• 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" ?

Also,
Gigabyte has changed some of the product listings.

Doesn't this mean that Buildzoid was right to call out the false advertising? If you call something X and it's Y, then that's false advertising?

I'm not particularity fussed either way, I've still bought cheaper mobos for Ryzen budget builds, although ran at stock.

I run 3.8GHZ on my 2700 because of the Vcore being ridiculous on this board.
 
Martini1991 said:
Also,
Gigabyte has changed some of the product listings.

Doesn't this mean that Buildzoid was right to call out the false advertising? If you call something X and it's Y, then that's false advertising?

I'm not particularity fussed either way, I've still bought cheaper mobos for Ryzen budget builds, although ran at stock.

I run 3.8GHZ on my 2700 because of the Vcore being ridiculous on this board.
Click to expand...

No its the hyperbole people are intepretating from what he is saying,which is why people in this thread actually think that you need a £150 motherboard to run a Ryzen 5,and similar comments can be seen on Reddit,etc. That includes 65W TDP models with a bit of an overclock.

VRM analysis is useful,but it needs to be in context,yet as usual with YouTube its all black and white.

Its one thing saying a VRM is not as strong as it looks,but its another thing to hint its useless to run ANY CPU which too many seem to think is what he is meaning.

If you look on some many tech forums,Reddit,etc people are now paranoid that even a Ryzen 5 won't run properly in B450 board,and yes you can probably overclock a Ryzen 3 or 5 a bit in them,if you do not dump idiotic voltages through them and push the chip to the edge.

People understood this concept years ago when overclocking - I mildly overclocked a Q6600 on slightly more than stock voltages on a 4 phase 975X Shuttle SFF system with a modified version of is proprietary cooler. The E4300/E4500 chips I had overclocked much more,but I made sure I didn't hit the voltage wall. The system was fine as the VRMs had constant cool air.

Again,OcUK uses these two motherboards with 4 phase VRMs for mildly overclocked Ryzen 5 1600 CPUs in their systems running at 3.8GHZ:

https://www.asus.com/uk/Motherboards/PRIME-B350-PLUS/
https://www.asus.com/uk/Motherboards/PRIME-B350M-A/

Going by the hyperbole,OcUK will have 100% of those systems exploding. Those CPUs are probably well exceeding their 65W TDP.

Massive OEMs like HP,Acer,etc are also using 4+2 phase VRMs in plenty of their systems fine.

These are systems with a three year warranty.

HP uses 4+2 phase VRMs in its Omen systems to support even 95W TDP CPUs.

FFS,for anyone who has been an enthusiast long enough(I have been one for over 15 years),we can all remember when almost all motherboards could overclock,and there were plenty of cheaper motherboards which could run lower end chips and overclock them fine,just maybe not the highest end chip. Examples being those Core i3 530 overclocking bundles with cheapish motherboards. Overclocking a Core i5 750 would probably not be advisable using the same motherboard and cooler.

I know plenty of people who had FX6300/FX6350 CPUs in lower end/midrange boards which would not overclock an FX8350 or run an FX9590. All of those systems lasted years,to the extent they were replaced by newer systems.

Someone who spends £80 to £140 on a CPU in a £70 to £100 board,generally is not all of a sudden going to buy a £300 one,ie,costs more than the CPU and board they already had.Most people who even buy that Ryzen 5 will probably not bother even upgrading it FFS,and ditch it in a few years,and even if they upgrade its probably another £150 CPU made on 7NM,but knowing AMD its probably some new feature which won't work in older boards.

If Ryzen needs expensive motherboards for sub £200 SKUs then TBH it is dead as a platform. In the RL it won't be sustained by people buying Ryzen 7 CPUs on £200 boards,as it will not be used by OEMs due to motherboard costs,let alone a lot of gamers.
 
Last edited:
For us Ryzen boys

Ryzen DRAM Calculator 1.3.0
changelog:
* added initial support Hynix CFR (18nm), Micron E-die (16nm)
* substantially reworked most of the presets (timings, procODT, RTT, voltages)
* the "custom profile" now works a little differently, in most cases the XMP data is simply not compatible with Ryzen, so some timings are calculated according to a special algorithm. My opinion, importing a profile in most cases will not be successful anyway, AMD and Intel controllers have huge architectural differences and signal tolerances.
* combined Samsung e-die / d-die (v1 profile d-die, v2 - e-die)
* Extreme preset got a new life (I remind you that any memory requires additional cooling, if the memory heats above 52 degrees the system loses stability. AMD I have notified.)
* Overclocking potential DRAM is back for samsung b-die (for other chips, support will be added later)
* the combination for procODT + RTT now has more accurate recommendations for frequencies, with a change in frequency, these parameters change
* some items have been removed (for example, the recommendations have become smaller, DQS str + Data drive has been removed because most motherboards do not have these settings. These settings work only on ASUS CH6 / 7)
* new AGESA brought some changes in the power supply (PMU) for SOC / DRAM, the difference between generations of processors I did not see, because the choice of processor generation was removed
* appeared protection from stupid situations, when memory is not capable of working at the desired frequency, but the calculator gives suggestions
* added Help tab with 4 button (Overclocking Statistics + Information support)
* in the folder with the program now there is a picture, it is a methodical tool to help you set up the system

https://drive.google.com/open?id=107Prv-5iCdzMSs_y6MgGpzOgODAPof2m


vxKtowJ.jpg

news and some important information:
A huge amount of time was spent on testing, because of this I had to delay the release of the new version. There is a problem you need to know about. Timing tFAW in most cases does not have a fixed time, the rule tFAW = tRRDS * 4 does not work, this timing must be selected manually. For example, 3666 I have stable only at tFAW = 27, and 3333 at tFAW = 17.

There is also a nuance, not all motherboards of the X470 generation received a new bus topology. The difference is in procODT, for example 3666, I can make it work with procODT 48, but some cards require procODT 60. In case of failure, you need to check the neighboring values of procODT.

AGESA 1.0.0.4c has an improvement in DRAM overclocking, at the moment AMD strives to ensure that most of the key settings work perfectly in automatic mode. First of all it concerns CAD_BUS. The values 24 24 24 24 are relevant for single rank. The release of the final bios is scheduled for the end of July.

At the moment, AMD has provided the developers of motherboards with a new AGESA 1.0.0.5. In addition to the Specter 2 patch, it is not known what it provides yet.
 
Zeed said:
Problem is people think they need 800w PSU to run 1 gpu setup.

My setup maxes out at 470w from wall on max load max oc LOL
Click to expand...

Indeed that is true but so true is that the PSU is still most efficient although only by a fraction of % at the 50% load still even with a titanium level PSU. Of course the cost of a 500 watt titanium PSU and 800 watt titanium is £80 different so it depends how much gaining that 2% - 4% efficiency is for the 50% load rating. I feel a 600 watt is about the sweet spot for most at moment and you can get them in SFX size now at that wattage meaning we don't need big bulky PSU's anymore and they are just as efficient.
 
Curlyriff said:
Indeed that is true but so true is that the PSU is still most efficient although only by a fraction of % at the 50% load still even with a titanium level PSU. Of course the cost of a 500 watt titanium PSU and 800 watt titanium is £80 different so it depends how much gaining that 2% - 4% efficiency is for the 50% load rating. I feel a 600 watt is about the sweet spot for most at moment and you can get them in SFX size now at that wattage meaning we don't need big bulky PSU's anymore and they are just as efficient.
Click to expand...

Big PSUs have big fans though for less noise. And the good ones work semi-passively.
 
I have a Corsair SF 450 450W PSU with an IB Core i7 and a GTX1080FE and a few drives. Power consumption is between 140W to 280W at the wall during games,which when you take efficiency losses into place means the PSU is probably just above 50% load internally and for the most part the fan hardly spins up. I then saw a review of the Corsair One SFF system,which includes a Core i7 7700K and GTX1080 and they had a 400W version of the same PSU.
 
I've got a question around performance with my setup. I've got:

Ryzen 2700X with an H100i GTX cooling it
Asus X470-I motherboard with latest 0804 BIOS
16GB (2x8GB) of Corsair Vengeance LPX 3200MHz

Clean install of Windows 10 1803 for this setup. Latest AMD chipset drivers installed and Ryzen power profile enabled.

It all worked perfectly right from the start, no issues whatsoever. RAM worked straight away at 3200MHz with the DOCP profile enabled so it's all good on that front. I'm just not sure about my Cinebench and CPU-Z benchmark scores. I realise these aren't exactly important but my setup seems to be scoring a fair bit less than others. Cinebench is coming in at around 1750cb which seems a little on the low side as most 2700X reviews show it at around 1850. Also the CPU-Z single thread score is around 480 while mine is scoring 440.

All in all not a huge deal but I'm a bit confused as to why it's scoring a fair bit lower than other identical CPUs. It seems to be maxing out at about 3.95-4GHz so either my CPU is crap or the hot weather isn't helping XFR2 do its thing. I suspect that's a part of it, as I believe other people are seeing XFR2 boosts of 4.1-4.2GHz while mine never seems to clock itself over 4GHz. Has anyone else noticed lower XFR boosts since the hot weather kicked in? I haven't paid much attention to temps yet to be fair.

Also on the subject of XFR, my CPU speeds seem to be all over the place even with it at idle. It also doesn't seem to clock down much. Even after tweaking the Ryzen power profile to allow minimum CPU state of 5% it never seems to clock below 2.3GHz. Is this normal or am I missing something? Most of the time it will sit at some speed in the 3GHz range when idle which seems a bit weird to me. HWMonitor also shows core speeds and voltages constantly fluctuating. Just different behaviour compared to my Intel systems where when idle, they would usually sit at their downclocked speed and a relatively static voltage, so there probably is no issue at all but I'm just curious.

TLDR; CPU only seems to clock to a max of 4GHz under XFR. Is my CPU crap or is it because of the hot weather or maybe something else? Also CPU speed never seems to drop much at idle and volts/core speeds hop all over the place even at idle which - is that normal for Ryzen setups or is something not right?
 
Phemo said:
I've got a question around performance with my setup. I've got:

Ryzen 2700X with an H100i GTX cooling it
Asus X470-I motherboard with latest 0804 BIOS
16GB (2x8GB) of Corsair Vengeance LPX 3200MHz

Clean install of Windows 10 1803 for this setup. Latest AMD chipset drivers installed and Ryzen power profile enabled.

It all worked perfectly right from the start, no issues whatsoever. RAM worked straight away at 3200MHz with the DOCP profile enabled so it's all good on that front. I'm just not sure about my Cinebench and CPU-Z benchmark scores. I realise these aren't exactly important but my setup seems to be scoring a fair bit less than others. Cinebench is coming in at around 1750cb which seems a little on the low side as most 2700X reviews show it at around 1850. Also the CPU-Z single thread score is around 480 while mine is scoring 440.

All in all not a huge deal but I'm a bit confused as to why it's scoring a fair bit lower than other identical CPUs. It seems to be maxing out at about 3.95-4GHz so either my CPU is crap or the hot weather isn't helping XFR2 do its thing. I suspect that's a part of it, as I believe other people are seeing XFR2 boosts of 4.1-4.2GHz while mine never seems to clock itself over 4GHz. Has anyone else noticed lower XFR boosts since the hot weather kicked in? I haven't paid much attention to temps yet to be fair.

Also on the subject of XFR, my CPU speeds seem to be all over the place even with it at idle. It also doesn't seem to clock down much. Even after tweaking the Ryzen power profile to allow minimum CPU state of 5% it never seems to clock below 2.3GHz. Is this normal or am I missing something? Most of the time it will sit at some speed in the 3GHz range when idle which seems a bit weird to me. HWMonitor also shows core speeds and voltages constantly fluctuating. Just different behaviour compared to my Intel systems where when idle, they would usually sit at their downclocked speed and a relatively static voltage, so there probably is no issue at all but I'm just curious.

TLDR; CPU only seems to clock to a max of 4GHz under XFR. Is my CPU crap or is it because of the hot weather or maybe something else? Also CPU speed never seems to drop much at idle and volts/core speeds hop all over the place even at idle which - is that normal for Ryzen setups or is something not right?
Click to expand...

You want to use Windows Balanced profile. No need for the Ryzen one anymore. That'll be why you're not clocking down at idle.

In regards to the ~4.3Ghz boost, check your BIOS for (IIRC) performance enhancer, enable that.
 
There is variation in reviews, more i would say than margins of error.

Techspot: 1771 https://www.techspot.com/review/1613-amd-ryzen-2700x-2600x/
Hothardware: 1783 https://hothardware.com/news/amd-ry...r-benchmarks-leak-435ghz-turbo-clock-achieved
Guru3D: 1828 http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/amd-ryzen-7-2700x-review,9.html
Techreport: 1847 https://techreport.com/review/33531/amd-ryzen-7-2700x-and-ryzen-5-2600x-cpus-reviewed/6

Its a difference of 4/5%

I think maybe it has to do with memory timings, Corsair LPX are not great i think they will be something like 16-17-17 Timings ?

I know i'm beaten by a couple % in cinebench by people with better memory than me, no matter how hard i try...
 
Phemo said:
I've got a question around performance with my setup. I've got:

Ryzen 2700X with an H100i GTX cooling it
Asus X470-I motherboard with latest 0804 BIOS
16GB (2x8GB) of Corsair Vengeance LPX 3200MHz

Clean install of Windows 10 1803 for this setup. Latest AMD chipset drivers installed and Ryzen power profile enabled.

It all worked perfectly right from the start, no issues whatsoever. RAM worked straight away at 3200MHz with the DOCP profile enabled so it's all good on that front. I'm just not sure about my Cinebench and CPU-Z benchmark scores. I realise these aren't exactly important but my setup seems to be scoring a fair bit less than others. Cinebench is coming in at around 1750cb which seems a little on the low side as most 2700X reviews show it at around 1850. Also the CPU-Z single thread score is around 480 while mine is scoring 440.

All in all not a huge deal but I'm a bit confused as to why it's scoring a fair bit lower than other identical CPUs. It seems to be maxing out at about 3.95-4GHz so either my CPU is crap or the hot weather isn't helping XFR2 do its thing. I suspect that's a part of it, as I believe other people are seeing XFR2 boosts of 4.1-4.2GHz while mine never seems to clock itself over 4GHz. Has anyone else noticed lower XFR boosts since the hot weather kicked in? I haven't paid much attention to temps yet to be fair.

Also on the subject of XFR, my CPU speeds seem to be all over the place even with it at idle. It also doesn't seem to clock down much. Even after tweaking the Ryzen power profile to allow minimum CPU state of 5% it never seems to clock below 2.3GHz. Is this normal or am I missing something? Most of the time it will sit at some speed in the 3GHz range when idle which seems a bit weird to me. HWMonitor also shows core speeds and voltages constantly fluctuating. Just different behaviour compared to my Intel systems where when idle, they would usually sit at their downclocked speed and a relatively static voltage, so there probably is no issue at all but I'm just curious.

TLDR; CPU only seems to clock to a max of 4GHz under XFR. Is my CPU crap or is it because of the hot weather or maybe something else? Also CPU speed never seems to drop much at idle and volts/core speeds hop all over the place even at idle which - is that normal for Ryzen setups or is something not right?
Click to expand...

For all core workloads it should be hitting roughly 4ghz, for single core it should boost 4.35 ish. Try cinebench multi and then single, see what it does.

If you memory has crappy timings it will affect benchies somewhat.
 
Hardware snobbery has been around a while, I would say the biggest component is on PSUs.

People get told if they buy a budget orientated PSU it will explode at some point and maybe fry some components, I have to this day even when overclocking CPUs and GPUs have not yet had a PSU blow up on me. I have had only one PSU failure of any nature in the past 10+ years, Then there is also the buy a 700+ watt psu for your 250 watt GPU.
 
Actually i had countless cheap PSU's blow out in the late nineties, early 2000's. Have always bought decent models since. Once i started buying Seasonics / Corsairs (when was rebadged Seasonics!) and others, never had one let go since.

I always tell people never to scrimp on PSU's. Saying that maybe the pendulum has swung a big too far. I suspect there's many different definitions of "budget" .

Presumably there's still a huge difference between the budget end of Corsair(purely chosen for example) etc and Computer fair £20 Chinese cack PSU's that i used to use that would give up in a very smelly smokey way many years back.
 
chrcoluk said:
Hardware snobbery has been around a while, I would say the biggest component is on PSUs.

People get told if they buy a budget orientated PSU it will explode at some point and maybe fry some components, I have to this day even when overclocking CPUs and GPUs have not yet had a PSU blow up on me. I have had only one PSU failure of any nature in the past 10+ years, Then there is also the buy a 700+ watt psu for your 250 watt GPU.
Click to expand...

As neil473 has said, in the early 2000's, psu's would quite happily fry rigs on a regular basis. I well remember all the threads on this very forum at the time, it was a big issue. It was a big issue because nearly all the manufacturers lied about the output and capacity of psu's. In the early to mid 2000's when a lot of us started using SLI and Crossfire, it became crystal clear they were lieing. At the time i decided to buy a PC Power and Cooling 1KW psu to get over the issue. That same psu is alive and chugging away to this day in my X58 rig. A few years latter i bought a Dark Power Pro 1KW psu, it's still now powering the rig i'm typing from and in my sig.
In my case, it's not a case of "hardware snobbery", it's a case of buy the best because it will last for years. How many peeps on here have had the same psu for over 15 years, not many would be my guess.
 
Yeah not many as in that time specifications changed sata power connectors, pcie and things like c7 etc

I always get a reputable brand but usually their lower line not top tier stuff
 
There is a big difference between a cheap PSU from some unknown company/OEM or a cheaper PSU from a better known one. For example,I have a FSP 400W jobbie bought in 2011 for £15 to £20 which has been powering an AMD Llano rig ever since. The caps were not bad for the class of PSU,and the design was a well characterised one which had the necessary protections. For my main rigs I tend to go for higher tier stuff since they are SFF systems and are more thermally constrained,ie,need to work OK at a higher temperature but I don't go overboard on the wattage,ie,they tend to be 450W ~500W class PSUs.
 
chrcoluk said:
yeah but there is people who tell you to avoid low end branded psus because they not the best components
Click to expand...

I go by price and usage TBH,and check the reviews to make sure everything is OK OFC(all protections are there). One of the things which helps with PSU lifespan is a case with solid airflow,which interestingly does not need to be too expensive either.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom