• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

OcUK Ryzen 3000/Zen 2 review thread

cat the fifth just noticed your reply.

I am surprised you know many people with K chips that run at stock speeds, as whilst thats a valid way to run them, its a poor value for money deal as there is a premium on those chips price wise.
In terms of "safe" overclocks I think your point is fair, I know first hand there is silicon lottery losers, and with reviewers seemingly getting a decent chance of a golden sample, that sways things even further so e.g. there is people claiming every coffee lake can hit 5ghz, and if someone posts they only get say 4.8ghz using 1.35vcore then the end user must be doing something wrong it cannot be simply that they got a silicon loser. So for this reason I think using a 8600k or 8700k at 5ghz as a comparison isnt quite right either, its definitely vague, a safe overclock is probably what MCE configures so probably 4.7 for an 8700k and 4.3 for an 8600k. I have never heard of an 8600k not able to reach 4.7 but there is some pretty nasty 8600k's out there, one guy needed 1.38v to hit 4.7. I also suspect a fair few of these claimed stable 5ghz chips are not proper stable. My own 8600k will boot into windows at 5ghz, I can run aida bench, cinebench bench, play games. Browse the net etc. For a few hours. It probably would crash doing these activities eventually but I suspect some people will tolerate it providing its not too frequent. It of course crashed on stress testing.

If I was reviewing these parts I would likely test all 3 scenarios, shipping clocks, MCE clocks and "aggressive" clocks. 5ghz is aggressive on intel, even if you can get it stable they need very good cooling at those speeds. I would add a note MCE is whats realistically achievable, anything on top of that a bonus.

AMD has the advantage they are consistent, which I like, I like it a "LOT" I hate silicon lotteries (I lose them a lot which doesnt help), and especially when they have such a high variance. Having one chip need 1.38 to do 4.7 and another 1.25 to do 5ghz is too much variance in my opinion. A future I would like is akin to XFR, maybe PBO and all manual o/c outside of that disabled. To remove that variance, that lottery, you know what you getting for your money. Things like p-state tuning no problem, just disable the extra clocks.
 
Zeed said:
And thats why Intel is doing this 9900ks. Its more like 3000series in a way aka runs at MAX out of box.
Click to expand...

That does mean unless the Core i9 9900KS replaces the Core i9 9900K,it might mean the latter overclocks worse.

chrcoluk said:
cat the fifth just noticed your reply.

I am surprised you know many people with K chips that run at stock speeds, as whilst thats a valid way to run them, its a poor value for money deal as there is a premium on those chips price wise.
In terms of "safe" overclocks I think your point is fair, I know first hand there is silicon lottery losers, and with reviewers seemingly getting a decent chance of a golden sample, that sways things even further so e.g. there is people claiming every coffee lake can hit 5ghz, and if someone posts they only get say 4.8ghz using 1.35vcore then the end user must be doing something wrong it cannot be simply that they got a silicon loser. So for this reason I think using a 8600k or 8700k at 5ghz as a comparison isnt quite right either, its definitely vague, a safe overclock is probably what MCE configures so probably 4.7 for an 8700k and 4.3 for an 8600k. I have never heard of an 8600k not able to reach 4.7 but there is some pretty nasty 8600k's out there, one guy needed 1.38v to hit 4.7. I also suspect a fair few of these claimed stable 5ghz chips are not proper stable. My own 8600k will boot into windows at 5ghz, I can run aida bench, cinebench bench, play games. Browse the net etc. For a few hours. It probably would crash doing these activities eventually but I suspect some people will tolerate it providing its not too frequent. It of course crashed on stress testing.

If I was reviewing these parts I would likely test all 3 scenarios, shipping clocks, MCE clocks and "aggressive" clocks. 5ghz is aggressive on intel, even if you can get it stable they need very good cooling at those speeds. I would add a note MCE is whats realistically achievable, anything on top of that a bonus.

AMD has the advantage they are consistent, which I like, I like it a "LOT" I hate silicon lotteries (I lose them a lot which doesnt help), and especially when they have such a high variance. Having one chip need 1.38 to do 4.7 and another 1.25 to do 5ghz is too much variance in my opinion. A future I would like is akin to XFR, maybe PBO and all manual o/c outside of that disabled. To remove that variance, that lottery, you know what you getting for your money. Things like p-state tuning no problem, just disable the extra clocks.
Click to expand...

The problem is the non-K bins are 65W TDP CPUs,so out of the box they do tend not to hold as high clockspeeds,so I think that is why I have seen people buy them,and also "I can overclock it at a later date if needed",but then they don't bother! :p

Regarding overclocking it makes sense to have a range of overclocks as you mention,as it gives a closer to realworld approximition,of what level of performance you will get.
 
AMD fixing some launch problems:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/commen...ny_2_and/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app

Hello, friends.

Please set a remindme! on this post for Tuesday morning (30 July) Central Daylight Saving Time (CDT). We have a comprehensive update coming for you regarding the WHEA warnings in the Windows Event Log; Destiny 2 game launch; and desktop idle behavior.

We're putting the finishing touches on it, and wanted to let y'all know when to expect it as soon as I could. I will edit this post with the final details on 7/30.
Click to expand...
 
Are these new drivers still in Beta ? or are they fully released and just not yet on the AMD site ?

Would like to have a play but don't want to break my 24/7 work machine

EDIT - Ah well curiosity got the better of me, seems to have done very little though
 
Last edited:
CAT-THE-FIFTH said:
@MartinPrince

Puget Systems have published their Photoshop benchmarks:

https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/a...adripper-2-Intel-9th-Gen-Intel-X-series-1529/

pic_disp.php
Click to expand...
Hey @CAT-THE-FIFTH, finally managed to get my 3900X up and running. For my most intensive task which is a DXO Photolab export to Lightroom with a few adjustments but Prime NR set to 90, the 3900X took 20secs. My 8600K@5Ghz took 25secs.

This was a 20Megapixel RAW file from a Sony RX10 IV. That's ~20% improvement which seems to tie in with the chart from Puget.

Once I got things configured more I'll try to optimise the 3900X and see if there is any improvement though there isn't much headroom for overclocking in these CPU's.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom