Good quiet and cheap cooller for a and fx 8350

[Flying_pig]

As the name suggests currently my fx8350's cooler is really loud and I was wondering if any ody out there knew of a cheap cooler ($50 or less) that works well and is silent ( or almost silent) also even though I don't think you can get a water cooler for $50 I just going to say upfront that currently the case the computer is In has one 120mm fan slot so water cooling is not possible ( I really need a fan thereso I can't possibly place a radiator there instead)

[Zach Decou]

[hijack]

I'm considering building a pc around this chip and an NVIDIA GTX 680. How's the vishera doing for you?

[/hijack]

[sqrt(-1)]

[hijack]

 

For X-Plane, that AMD processor doesn't have the single thread performance required to feed the GTX 680.  Better to use the best i7 you can afford.

 

[hijack]

[Flying_pig]

Actually it turns out that the amd fx 8350 should have have enough single thread performance since the list you linked might be a bit biased toward intel what I mean by this is note that every intel procesor they test shows it's clock speed well every amd one does not also since I happen to have two computers one which has a 650w power supply, intel i3 quad core @3.4ghz nvidia GeForce gtx 560 1gb, 3tb of hard drive space and 8gb of ram and another computer with a 450 w power supply an amd 8350 8core @3.6 ghz a nvidia 550 ti 1gb, 8 gb ram, and 80 gb of hard drive space and testing showed that the second system could render in blender using cycles faster the the first well doing a more complex model according to your source the first system should have rendered faster

[Kieran]

Just remember that Cycles uses all available threads/cores (unless you tell it not to), while X-Plane only uses 1 thread/core for drawing stuff.

[Flying_pig]

i used 4 threads while doing the test because of that

[Zach Decou]

[hijack]

 

For X-Plane, that AMD processor doesn't have the single thread performance required to feed the GTX 680.  Better to use the best i7 you can afford.

 

[hijack]

I've gotten similar feedback from others on what the vishera should do based on benchmarks. I'd like to know how it does in the real world with x-plane from someone who uses it.

[sqrt(-1)]

Actually it turns out that the amd fx 8350 should have have enough single thread performance since the list you linked might be a bit biased toward intel what I mean by this is note that every intel procesor they test shows it's clock speed well every amd one does not also since I happen to have two computers one which has a 650w power supply, intel i3 quad core @3.4ghz nvidia GeForce gtx 560 1gb, 3tb of hard drive space and 8gb of ram and another computer with a 450 w power supply an amd 8350 8core @3.6 ghz a nvidia 550 ti 1gb, 8 gb ram, and 80 gb of hard drive space and testing showed that the second system could render in blender using cycles faster the the first well doing a more complex model according to your source the first system should have rendered faster

 

There is no Intel bias for the benchmarks I linked you to.  All CPUs are listed at stock speeds.  You need to understand that Nr of Cores X Clock Speed does not equal work done equally between all CPU architectures.  I have been an AMD fan for a long time (see also my sig) and have learned that the current Intel CPUs get more done per core per clock pulse than AMD CPUs do.

 

Right now, I'd take the Intel i7 3770K which offers the best bang-for-the-buck, particularly for running X-Plane.  Rendering programs employ far more threads than X-Plane will, and the 8-core FX8350 may very well be fine for that.  That's why I built a quad GTX680 rendering machine for my son (an architect) that renders with 1536 x 4 GPU cores using OctaneRender and V-Ray RT.

 

Kieran is correct stating X-Plane drives the GPU with one thread.

Edited January 16, 2013 by SqrtOfNegOne

[Flying_pig]

do note that i limited cycles to only use 4 threads (the same as the i3) i did this because i was using my b-29 as my test model and if you have looked at the thread for it (if you haven't you should) you will see why i couldn't even start to think of rendering times with one thread also i was not saying that the 8350 would be better for x-plane then an i7 (this is due to the fact that i do not own one) but simply to point out that the linked page may not be accurate since it said an i3 is better that an fx 8350 which my little test showed was unlikely and the reason i said they may be biased toward intel was mainly because that some had ??? for the price i didn't know if this meant they were no longer available or something but i figured it was safe to assume that meant the processor was overclocked which actually should be considered since the 8350 was not only designed for overclocking but amd even made automatic overclocking software for it

 

I've gotten similar feedback from others on what the vishera should do based on benchmarks. I'd like to know how it does in the real world with x-plane from someone who uses it.

at ksea you'll get 17-18 fps with every object setting turned to average (medium) settings  and every thing else at it's lowes due note this was with a 550 ti so it shouldn't be that good anyways the good news is though that the computer was built as a rendering farm not to play games that's what my other computer is for 

 

also i still am wondering about any good coolers for an fx 8350

[sqrt(-1)]

You'll have to find out for yourself how that 8350 will work for X-Plane.

 

As for a suitable cooler, it will depend how much you will try to overclock it.  If you need to keep the cooler under $50, you might not be able to overclock it quite as much.  I prefer coolers from Noctua, Phanteks and Thermalright.  Perhaps they will have one that fits your budget.

 

Good luck!

[Flying_pig]

Actually I am not planning on doing any over clocking I was just saying that it should be considered when rating a procesor also thanks for telling me about those three companies.