bit of humanity in this thread.
The only thing that concerns me with overclocking the FX processors is the power drain seems very high much more than I would have expected.
Click to expand...

Thank you...And yes, the power draw is pretty extreme, but really not much worse (if any) than the 1100t was, overclocked. But I mean, at the end of the month, will it really make a huge impact in your power bill? Idk for sure yet - haven't seen it, but I kind of doubt it. Computer is about all I run, anyway.

My whole point in posting that, though, was just to prove a point: not everything boils down to fanboyism. I'm sick of people insulting my intelligence over it, when I'm just trying to help somebody. Unfortunately for AMD, only people in very rare circumstances are going to see any value in the chip...They're not going to sell many. I would never recommend this CPU to a new system builder or anybody who's worried about power consumption.

For me, that leaves the strain on the power circuits of my mobo, which....well....we'll see how it goes.

EDIT: I should note, however, that Cool N quiet actually works well, even with an overclock. I know it flies in the face of what people would normally say, "Turn that straight off", but decided to try it...Lo and behold, it scales back my voltage and clock speeds, all the way down to 1.8ghz @ 1.0v, when just doing light weight stuff, like browsing/chatting and clocks up to my full OC and voltage when I load on it. So, that's a good option, imo, to counteract the wear and tear of the cpu/mobo and save some on my power bill, too.
 
Last edited:
i like how everyone talks about power consumption. Any one who has a overclocked first gen I7 pulls more power than bulldozer does.

its not as efficient as sandy bridge by any means, but its more efficient than the first gen core processor.

Also, if you talk about TOTAL power used by your computer, monitor, stereo. Who cares about 60-200watts more juice. Turn out the light on the other side of the room for a month and blam, you have the same power bill.

for the original poster, with as many crashes as your experiencing across multiple games, you have to have some other problem. I would check the ram by doing some mem tests, perhaps you have a bios setting which is set incorrectly. Update to the latest bios if haven't already for your motherboard. Use Cpu-id hardware monitor and check for voltage problems, cpu temps, and what not.
 
ebduncan said:
i like how everyone talks about power consumption. Any one who has a overclocked first gen I7 pulls more power than bulldozer does..
Click to expand...

Yea, I guess it really isn't any worse than processors past (or even gulftown, for that matter), but they are a direct competitor to Intel, so that's why people are irritated by it - SB delivers some amazing performance for the power draw. That eases up strain on PSU requirements, possibly saving you a bit of money, and motherboard, saving some wear and tear...Though, mid and high end AMD motherboards ideally should have been built up with plenty of beefiness to handle it, anyway.

And I agree...Turning off a couple of lights (or replace them with florescent/LED bulbs) would make back what you loose on the CPU, anyway...So really, its just not a huge deal. Also, as I said, I'm surprised at how well cool n quiet actually works with an overclock; even more savings.
 
ebduncan said:
i like how everyone talks about power consumption. Any one who has a overclocked first gen I7 pulls more power than bulldozer does.

its not as efficient as sandy bridge by any means, but its more efficient than the first gen core processor.

Also, if you talk about TOTAL power used by your computer, monitor, stereo. Who cares about 60-200watts more juice. Turn out the light on the other side of the room for a month and blam, you have the same power bill.

for the original poster, with as many crashes as your experiencing across multiple games, you have to have some other problem. I would check the ram by doing some mem tests, perhaps you have a bios setting which is set incorrectly. Update to the latest bios if haven't already for your motherboard. Use Cpu-id hardware monitor and check for voltage problems, cpu temps, and what not.
Click to expand...
An overclocked Bulldozer uses about 200-300 watts more power under load than a Sandy Bridge. Over the time someone will own this processor that actually adds up to a decent amount of money. When you factor in the cost of that power consumption over a few years you could do a lot better in terms of bang for your buck by going with Intel. You're probably looking at $25-50 a year depending on usage. Over the duration of owning the CPU you're most likely looking at least $100 in added costs by owning an overclocked BD over a Sandy Bridge. It's the difference between owning a 2500k and a 2600k. If you already had a compatible platform I can see the desire to go to Bulldozer I suppose, but if someone is looking to build with a new motherboard anyway I don't see the reason to go with such a power hungry, buggy processor when there are better options available for your money.
 
sheesh721 said:
An overclocked Bulldozer uses about 200-300 watts more power under load than a Sandy Bridge.
Click to expand...

I've read most (if not all) of the reviews and I don't see where people are getting this outlandish claim of 200-300 watts MORE power than sandy bridge (so many people saying it - its ridiculous)... It's like 100-150 watts additional total system power MAX vs SB and virtually none vs. previous gen i7 and Phenom II. Its going to be, at absolute most, $1-3/mo extra in your power bill (again, depending on how often and hard you run your system). Additionally, cool n quiet, as I've already stated, works very well, even with an over clock, so its only when I'm gaming or doing other heavily taxing tasks, does my consumption go up that high.

If a CPU was drawing 200-300 watts alone, it would burn up in seconds. Sure an overclock will increase it, but it will be increased just the same on any overclocked CPU, and result in the same difference between the BD vs SB, give or take a bit, since overclocking power consumption is typically non-linear

Sources:
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2011/10/11/amd_bulldozer_fx8150_desktop_performance_review/9
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4955/the-bulldozer-review-amd-fx8150-tested/9
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/fx-8150-zambezi-bulldozer-990fx,3043-22.html

I could list more, but I think you get the point.
 
statikregimen said:
I've read most (if not all) of the reviews and I don't see where people are getting this outlandish claim of 200-300 watts MORE power than sandy bridge (so many people saying it - its ridiculous)...
Click to expand...

I can understand the confusion. The point I was making was that you had to overclock as you said because the performance sucked. My point was that under load an overclocked SB uses 200-300 watts more than a Sandy Bridge stock. I know I didn't specify the SB would be stock, but I thought it was implied.


Under load:
2500k - 168
OC FX8120 - 442
Difference of 274 watts

2600k 181
OC FX8150 - 452
Difference of 271 watts

If I had the option of a 2600k or an overclocked Bulldozer I would take the Sandy Bridge every day of the week. And the added power consumption even at stock levels is something that should be taken into consideration when buying a CPU. The added power costs over the lifetime of the CPU will ultimately increase the cost of Bulldozer fairly significantly in terms of percentage of cost.
 
Yea, if you compare stock to OC, that's different, but you'd have to pull your data from different review sites to get those numbers (as far as I know, anyway...you didn't supply any sources for your information), which could skew your figures, if the GPUs are vastly different or the PSUs are less efficient in one build than the other. Anyway, you didn't really make it clear :p

Just the same, i'd still be overclcocking the sandy bridge, so power wise, still would most likely be within the 100-150 watts tolerance I mentioned. And yes, performance would be awesome compared to BD, either way.

If SB made sense, when I built this computer, I would have gone that rout, but it didn't, considering the ability to spawn 2 additional computers, simply by purchasing new mobo/ram/cpu, sticking with AMD. BD is more just a toy, at this point - i built this computer with the 1100t in mind, as I said earlier on.

Anyway, we're getting way off topic here.

OP, let us know how your mem tests and everything pans out... I just can't think of anything else to try, at this point.
 
I'm extremely relieved to see that I'm not the only one having these problems. I have an fx8150 with Gigabyte 990fx UD3 motherboard. While I was running BIOS version F4, I could get Deus Ex to run, but it was performing pretty bad like described in other posts. The processor was bottlenecking my videocard to under 30% which isn't usually supposed to happen and it looked like it was only using one core. My other games seemed fine. When I upgraded my BIOS to version F5, The processor felt like it performed much better, but Deus Ex and Shogun 2(both on steam) would crash my computer and reboot it when I tried to launch them. Dirt3(also on steam) and Starcraft 2 would run just fine.

So now I'm stuck sacrificing performance for stability by using version F4. Since this issue is more widespread that I thought, it sounds like there's a fix coming, we'll just have to see where it comes from.
 
ebduncan said:
For the original poster, with as many crashes as your experiencing across multiple games, you have to have some other problem. I would check the ram by doing some mem tests, perhaps you have a bios setting which is set incorrectly. Update to the latest bios if haven't already for your motherboard. Use Cpu-id hardware monitor and check for voltage problems, cpu temps, and what not.
Click to expand...

Voltage is fine. Bios is up to date. Going to set the memtest to run tomorrow before I leave to do some things.

I have over 200 Steam games not counting free ones ,and as far as I can tell only the SteamWorks games have this problem. I haven't tried them all naturally as I just reinstalled my PC and need to download the bulk of them. I just finished playing GTA IV, BF:BC2, F1 2011, Driver: San Francisco, Orcs Must Die, Dragon Age Origins, Dungeon Siege 3, Dead Island, Hard Reset, L4D2, Metro 2033, Gatling Gears, and Witcher 2 yesterday or today without a sign of a hiccup. They run absolutely perfectly.

The "bad" games listed in the OP, I can't get past the initial loading screen. Hit "Play" in Steam, watch little loading box come up, computer automatically restarts. In Deus Ex: HR I have the choice in Steam to load the game or the options menu. If I try to do the options menu it restarts the PC. Naturally the game does the same.

Only other anomaly I can think of is that some of my really old Dvd's that I probably ripped 10 years ago have jerky playback. But back then you had to use 15 programs / steps to rip a dvd and countless codecs, so I don't know if that's related or not. Some flash based videos do the same when you stream them off websites (not youtube). But most of them play just fine.
 
Flex said:
I'm extremely relieved to see that I'm not the only one having these problems. I have an fx8150 with Gigabyte 990fx UD3 motherboard. While I was running BIOS version F4, I could get Deus Ex to run, but it was performing pretty bad like described in other posts. The processor was bottlenecking my videocard to under 30% which isn't usually supposed to happen and it looked like it was only using one core. My other games seemed fine. When I upgraded my BIOS to version F5, The processor felt like it performed much better, but Deus Ex and Shogun 2(both on steam) would crash my computer and reboot it when I tried to launch them. Dirt3(also on steam) and Starcraft 2 would run just fine.

So now I'm stuck sacrificing performance for stability by using version F4. Since this issue is more widespread that I thought, it sounds like there's a fix coming, we'll just have to see where it comes from.
Click to expand...

I haven't tried the older bios from Asus; never crossed my mind! I'll try that now.

Thx!
 
statikregimen said:
Yea, if you compare stock to OC, that's different, but you'd have to pull your data from different review sites to get those numbers (as far as I know, anyway...you didn't supply any sources for your information), which could skew your figures, if the GPUs are vastly different or the PSUs are less efficient in one build than the other. Anyway, you didn't really make it clear :p
Click to expand...
The source was HardOCP.

Just the same, i'd still be overclcocking the sandy bridge, so power wise, still would most likely be within the 100-150 watts tolerance I mentioned. And yes, performance would be awesome compared to BD, either way.
Click to expand...
Again, 100-150 watts adds up over the lifetime of the processor. These processors are beasts and they continue to insult you after you overpay for them with the added costs to run them over the competition. If you already have a mobo setup I could understand going with a BD. But for someone looking to buy fresh with a MB/CPU/RAM I just don't see any reasonable environment where BD is feasible over the competition at the prices they charge. Due to the power consumption and every else that is wrong with this chips, even if they dropped the price $50 it wouldn't make sense to buy it over Sandy Bridge in its current status. AMD set up hopes of grandeur and they failed massively to deliver. They should have marketed BD as a dual/quad core to compete with Core i3/i5 and left it at that. Instead they let everyone get their hopes up that it would be an Intel killer when clearly it doesn't even kill their own previous architecture.
 
Flex said:
I'm extremely relieved to see that I'm not the only one having these problems. I have an fx8150 with Gigabyte 990fx UD3 motherboard. While I was running BIOS version F4, I could get Deus Ex to run, but it was performing pretty bad like described in other posts. The processor was bottlenecking my videocard to under 30% which isn't usually supposed to happen and it looked like it was only using one core. My other games seemed fine. When I upgraded my BIOS to version F5, The processor felt like it performed much better, but Deus Ex and Shogun 2(both on steam) would crash my computer and reboot it when I tried to launch them. Dirt3(also on steam) and Starcraft 2 would run just fine.

So now I'm stuck sacrificing performance for stability by using version F4. Since this issue is more widespread that I thought, it sounds like there's a fix coming, we'll just have to see where it comes from.
Click to expand...

Wow, you're actually the first person I've seen that shared my exact issue with DX:HR...most people just said it crashed, while I'm looking at the few reviews that tested the game, showing it ran fine... What gives?

MSI released their 11.5 bios for the 990fxa-gd80 about a week before the chips launched and nothing since...I hope they don't do the same thing, where the next bios just causes it to crash. But i guess, either way, the game is unplayable.

Guess now, we just wait :(

EDIT: whoops I should have multiquoted that...meant to respond to this as well:

sheesh721 said:
The source was HardOCP.


Again, 100-150 watts adds up over the lifetime of the processor. These processors are beasts and they continue to insult you after you overpay for them with the added costs to run them over the competition. If you already have a mobo setup I could understand going with a BD. But for someone looking to buy fresh with a MB/CPU/RAM I just don't see any reasonable environment where BD is feasible over the competition at the prices they charge. Due to the power consumption and every else that is wrong with this chips, even if they dropped the price $50 it wouldn't make sense to buy it over Sandy Bridge in its current status. AMD set up hopes of grandeur and they failed massively to deliver. They should have marketed BD as a dual/quad core to compete with Core i3/i5 and left it at that. Instead they let everyone get their hopes up that it would be an Intel killer when clearly it doesn't even kill their own previous architecture.
Click to expand...

Yes, i fully agree, for a brand new system, no way one should choose BD over sandy bridge (or even Phenom II, for that matter). Like I said, though, you can turn on cool n quiet, which will make back some of the difference and is fully stable/functional even with an overclock (much to my surprise) but still, your point is taken...over time, they cost more....
 
Last edited:
I went over to the Asus website and grabbed the 0402 bios. It's not compatible with Bulldozer it seems, and I had to reinstall the 555 BE to get the board to post. Would be nice if Asus labeled it as so. :( But I can play my SteamWorks games again! :)

This 555 BE has really bad cores that no amount of voltage can cure. So I wonder if it's better to stay as a dual core that runs everything slower, or put the 8120 back in and not be able to play certain games. Decisions... Decisions...
 
So Im running into a similar issue with Duke Forever. Everything else I've thrown at it including Batman Arkham Asylum, TF2, Alice, Rage, and BF BC2 are stable, I cant reproduce the issue with any other titles. Spalsh screen comes up and I get a hard freeze with the blue screen and error you guys are describing. I have the beta 1.47 bios on my Asrock Fatal1ty 990fx mobo, also tried going back to the official 1.30. I've tried nvidia and ATi video cards, I'm out of ideas at this point. I may give Win8 a run later and see if its a scheduler issue. Any chance Kyle you can point the folks at AMD youre interviewing to this thread? Seems to be a common issue that people are getting these crashes, I'd be curious if they're aware and working on either a microcode update or a Windows Patch of some sort. Thanks!

System hardware:
ASRock 990FX Fatal1ty
AMD FX 8120
2x 4gb GSKILL Sniper 1866 (also tried Corsair 1333 DDR3 Ram)
Windows 7 x64
4870x2 / GTX 570 / 4850
PC Power & Cooling Silencer 750W.
 
cageymaru said:
I went over to the Asus website and grabbed the 0402 bios. It's not compatible with Bulldozer it seems, and I had to reinstall the 555 BE to get the board to post. Would be nice if Asus labeled it as so. :( But I can play my SteamWorks games again! :)

This 555 BE has really bad cores that no amount of voltage can cure. So I wonder if it's better to stay as a dual core that runs everything slower, or put the 8120 back in and not be able to play certain games. Decisions... Decisions...
Click to expand...

Sell 555 BE 8120 990FX and get Z68+2500K from microcenter if they still run 2500K deals.
Problem solved you will have fast CPU which works :D
 
I wish I had a digital camera. My 830 Stacker case obviously needs more fans because Bulldozer @4000 melted the labels off my 460's. I hope I never have to RMA them as I don't know how to explain warped labels. LOL! The effing heat spreaders on my Corsair ram keep falling off! :)

Oh and if anyone dreams of Bulldozer, make sure you get a real cpu cooler. This poor H50 stands no chance against my 8120. It's on the 555 BE and it's not even warm, but on the 8120 I run the A/C as my PC heats my bedroom, living room, and the kitchen. Down the road some people are burning oak logs in their fireplace and I'm running the A/C. :)
 
Try booting with /onecpu in the boot.ini file. I have an old game that only runs like that.
 
I wish I had a digital camera. My 830 Stacker case obviously needs more fans because Bulldozer @4000 melted the labels off my 460's. I hope I never have to RMA them as I don't know how to explain warped labels. LOL! The effing heat spreaders on my Corsair ram keep falling off!

Oh and if anyone dreams of Bulldozer, make sure you get a real cpu cooler. This poor H50 stands no chance against my 8120. It's on the 555 BE and it's not even warm, but on the 8120 I run the A/C as my PC heats my bedroom, living room, and the kitchen. Down the road some people are burning oak logs in their fireplace and I'm running the A/C.
Click to expand...


ummm it should not be running that so, to the point where your melting other things. perhaps you do have a bad cpu.
 
Just fired an email off to AMD support discussing the issue. I let them know its not just myself experiencing it and sent them a link to this thread, I also explained I dont particularly want to RMA due to the fact that its now backordered everywhere and ill be without a pc while they replace it. Im hoping the customer service at AMD is good :( This is a little frustrating I've already invested way too much time for what appears to be an OS issue with their processor. Has anyone tried Win8 to see if it resolves? The weird thing is if i disable 1 core per module, the game launches, but runs slowly and eventually crashes to the same bluescreen as with 8 cores enabled at the splash screen. (Duke Forever is the only title I have thats crashing although I havent tried Fear 3 yet).
 
ebduncan said:
ummm it should not be running that so, to the point where your melting other things. perhaps you do have a bad cpu.
Click to expand...

I was running it at 1.4125 volts if I remember right. So you didn't have heat issues? My radiator on my H50 was red hot the entire time at 4000. I have a Corsair air cooler here also and it was worse. I didn't try the stock AMD cooler although it does look beefy in hindsight.
 
cageymaru said:
I was running it at 1.4125 volts if I remember right. So you didn't have heat issues? My radiator on my H50 was red hot the entire time at 4000. I have a Corsair air cooler here also and it was worse. I didn't try the stock AMD cooler although it does look beefy in hindsight.
Click to expand...

Do you have a push / pull setup with the h50? I've got an H60 on mine and its not having heat issues, I'm not overclocked but I think Im loading in the neighborhood of 42c with 8 threads in prime.
 
DPGX said:
Do you have a push / pull setup with the h50? I've got an H60 on mine and its not having heat issues, I'm not overclocked but I think Im loading in the neighborhood of 42c with 8 threads in prime.
Click to expand...

Push pull and load @4000 is 56c following Corsair recommended mounting method with air blowing into the case. Using NoctuaNT-H1 paste. When I was trying for 4200 - 4500 I was over 66c. At 4500 to be exact I was over 70c before I got scared and rolled back to a lower setting. I thought maybe I didn't mount it right so I remounted it numerous times with the same results. Maybe that testing melted the labels off my 460's. :)

My 555 Be loads up at 39c for reference @ stock, but I just installed it so not sure what the curing time is for the Noctua paste. Same equipment; only difference is processor swap. I use AMD OverDrive to load the processors. I can OC the 555 BE to 4200 easy but I can't find my notes on bios settings atm. Sister came by to help with mom and cleaned up this weekend so I'm not holding out hope.
 
djstarfox said:
Try booting with /onecpu in the boot.ini file. I have an old game that only runs like that.
Click to expand...

I will try that after I get home. I'll google it, but if you're kind enough to post how you did it I'd appreciate it. :)
 
ebduncan said:
ummm it should not be running that so, to the point where your melting other things. perhaps you do have a bad cpu.
Click to expand...

This. The H50 isn't amazing (I own one, although its not being used on my BD) but it shouldn't have that much issue cooling this CPU. It performed similarly to my Zalman 9700, on my 1100t - maybe slightly better. So yea, could be a bad cooler or bad CPU....
 
Last edited:
thomasward00 said:
Maybe next time you won't buy a launch product, especially a brand new architecture.......
Click to expand...

meh. If nobody buys them, bugs never get found, nor fixed. As I recall, Intel also had a bug not too long ago in their chipsets that required a recall? If no body bought them, they never would have gotten fixed.
 
my full load temps with the antec 920, never go over 50c. idle temp is 29c
cool and quiet turned off.

at 4.6ghz@ vcore 1.41

using the stock tim that came with the 920. no fancy paste.
 
ebduncan said:
my full load temps with the antec 920, never go over 50c. idle temp is 29c
cool and quiet turned off.

at 4.6ghz@ vcore 1.41

using the stock tim that came with the 920. no fancy paste.
Click to expand...

Sounds about right. My Zalman CNPS11x keeps me under 53C, under stress test loads @ 4.5ghz. and under 49C under more real-world heavy loads, like gaming, encoding, etc...

OP's temps are....a little.......disconcerting, to say the least.
 
But the temps aren't crashing the games as it would crash all games as they hit the same temps. I mean the bad games don't even get to the loading screen 99% of the time. Anyway... Got in my DoW fix in and about to reinstall the fire breathing dragon.

:)
 
cageymaru said:
But the temps aren't crashing the games as it would crash all games as they hit the same temps. I mean the bad games don't even get to the loading screen 99% of the time. Anyway... Got in my DoW fix in and about to reinstall the fire breathing dragon.

:)
Click to expand...

Right, but we're saying, temps like that aren't normal, even for that cooler (I mean, maybe it really is that inadequate, but I don't think so). It could indicate an underlying issue with the CPU. Either way, it is not safe to run your CPU at those temps, and it is highly recommended that you try to sort out a better solution, before going much further.

EDIT: Remember, I have the same CPU, overclocked further, and my temps are way lower and I'm not having the BSOD issues in any games/apps, so far...The ones I'm having problems with (portal 2 and dx:hr) are merely under performing (by tremendous amounts).
 
statikregimen said:
Right, but we're saying, temps like that aren't normal, even for that cooler (I mean, maybe it really is that inadequate, but I don't think so). It could indicate an underlying issue with the CPU. Either way, it is not safe to run your CPU at those temps, and it is highly recommended that you try to sort out a better solution, before going much further.

EDIT: Remember, I have the same CPU, overclocked further, and my temps are way lower and I'm not having the BSOD issues in any games/apps, so far...The ones I'm having problems with (portal 2 and dx:hr) are merely under performing (by tremendous amounts).
Click to expand...

My issues are by no means temperature related, Duke Forever causes the same blue screen described here, and hardware.fr is reporting amd is aware of the issue and working on a fix. Im guessing its firmware related if youre not having issues and using an MSI mobo. Everything else works perfect and my load temps rarely exceed 43c.
 
I'm not having any of the issues you are describing at all. The biggest issue I am seeing is my temp sensors not working at all in windows. AMD told me that was the motherboard makers issue and to contact them. MSI says the problem is because I'm using a water loop on it....so MSI is smoking something.

That aside, I was having major game issues in general with my setup. Games were running at double the speed of normal, making it impossible to play anything. It turns out that C1e in the bios was enabled by default on my setup and that is a bad thing. Disabling it fixed the game speed issue.

Maybe you have a setting that is just not ideal or setup properly. It took me a long time of troubleshooting to try and fix my issue.
 
DPGX said:
My issues are by no means temperature related, Duke Forever causes the same blue screen described here, and hardware.fr is reporting amd is aware of the issue and working on a fix. Im guessing its firmware related if youre not having issues and using an MSI mobo. Everything else works perfect and my load temps rarely exceed 43c.
Click to expand...

It is definitely looking like firmware issues, but doesn't change OP's temps are not normal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top