CAT my board doesn't have PBO, it runs at <4.2Ghz without it under a 4 year old KRAKEN X31 at <65c. using PBO in Ryzen Master makes 0 difference.
I don't care about it being the value option, it's just plain a fast CPU, let it fly.
I look at performance per £.
Most of my mates will quite happily take 90% of the gaming performance of a Ryzen CPU using its included cooler when compared to more expensive Intel plus its additonal cooling. In the end it means the builds can be more balanced,ie,spend more on the graphics card or something else for example. Also the fact is if you want to upgrade the cooling on a Ryzen 5 3600,places like OcUK sell the Spire and Prism for £5 and £20 respectively.
I was actually looking at the Core i7 8700 non-K and Core i7 8700K when I had to upgrade my old IB Xeon E3 system,but when my Ryzen 5 2600 cost me £137,and £5 for a Wraith Stealth,which was a cheap lowish profile cooler. This is compared to £300 at least during that time for the Core i7 8700 non-K which has a crap Intel stock cooler,meaning in a mini-ITX system I probably would have to get a much more expensive cooler,I was not going to spend over double to get 10% extra peformance(or less) in non-gaming stuff,or 15% extra in games.
Sure,if its just a CPU comparison I can understand the logic of equating cooling but again I also disagree entirely stock cooling should be ignored,and I would like an additional test of the Intel CPUs with a Hyper 212 or TX3 for example.
In the end pushing for equated cooling only makes AMD look much less value if you ignore the stock cooling,and the cost of the extra cooling for Intel was equated into many builds I knew people do.
Also I see no point of spending £50 on an AIO water cooler for a £190 Ryzen 5 3600 just to gain 100MHZ over buying a £5 Wraith Spire.
Edit!!
The same goes with all those people spending £100 more on very fast RAM to get 5% extra game performance on a £200 CPU. Meh.
