# AMD Ryzen 7 3700X, 3800X and Ryzen 9 3900X



## dantoddd

can we see a performance comparison between equally prices intel comparison including the new i9-9900KS. I think this looks like a clear win for AMD, but by how much is interesting question, especially for gaming. I'm also not too enthused by Navi at this point.


----------



## Prophet4NO1

Let's hope it lives up to the hype. If these are as good as they claim in the real world, we are looking at a real monster lineup.


----------



## FlanK3r

next models for launch:
https://videocardz.com/80798/amd-ryzen-3000-series-12-core-ryzen-9-3900x-at-499-usd


----------



## poah

I'm waiting for the 16 core unit before I upgrade


----------



## Dreamliner

It looks like the 9900K/3800X are pretty much identical. What I don’t understand is how the 9700K is getting walloped by the 3700X, you’d think there was a core count difference or something...?

Nice to see AMD competing on an IPC level again. Hopefully this will drive Intel to do some real R&D and bring down their prices. 

The 3900X looks like an awesome bargain!


----------



## hickelpickle

The 9700k is only 8 cores no hyperthreading, while the 3700x 8c/16t. 3700x is same as 3800k just a lower bin/clock.


----------



## Dreamliner

hickelpickle said:


> The 9700k is only 8 cores no hyperthreading, while the 3700x 8c/16t. 3700x is same as 3800k just a lower bin/clock.


 Oh that’s right, I forgot about the hyperthreading bit. That makes sense. 

Are you sure the 3700X and 3800X are the same? The 3700X is only 65W but the 3800X is 105W.


----------



## ibb27

I'll get R7 3700X with Asus ROG Crosshair VIII Impact. Can't wait to build new PC!
Effectively doubling cores and threads to my current config, thank you AMD! :thumb:


----------



## deepor

Dreamliner said:


> Oh that’s right, I forgot about the hyperthreading bit. That makes sense.
> 
> Are you sure the 3700X and 3800X are the same? The 3700X is only 65W but the 3800X is 105W.


I would assume it's the same hardware design, it's just the turbo clocks set up differently for the default BIOS settings. The 105W model will keep the clock higher when all cores are in use.


----------



## Dreamliner

ibb27 said:


> I'll get R7 3700X with Asus ROG Crosshair VIII Impact. Can't wait to build new PC!
> Effectively doubling cores and threads to my current config, thank you AMD! :thumb:


That board will probably cost more than the chip. Yuck. Asus sells too many boards. If you are going to spend the money for Asus, at least get a TUF series board for the reliability and 5-year warranty.


deepor said:


> I would assume it's the same hardware design, it's just the turbo clocks set up differently for the default BIOS settings. The 105W model will keep the clock higher when all cores are in use.


It will be interesting to see overclockability. Perhaps the 65W will limit the chip and is a way to get people to pay for the faster chip. 

Either way, I couldn’t imagine not spending the extra $100 to go right to the 3900X... and for how long a desktop can last it is obviously the best choice for anyone building a new system.


----------



## ibb27

Dreamliner said:


> That board will probably cost more than the chip. Yuck. Asus sells too many boards. If you are going to spend the money for Asus, at least get a TUF series board for the reliability and 5-year warranty.


It's fine for me MB to cost more than a CPU. I'll def upgrade the CPU, when 16 core version is ready. Previous TUF boards were nothing special, but I'll keep eye on the Asrock miniITX boards too.


----------



## NightAntilli

The difference in power between these CPUs is interesting...

