• 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.

Ryzen "2" ?

prjwebb said:
4.35 was pretty standard for the stock XFR boost on the 2700X I think.
Click to expand...
It can't hold 4.3Ghz on all cores though, someone on reddit aggregated all of the review overclocking results here: https://www.reddit.com/r/hardware/comments/8dnu2c/i_aggregated_the_overclocking_results_for_zen/
Average for the 2700X is 4232Mhz with 1.404 V and for the 2600X it's 4215Mhz with 1.408 V, and if 1st gen is anything to go by, actual retail samples will probably only reach 4 to 4.1Ghz, unless you get lucky.
 
further testing and at 1.431v I've seen a max 4.5ghz on all 8 cores (42.50 multiplier and a 101 bclk) weirdly my temps have dropped in hwmoniter from 74 down to 65, it should be mentioned that in core temp v1.11 the core temp at these speeds is 99 degrees with peaks up to 145 degrees, i think that's definitely a bug as the cpu was rock solid posting almost 5300 points in cpuz stress test multi and almost 500 in single thread
 
Your frequency is multiplier x bus speed, anything over that number is just going to be a reading error. 42.5 x 101 is just short of 4.3Ghz.
Guessing a lot of these issues are due to immature X470 uefis? You'd think AMD learned from the initial Ryzen launch and would have given motherboard makers more time to work on their firmware.
 
yeah seems a bit odd as the cpu is sitting at 4250 at base, with jumps into 4360mhz and up to 4509mhz on all cores, not complaining as if its getting up to those speeds in reality then damn I've won the silicon lottery
 
I have x370 ...
Here the score with cpu at default (with precision boost override 1853,without 1790 )
anandtech maybe he's right ....
you must use little voltage max 1.35 / 1.4 (depends on the heat sink) It's dangerous
After, active Precision Boost Override+ cpu default frequency
 
The Stilt made some comments about AMD exceeding TDP ratings by quite a lot here: https://forums.anandtech.com/threads/ryzen-strictly-technical.2500572/page-72#post-39391302
Interesting bit on Precision Boost Override:
The "Precision Boost Override" feature available on 400-series motherboards allows increasing the physical limiters mentioned earlier. On SKUs belonging to the 105W TDP infrastructure group, the default limiters are following: PPT 141.75W, TDC 95A, EDC 140A and tJMax of 85°C (absolute, excl. offset).
Click to expand...

@LOLN1 Pretty good scores, I only get about ~1700 points in Cinebench R15 with an R7 1700 overclocked to 3.85Ghz and 3066Mhz on the RAM.
 
Last edited:
On memory from the Stilt post:
On the tested samples, the distribution of the maximum achievable memory frequency was following:

  • 3400MHz – 12.5% of the samples
  • 3466MHz – 25.0% of the samples
  • 3533MHz – 62.5% of the samples

There are clear differences in how the memory controller behaves on the different CPU specimens. The majority of the CPUs will do 3466MHz or higher at 1.050V SoC voltage, however the difference lies in how the different specimens react to the voltage. Some of the specimens seem scale with the increased SoC voltage, while the others simply refuse to scale at all or in some cases even illustrate negative scaling. All of the tested samples illustrated negative scaling (i.e. more errors or failures to train) when higher than 1.150V SoC was used. In all cases the maximum memory frequency was achieved at =< 1.100V SoC voltage.

AMD has revised the memory layout design guidance with Pinnacle Ridge targeting motherboards (i.e. 400-series) in an effort to potentially make the higher memory frequencies possible.

While this might theoretically improve the frequencies on some motherboards, generally the frequency limiting factor is the memory controller itself and not the topology the motherboard uses for memory signaling. Because of that, the newer 400-series motherboards alone should not be expected to provide improved memory frequencies at least by a significant margin.
Click to expand...

Should help those wondering if they should upgrade to X470, or in need of memory overclocking tips for the 2000 series.
 
Last edited:
Here's hoping this is just the first batch of 12nm test chips, much similar to the rx470/480 v1 and v2. Hope we'll see a revised 12nm with that leakage barrier at 4.1ghz shifted to 4.4/4.5.

In essence the stilt has proven everything that you need to know. Great work.
 
So my 2700x is running at 64C idle and 90C+ in load... turned it off when it started going up to 105C. I'm using the stock cooler that game with it too. Anyone else had this issue? I'm thinking i either ****** up and missed a bit of plastic on the CPU that i didnt remove, didn't install the heatsink properly or was i supposed to apply separate TIM (the amd cooler came with it pre-applied)
 
I got mine built last night (2700X, Asus Prime, AIO cooling, 3200 cl14 b.die). DOCP locked in the ram first try. I'd left my boot drive connected intending to rebuild... windows looked at it suspiciously for all of a minute then booted, gaming stable... :o

Will "limp" along like this for a few days till I got time off and have a proper play with it then.
 
AndreiD said:
It can't hold 4.3Ghz on all cores though, someone on reddit aggregated all of the review overclocking results here: https://www.reddit.com/r/hardware/comments/8dnu2c/i_aggregated_the_overclocking_results_for_zen/
Average for the 2700X is 4232Mhz with 1.404 V and for the 2600X it's 4215Mhz with 1.408 V, and if 1st gen is anything to go by, actual retail samples will probably only reach 4 to 4.1Ghz, unless you get lucky.
Click to expand...
Gavin brought this "Ryzen 1 review samples clocked higher" notion up before and I went and found a bunch of reviews that couldn't get to 4 GHz with the R7 1700 (or could barely but with stupid voltages), which is what we see on retail samples. Do you know any that could achieve higher than typical overclocks?

If I understand correctly, R7 1700 clocks to 3.8-3.9 GHz typically, and R7 2700 will probably be in the 4.1-4.2 GHz range, so 300 MHz higher. Add 100 MHz for the X versions.
 
AndreiD said:
The Stilt made some comments about AMD exceeding TDP ratings by quite a lot here: https://forums.anandtech.com/threads/ryzen-strictly-technical.2500572/page-72#post-39391302
Click to expand...

His claim is that at stock it exceeds TDP.

What is stock and who sets the stock settings?

https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-7-2700x-review,5571-12.html

Over on tomshardware they put the 2700X through an AVX torture test and it didn't go above 105W.

But what they did do was this:

AMD is working on a Precision Boost Overdrive feature, which seems similar to the Multi-Core Enhanced Turbo (MCE) feature that allows Intel's K-series processors to run at their maximum Turbo Boost bin across all cores at all times. The setting on Intel platforms modifies the CPU's clock rate and voltage to deliver higher performance, basically amounting to factory-sanctioned overclocking.

AMD's Ryzen Master 1.3 software doesn't currently let you activate this feature from within Windows. But as we often find with MCE, AMD's Precision Boost Overdrive is enabled by default in many BIOSes. After extensive experimentation, we can conclude that the option doesn't deliver an appreciable performance gain in its current form. Thus, we ran our tests with Precision Boost Overdrive disabled.
Click to expand...

Seems like an awkwardly obvious thing he's missed there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom