What's new
  • Please do not post any links until you have 3 posts as they will automatically be rejected to prevent SPAM. Many words are also blocked due to being used in SPAM Messages. Thanks!

Ryzen 3000 Overclocks

lowfat

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Feb 12, 2007
Messages
9,950
Location
Grande Prairie, AB
The only option in the BIOS to OC individual cores (only physical along with virtual core, so 8 only groups), is by changing the multiplier for each vs "sync mode" which changes the multiplier for all Cores....so you can "quazi oc" each core, but with base clock and vcore limitations....
Going back thru this thread (OC'ing will always grab me).....looks like your able to change frequency and/or multiplier with physical and virtual cores?...but Voltage will be the same across all when you set vcore....?
Are you able to sync all cores and find highest OC? Is there Load Line Calibration or something similar?....

curious is all....
What board are you using?

When you are setting a voltage in the bios or Ryzen Master, then yes it sets a constant voltage as far as i can tell. Although if a core is sleeping it does get a lower voltage. There is no way to set a voltage per CCD/CCX as far as I am aware. In theory if you are using a voltage offset, that probably is the best of both worlds.

I'd highly suggest using CCD/CCX overclocking if possible as you'll likely have one CCD/CCX that clocks higher than the other.


EDIT: So I just did some testing. On my Asus board I can set the VID in the bios under the CCD overclocking menu. I set 1.25V and that becomes the max limit. So only the cores being stressed will use up to 1.25V. Going to have to run a lot of stress testing to see if setting max VID instead of a solid voltage will have any affect on stability.

EDIT2: Well it definitely isn't near stable. Previously I had ran a week straight of [email protected], which is an AVX load. Now not even an hour stable.
 
Last edited:

rjbarker

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 19, 2008
Messages
6,609
Location
Courtenay, B.C
Maybe some confusion....I'm not using AMD platform...but was referring to my Maximus XI Extreme and 9900k (when I mentioned able to set clock speeds for each core ...by way of different multiplier....or "syncing all cores" to the same multiplier.....just looking at the differences and perhaps similarities to OC'ing....if the next round of Ryzen chips can push the 5 Ghz frequency I may consider taking a closer look....

...with the Intel Boards (Z390) I know there are some folks running 1 or 2 cores at 5.1 or even 5.2 Ghz...with remaining cores at 4.7 - 4.8....whereever they can find the sweet stable spot....but my OCD messes with me too much having cores running at different speeds ;)
 

Sagath

Moderator
Staff member
Folding Team
Joined
Feb 7, 2009
Messages
4,442
Location
Edmonton, AB
Have you done any more work on this LF? I sat down today and burned about 5 hours overclocking my 3900x. I didnt fiddle with the CCD/CCX overclocking, and Ive got it stable (I use this relative, as obviously I haven't stress tested it for 2 hours) at 4.3 all core @1.3v

I would have to do more research in to CCD/CCX overclocking with Ryzen Master, but to be honest, that program is such a GIANT piece of shit I'm not sure its worth the time to eek out an extra ~100 mhz on a random core here and there.
 

lowfat

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Feb 12, 2007
Messages
9,950
Location
Grande Prairie, AB
Have you done any more work on this LF? I sat down today and burned about 5 hours overclocking my 3900x. I didnt fiddle with the CCD/CCX overclocking, and Ive got it stable (I use this relative, as obviously I haven't stress tested it for 2 hours) at 4.3 all core @1.3v

I would have to do more research in to CCD/CCX overclocking with Ryzen Master, but to be honest, that program is such a GIANT piece of shit I'm not sure its worth the time to eek out an extra ~100 mhz on a random core here and there.
IMO I think 1.3v is too high for a 24/7. At least that is what the internet is telling me.

I did do CCD overclocking but decided not to try to scrape every single MHz out of each CCX like I had previously. I have CCD0 @ 4.3GHz and CCD1 @ 4.2GHz. I set VID to 1.265v. As you can see the average voltage does drop. Setting a static vcore does not allow voltage to drop, at least for my board. I did all the trial and error in Ryzen Master, then just set the CCD values in the bios. I did 5 days of [email protected] stress testing, which is an AVX load. So I think its good.

1.PNG
 

Sagath

Moderator
Staff member
Folding Team
Joined
Feb 7, 2009
Messages
4,442
Location
Edmonton, AB
I've given up with Ryzen Master, since it crashes for me if I move the mouse (or so it seems). Its a lot more difficult to tweak that stuff without it, since it means a full reboot/test/repeat.

What a piece of garbage program.
 

JD

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Jul 16, 2007
Messages
9,752
Location
Toronto, ON
4.3 all core @1.3v
I have CCD0 @ 4.3GHz and CCD1 @ 4.2GHz.
Do you guys find this beneficial though? At stock, mine seems to do 4.1GHz all core, so it's really only gaining 100-200MHz while losing the ability to boost to 4.6GHz. My main usage is gaming, so I've stuck to running stock so I can get the fastest single threaded performance possible.

I guess if you're constantly doing heavy CPU load, then it makes sense to gain the extra couple MHz.
 

lowfat

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Feb 12, 2007
Messages
9,950
Location
Grande Prairie, AB
Do you guys find this beneficial though? At stock, mine seems to do 4.1GHz all core, so it's really only gaining 100-200MHz while losing the ability to boost to 4.6GHz. My main usage is gaming, so I've stuck to running stock so I can get the fastest single threaded performance possible.

I guess if you're constantly doing heavy CPU load, then it makes sense to gain the extra couple MHz.
Boosting to 4.6GHz in a single thread seems mostly useless to me. Anything running in the background and clocks would drop. Even just trying to run a single threaded app like SuperPi and I never saw it maintain 4.6GHz for more than a few seconds at a time. I made a post earlier about it. I could maintain a 4.4GHz single core load. Multi-core max was 4.15GHz, and its bouncing off 95C because it uses excessive voltage. At my current settings even w/ an AVX load I max @ 81C.

The other issue I've had is Windows juggles the process from core to core, moving it to a non-preferred core, which has a lower max boost clock. If I'm launching a game, I am currently setting affinity manually to all on my 4.3GHz CCD.
 

Bond007

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 24, 2009
Messages
5,615
Location
Nova Scotia
Thread bump -

I see minimal mention of running a negative offset and any benefits in this thread. I have read quite a bit of people successfully leaving stock freq (vice chasing a possible couple hundred mhz), and using a negative offset of .05 to .1on avg with very measurable drops in temps/power and the same or more performance.

anyone played with that at all?
 

JD

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Jul 16, 2007
Messages
9,752
Location
Toronto, ON
I had tried, but either Gigabyte sucks, or my 3900X isn't a great chip. Dropping the voltage didn't seem to yield any notable benefits for me. Perhaps power usage might have been lower, but that's not something I really check.
 

Latest posts

Twitter

Top