AMD FX-8350 stock fan

[PotatoRynn]

So I recently (Last night) put a new CPU into my computer, which is the AMD FX-8350. I got everything working, went to bed, woke up this morning, got on my computer, and realized that my computer now sounds like a jet turbine. My computer is relatively loud all the time, I have the thing packed with a bunch of fans, (5 in total) but with this new CPU stock fan, the thing is just too loud. I went online and looked at some forums where people had the same problem, and most of the people recommended getting this fan, which I have screenshotted in my amazon cart. (Pretty sure it was an Evo 212.) Before I get this though, I wanted to ask you people what you recommend. (Please don't say water cooling, I don't really want to do that.)  https://gyazo.com/4bdf1a082fd456c82ae1766ea1fab529 I also have the Thermaltake Versa H21 for my case, so would the CPU fan be able to fit inside of it?

[Princess Luna]

FX 8350 is outdated and yes it is a fireplace from how hot it gets, a 212 Evo will run on 100% and be loud just as much while you'll probably never keep the temperatures of this old bad chip controlled without spending considerable.

[PotatoRynn]

Wow, turn-over time on responses is fast. Well I'm stuck with this CPU for now, I don't feel like buying a new motherboard and Processor, so I'll just drown out the noise with music or something. If I was to do water cooling though, would it make temps better, or would it be a not-so-noticeable difference.

[mariushm]

FX8350 is fairly warm and the stock cooler it comes with isn't great.

I personally have a FX 8320 and use a ZEROtherm ZEN FZ120 120mm CPU Cooler but i replaced the stock fan (which was adequate) with a fan optimized for silent operation. It keeps the cpu at around 50 degrees Celsius.

 

My advice would be to make sure you have the power plan set to Balanced or customize the High Performance power plan to allow the cpu to switch between frequencies at idle. Sometimes the motherboard is configured (through bios) and Windows is configured to always keep the cpu at the highest frequency, and the cpu is constantly hot. Mine switches cores between various frequencies with the load, reducing the power consumption and heat.

 

You could also lower the frequency slightly, let's say down to 3.5 Ghz, from bios or software. Think of the FX8350 as a more or less factory overclocked processor, to reach 4.0-4.2 ghz , and in order to achieve that they raised the default voltages a lot which produces heat. If you lower the frequency a bit (underclock it), you'll get a cooler cpu but it would still be fast enough.

 

You have a very good silicon die which can achieve those frequencies at high voltage, so that means it may not need as much voltage at lower frequencies as the one that's default in the motherboard bios, so if you take it down to fx8320 levels (or somewhere like that), you may be able to manually bring the voltage down in very small steps (like 0.05v down, benchmark with superpi , with aida cpu stress test etc, if it's stable then go down another 0.05v and repeat) etc

[ChatDaw]

55 minutes ago, Princess Cadence said:

FX 8350 is outdated and yes it is a fireplace from how hot it gets, a 212 Evo will run on 100% and be loud just as much while you'll probably never keep the temperatures of this old bad chip controlled without spending considerable.

LOL really?

The stock cooler isn't great indeed but if you tune the CPU fan curve inside your BIOS et reduce the voltage of the CPU it doesn't get that hot and loud anymore.
Also a 212 evo is enough and will remain much quieter even at full blast than the stock cooler.

@PotatoRynn just tune down your fan curve and reduce the CPU vcore a little for now until your 212 evo arrives, it will keep it cool enough and will be much quieter
I can help you with that, I own 2 FX CPUs to this day still and I have an FX-8320 which is basically the same with lower clocks out of the box.

[Stefan Payne]

1 hour ago, Princess Cadence said:

FX 8350 is outdated and yes it is a fireplace from how hot it gets, a 212 Evo will run on 100% and be loud just as much while you'll probably never keep the temperatures of this old bad chip controlled without spending considerable.

The Fireplace Part is bullshit.

Its not that much worse than other Intel CPUs in 32nm that are similar. That's just FUD.

But as always, if AMD is a bit worse in something, its a huge deal for whatever reason...

 

And the Performance can be quite good if the Software is written well..

1 hour ago, PotatoRynn said:

So I recently (Last night) put a new CPU into my computer, which is the AMD FX-8350. I got everything working, went to bed, woke up this morning, got on my computer, and realized that my computer now sounds like a jet turbine. 

You can play a bit with the fan profiles.
And if you used the right Thermal paste, it shouldn't be that loud if you use the Silent profile of your board.

 

I had an FX8350 myself on an ASUS 990FX Sabertooth Board. And also used the Stock fan, though with the side panel open...

And even while gaming it wasn't that loud (well, except for the Ball Bearing/Motor Noise of the Fan of course)..,

 

So you might want to try that first...

As for the Heatsink, I'd get a better one, like Scythe Ashura, if it fits inside the case of course...

But it depends on the Board, be aware that you can not use Tower Boards with some Cheapish Am3+ Boards!

Especially those without decent heatsinks on the CPU VRM like some Asrock Boards but also others...

[JoostinOnline]

25 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

The Fireplace Part is bullshit.

Its not that much worse than other Intel CPUs in 32nm that are similar.

You say that like 32nm wasn't crazy hot. I've still got a Sandy Bridge CPU in one of my rigs and even at a much lower clock speed, it gets crazy hot compared to my Devil's Canyon one on a stock heatsink.

 

@PotatoRynn  The reason Ryzen was such a huge deal (or at least the biggest reason) is because it was the first truly great processors by AMD in like a decade that gave good performance without nearly setting your house on fire. You can argue about it being Intel's fault for using dirty tactics (which they definitely did do), but that doesn't change the fact that the FX series was rarely practical, even when it was new. AMD didn't have the money for R&D to come up with a competitive CPU.

 

As for a cooler, your case supports coolers as high as 155mm, so any of these are compatible. Alternatively, you can lower the clockspeed and voltage, as someone already suggested.

[Emberstone]

46 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

The Fireplace Part is bullshit.

Its not that much worse than other Intel CPUs in 32nm that are similar. That's just FUD.

But as always, if AMD is a bit worse in something, its a huge deal for whatever reason...

The issue wasn't that FX got hot. The heat was more than manageable. It was just that it got pretty warm for the level of performance you got.

 

You're right that Gulftown, Bloomfield, etc. Intel chips at 32nm were pretty spicy, especially the six-cores at 130 watt TDP's with their stock configurations, but those were some of the best processors around when FX released. It's like comparing an i9-7900X to an R5-1600 price-wise.

 

Only in this analogy, the 1600 would be just as difficult to cool as the i9-7900X. Pretty uncool. Literally. And the FX-8000/9000 processors couldn't hold a candle to the i7-980X despite their almost-identical TDP's.

 

It wasn't that FX was getting hot; good air coolers existed in 2011 and 2012. It's just that it got as hot as the fastest CPUs available while offering nowhere close to their level of performance. Means you'd have to shell out a good bit extra on cooling if you want to overclock or make your PC quieter, which isn't fun if you were one of the folks who chose FX for its lower cost.

[flibberdipper]

2 hours ago, Princess Cadence said:

FX 8350 is outdated and yes it is a fireplace from how hot it gets, a 212 Evo will run on 100% and be loud just as much while you'll probably never keep the temperatures of this old bad chip controlled without spending considerable.

Man you are on some next-level shit to think that a 212 Evo won't be able to keep up with a stock-clocked 8350.

 

1 hour ago, JoostinOnline said:

You say that like 32nm wasn't crazy hot. I've still got a Sandy Bridge CPU in one of my rigs and even at a much lower clock speed, it gets crazy hot compared to my Devil's Canyon one on a stock heatsink.

Incredibly my 3240 isn't all that hot. Granted, it still gets into the high 60s/low 70s, but it has an all aluminum heatsink thats like 15-20mm thick with an 80mm fan slapped on top which doesn't ramp up. And even then it's exhausting air so it already deals with hot air.

 

And then there's my G3258 that goes full furnace with the normal 4.6/1.35v overclock and happily sits in the low 70s with an H115i.5

[JoostinOnline]

1 minute ago, tmcclelland455 said:

Man you are on some next-level shit to think that a 212 Evo won't be able to keep up with a stock-clocked 8350.

 

Incredibly my 3240 isn't all that hot. Granted, it still gets into the high 60s/low 70s, but it has an all aluminum heatsink thats like 15-20mm thick with an 80mm fan slapped on top which doesn't ramp up. And even then it's exhausting air so it already deals with hot air.

 

And then there's my G3258 that goes full furnace with the normal 4.6/1.35v overclock and happily sits in the low 70s with an H115i.5

I've never personally owned an FX CPU, just worked on computers with them (I repair computers for a living). The stock coolers are always screaming like a Core 2 Quad does. I've never seen one with an aftermarket cooler.

[flibberdipper]

7 minutes ago, JoostinOnline said:

I've never personally owned an FX CPU, just worked on computers with them (I repair computers for a living). The stock coolers are always screaming like a Core 2 Quad does. I've never seen one with an aftermarket cooler.

My sister has an FX 6300 and she has the AM3+ version of the wraith cooler and it's fine. Tops out in the high 50s with a super lazy fan curve.

[Stefan Payne]

43 minutes ago, Emberstone said:

The issue wasn't that FX got hot. The heat was more than manageable. It was just that it got pretty warm for the level of performance you got.

The Problem was that FX was way ahead of its time and the Software wasn't ready for it (yet).

If you look at GameGPU and others, you see that it can keep up with Haswell or even beat an i7-4770.

But the Software has to to be optimized for Bulldozer wich most is not, sadly.

 

But if it is optimized for BD, the Performance is really great...

 

Again, the BD is so much different that it needs special treatment!

That's why AMD went back to a more classical design...

 

Sadly Kaveri wasn't ready and Sony did Choose Jaguar over Bulldozer...

43 minutes ago, Emberstone said:

You're right that Gulftown, Bloomfield, etc. Intel chips at 32nm were pretty spicy, especially the six-cores at 130 watt TDP's with their stock configurations, but those were some of the best processors around when FX released. It's like comparing an i9-7900X to an R5-1600 price-wise.

Yeah, the last part is what you are doing right now
An FX8350 was available for under 200€.

So it would be nice if we stick to comparing it to Intel CPUs that were available new for 200€ and less. Wich leaves at most the i5-4440 or so.

 

43 minutes ago, Emberstone said:

Literally. And the FX-8000/9000 processors couldn't hold a candle to the i7-980X despite their almost-identical TDP's.

Jeez...

Why do you keep comparing 1000€ CPUs to a 150€ one?!

The best Price of that CPU was 550€...

 

The FX8350 was introduced with ~180€:
https://geizhals.eu/?phist=852989

 

The 8320 even 150€:

https://geizhals.eu/?phist=852342

 

Especially since it was EOL when Bulldozer arrived:
http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/Core_i7/Intel-Core i7-980 AT80613006756AA (BX80613I7980).html

 

 

43 minutes ago, Emberstone said:

It wasn't that FX was getting hot; good air coolers existed in 2011 and 2012. It's just that it got as hot as the fastest CPUs available while offering nowhere close to their level of performance. Means you'd have to shell out a good bit extra on cooling if you want to overclock or make your PC quieter, which isn't fun if you were one of the folks who chose FX for its lower cost.

Yeah, like Intel does right now, right?

 

And it also depends on the Board, what Voltage the Board gives to the CPU and so on.

Some Boards tend to give a bit more and there can be a difference of up to 50W between an efficient and a lesser efficient Board.

Here one Proof that shows 20-30W Difference on FM2+ Plattform:

http://www.planet3dnow.de/cms/10133-3x-fm2-von-asrock-biostar-und-gigabyte/subpage-leistungsaufnahme-und-effizienz/

 

You can imagine how much bigger the difference between FM2 and AM3+ could be...

[Princess Luna]

25 minutes ago, tmcclelland455 said:

Man you are on some next-level shit to think that a 212 Evo won't be able to keep up with a stock-clocked 8350.

I did not say it couldn't I just stated that depending on his conditions he might get it to go loudly as well.

[flibberdipper]

10 minutes ago, Princess Cadence said:

I did not say it couldn't I just stated that depending on his conditions he might get it to go loudly as well.

You would have to throw more than an 8350 at a 212 Evo to make it feel the burn...

[Emberstone]

41 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

Why do you keep comparing 1000€ CPUs to a 150€ one?!

Uh, because you did.

2 hours ago, Stefan Payne said:

Its not that much worse than other Intel CPUs in 32nm that are similar.

The 130+ watt 32nm CPUs from Intel are the $1000+ ones.

 

And you're right. FX and 32nm Intel HEDT processors both had similar cooling requirements, but that's exactly why people were underwhelmed by FX. Consumer processors eating just as much power and getting just as hot as HEDT/server CPUs was kind of wonky.

[RAM555789]

I had this same CPU myself, I got an H100i Evo AIO cooler and had good temps and it didn't get loud even running a 4.5GHz overclock on it.

[Stefan Payne]

2 hours ago, Stefan Payne said:

Its not that much worse than other Intel CPUs in 32nm that are similar.

 

27 minutes ago, Emberstone said:

Uh, because you did.

The 130+ watt 32nm CPUs from Intel are the $1000+ ones.

Not really...

And your statement is false, because there is a 32nm CPU with 130W TDP in the the ~300€ range that is very comparable to Bulldozer in every way - Idle Power Consumption and Power Consumption under load as well. And was even introduced in the same Year as the 8300 series...

 

And I can give you a small hint:
I have that CPU on my Gigabyte UD5...

[Emberstone]

2 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

 

Not really...

And your statement is false, because there is a 32nm CPU with 130W TDP in the the ~300€ range that is very comparable to Bulldozer in every way - Idle Power Consumption and Power Consumption under load as well.

 

And I can give you a small hint:
I have that CPU on my Gigabyte UD5...

Ah, didn't realize that the i7-920 and other quad cores were at 130 watts as well since they don't consume as much power. My mistake. Regardless, the FX 8-cores still get just as hot and consume just as much power under load as the Gulftown six-cores; that's the point I was trying to make. That's why people were disappointed with them.

 

I'm annoyed, too, when people call FX "furnaces" because they weren't really any hotter than other chips available at the time; all I'm stating is why people were underwhelmed. They were just hotter and more power hungry than their price class.

[Stefan Payne]

47 minutes ago, Princess Cadence said:

I did not say it couldn't I just stated that depending on his conditions he might get it to go loudly as well.

Yeah, in a 1st Generation ATX Case with 1 80mm fan at most maybe.

And if you ramp up the VCOre. But other than that, not soo much. 

 

You should really stick to the facts and not present what you think as a fact.

36 minutes ago, tmcclelland455 said:

You would have to throw more than an 8350 at a 212 Evo to make it feel the burn...

I don't know much about that Cooler but an 8350 isn't as bad as people claim it to be...

The biggest problem is finding a good board (wich I had, the Sabertooth). Besides that without OC its not that bad....

1 hour ago, JoostinOnline said:

I've never personally owned an FX CPU, just worked on computers with them (I repair computers for a living). The stock coolers are always screaming like a Core 2 Quad does. I've never seen one with an aftermarket cooler.

I had an FX8350 for some time (and was somewhat happy with it).

 

And I don't know what Stock Cooler you are talking about but the 4 Heatpipe one (predecessor to the Wraith wich isn't much more than an old AMD FX-60 or so Box Cooler) isn't that loud.

Though there are different versions of that cooler, some with a 70x20mm fan, some with a 70x15mm fan.

 

And a long time ago there was this AMDBoxed Cooler with 4 Heatpipes and an 80mm fan on top (like the Wraith), so that one isn't new at all, its rather old. But good to see that they choose that one to be the new default...

 

[Stefan Payne]

2 minutes ago, Emberstone said:

Ah, didn't realize that the i7-920 and other quad cores were at 130 watts as well since they don't consume as much power. My mistake. Regardless, the FX 8-cores still get just as hot and consume just as much power under load as the Gulftown six-cores; that's the point I was trying to make. That's why people were disappointed with them.

I wasn't talking about those because they are 45nm ,)
I was talking about the i7-3820 by the way.

 

And all LGA2011 Processors have 130W TDP (or more), as well as the 1366 ones...

 

2 minutes ago, Emberstone said:

I'm annoyed, too, when people call FX "furnaces" because they weren't really any hotter than other chips available at the time; all I'm stating is why people were underwhelmed. They were just hotter and more power hungry than their price class.

It depends on when we are talking about...

 

But the real Problem of the FX is that it was late, a year or better two sooner and it would have been remembered as a good CPU...

 

Well, even today people don't recognize that Ryzen is more power efficient under load than Intel Chips. Now people are saying that Power consumption doesn't matter...

[Emberstone]

9 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

I wasn't talking about those because they are 45nm ,)

My head is in the clouds. Rip.

 

For 8 years I thought those were 32nm. Lol. Learn something new every day.

[Crunchy Dragon]

4 hours ago, PotatoRynn said:

Wow, turn-over time on responses is fast. Well I'm stuck with this CPU for now, I don't feel like buying a new motherboard and Processor, so I'll just drown out the noise with music or something. If I was to do water cooling though, would it make temps better, or would it be a not-so-noticeable difference.

Get a better cooler. I'd get a Noctua NH-D15 or bequiet! Dark Rock Pro 3 or 4.

[flibberdipper]

32 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

I don't know much about that Cooler but an 8350 isn't as bad as people claim it to be...

The biggest problem is finding a good board (wich I had, the Sabertooth). Besides that without OC its not that bad....

I had an FX8350 for some time (and was somewhat happy with it).

Yeah 8350's really aren't hard to tame with coolers like the H7/212 Evo with a reasonable overclock, even with the fact that the ohshit zone starts at like 65C or so.

[LogicalDrm]

47 minutes ago, Crunchy Dragon said:

Get a better cooler. I'd get a Noctua NH-D15 or bequiet! Dark Rock Pro 3 or 4.

That would be overkill and also won't fit case, as @JoostinOnline pointed. Might be hard to pick that when people are rambling on what is underpowered CPU of its day compared to now and so on.

 

@PotatoRynn, have you looked at temps? You probably can lower fan speeds enough to get it quiet down. Stock coolers aren't that bad as many people here make them seem. Without OC, and maybe little undervolting, you can just run it with stock cooler. If thats not enough for you, H7, M9a, TX3 Evo and so on are good picks.

[aezakmi]

What's your CPU temp?

 

You could decrease the fan speed via BIOS (target fan speed) or using SpeedFan if the temp is under 66C

 

14 minutes ago, LoGiCalDrm said:

Stock coolers aren't that bad as many people here make them seem.

There were 2 stock cooler models for this CPU, first was the old AM2+ model and then AMD started using a different model with small heatpipes, if OP's cooler is the 1st model I can confirm it's way too small for the 8350 and it struggles to cool it even at stock frequency, I used it for 2 days and it kept the CPU at like 55C idling while the fan was running at ~5500 RPM (with the classic jet engine noise)