Ryzen 9 3900X	
7nm 12/24
3.8 / 4.6 GHz
105W
499 USD

Ryzen 7 3800X	
7nm 8/16
3.9 / 4.5 GHz
105W
399 USD

Ryzen 7 3700X	
7nm 8/16
3.6 / 4.4 GHz
65W
329 USD

Ryzen 5 3600X	
7nm 6/12
3.8 / 4.4 GHz
95W
249 USD

Ryzen 5 3600	
7nm 6/12
3.6 / 4.2 GHz
65W
199 USD

The 3600X has a higher TDP compared to the 3700X, with only 0.2 GHz higher base clock and the same 4.4 GHz boost clock, while having 2 cores less...
The 3600 has the same TDP as the 3700X, despite having 2 cores less, the same base clock and a lower boost clock...
The 3800 and 3900 have the same TDP, despite the 3900 have 4 additional cores (that's 50% more cores), with only 0.1 GHz lower base clock and a 0.1 GHz higher boost clock...

If this was a leak, I would call it fake lol... 
But in all seriousness... We know that the 3900X uses two 6 core chiplets. These are definitely binned much higher compared to the 3600 and 3600X. I don't think the 3600 and 3600X are using two 3 core chiplets. Maybe they are also binning the I/O dies to lower power consumption on the more expensive parts, because I see no other way that the TDP could be like it is now.


----------



## Offler

What are two other chiplets? HBM2?


----------



## Mandarb

Offler said:


> What are two other chiplets? HBM2?


The big chip is the IO die while the smaller chiplets are the the actual 8 core CPU dies.

How they are set up we will see. I will take a guess and say the R7 3700X is a single CPU die while the R7 3800X is two chiplets with 4 cores active each. But we'll see if it's just binning or a difference in the topology between the two. We still don't know exactly where the caches are located etc. Might be the 3800X has more cache than the 3700X. But a bigger cache size on the R9 3900X suggests it might be located on the CPU dies.


----------



## Schottky

The 3700X with 65W TDP looks good to me. 

I want to try to keep the temps down and maybe even use a fanless MB like the Gigabyte X570 AORUS XTREME.


----------



## Spirillum

Very interesting! I'll be keeping an eye on the reviews and benchmarks as they come, but this could very well be a platform for me to upgrade to from my Broadwell-E at 4.6 GHz.


----------



## miklkit

Hey! A cpu thread in the AMD forums. Where is the motherboard thread?


Hmm. 3700X or 3800X?


----------



## ShrimpBrime

miklkit said:


> Hey! A cpu thread in the AMD forums. Where is the motherboard thread?
> 
> 
> Hmm. 3700X or 3800X?


Stick with m y 2700x till 2020 and hope for 3700x/3800x prices come down a little.


----------



## Kryton

I'm just waiting for Shrimpy to pop the top on one.

That and the release of these - Will be looking at them closely.


----------



## FlanK3r

For my PC will be 3700X or 3800X right choice and for benchtable Ryzen 9 3900X


----------



## AlphaC

deepor said:


> I would assume it's the same hardware design, it's just the turbo clocks set up differently for the default BIOS settings. The 105W model will keep the clock higher when all cores are in use.


 It's probably a higher power limit for the Ryzen 7 3800X and silicon likely binned for lower power on the 65W model rather than higher clocks.

The claim is +32% over Ryzen 7 1800X in CB R20 1T to the Ryzen 9 3900X (4.6Ghz boost) which is rather large.





Dreamliner said:


> That board will probably cost more than the chip. Yuck. Asus sells too many boards. If you are going to spend the money for Asus, at least get a TUF series board for the reliability and 5-year warranty.
> 
> It will be interesting to see overclockability. Perhaps the 65W will limit the chip and is a way to get people to pay for the faster chip.
> 
> Either way, I couldn’t imagine not spending the extra $100 to go right to the 3900X... and for how long a desktop can last it is obviously the best choice for anyone building a new system.


Or you could just not buy ASUS and get something as cheap as the X570 TUF board from another vendor (Asrock/Gigabyte/MSI X570) that is better in every way (IO, power, features, aesthetic vs TUF and STRIX).

The TUF lineup is no longer a good lineup, it's literally their lowest end board besides the -K boards and the ASUS no name ones. If you look at z390 and Nvidia GPUs for example it's ROG Crosshair/Maximus > STRIX > PRIME/Dual > TUF


Update: the article over on https://edgeup.asus.com/2019/the-x570-motherboard-guide-ryzen-to-victory-with-pci-express-4-0/2/ suggests it's 12 powerstages but I'll believe it when actual reviewers look at it

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ryzen 5 might have a hard time breaking into the market at MSRP:
https://www.anandtech.com/show/1440...-cores-for-499-up-to-46-ghz-pcie-40-coming-77
Ryzen 5 3600X 6 cores 12 threads , 3.8GHz base and 4.4GHz boost $250
Ryzen 5 3600 6 cores 12 threads , 3.6GHz base and 4.2GHz boost $200


----------



## Damaging Excess

I'm waiting till I get some benchmarks for the likes of Gamers Nexus or other third party sites before I hop on the hype train but I do want these to be good. With the issues Intel has been having with things like Specter and Spoiler my confidence in Intel is just not great. I realize me being effected by these issues is really slim but the performance hits from the "fixes" is something I'm just not ok with. I love the performance of my 8700k but I'll gladly sell it for some peace of mind


----------



## MacMus

I'm waiting for tr4.. I will settle on 64 cores I think and then I will be content.


----------



## speed_demon

No word on the G variants with integrated GPU?

Edit: AMD has the new processors live on their official website - 

Ryzen 9 3900x - https://www.amd.com/en/product/8436

Ryzen 7 3800x - https://www.amd.com/en/product/8441

Ryzen 7 3700x https://www.amd.com/en/product/8446

Ryzen 5 3600 - https://www.amd.com/en/product/8456


----------



## doggymad

Anyone any thoughts on what UK pricing will be? I have a budget of around £2k (including a good monitor).

I'm going to buy on 7th July (or 8th as 7th is a Monday).

I'm thinking:

Ryzen 9 3900X
Radeon VII
32GB DDR4 3000Mhz+
Samsung 1TB 970 PRO V-NAND M.2 (or PCIe 4.0 similar)
2TB HDD
Gigabyte mATX x570 Motherboard
850W PSU

My first upgrade in 7 years so pushing the boat out a bit so it hopefully lasts another 7 years!


----------



## chrisjames61

Dreamliner said:


> That board will probably cost more than the chip. Yuck. Asus sells too many boards. If you are going to spend the money for Asus, at least get a TUF series board for the reliability and 5-year warranty.


THe legendary TUF series boards like the Sabertooth 990FX R2 are long gone. The TUF branded boards of today are garbage.


----------



## Malkorath

How would X370 boards like the Crosshair VI Hero cope with the 3800X and 3900X? Will there be official support for the 3900X or would I have to upgrade to an X570 board? 

Money's been tight so I can afford only the 3900X on X370 or else I would have to drop down to the 3700X or even the 3600X if I have to upgrade to X570, depending on pricing.


----------



## Grin

System Memory Specification 3200MHz
System Memory Type DDR4
Memory Channels 2

How about ECC support? Any rumors?


----------



## Quesoblanco

Malkorath said:


> How would X370 boards like the Crosshair VI Hero cope with the 3800X and 3900X? Will there be official support for the 3900X or would I have to upgrade to an X570 board?
> 
> Money's been tight so I can afford only the 3900X on X370 or else I would have to drop down to the 3700X or even the 3600X if I have to upgrade to X570, depending on pricing.







your mobo will be more than enough for a new 8 core.


----------



## junglechocolate

If the pricing is true. As much as I want to support AMD, I can nab a 9900k for 270ish with my employee discount for Intel. My eye was on the 3800x but I can get a 9900k much cheaper. Not worth it to do AMD no?

What technologies would the new Ryzen introduce I'd miss out on?


----------



## betam4x

NightAntilli said:


> The difference in power between these CPUs is interesting...
> 
> Ryzen 9 3900X
> 7nm 12/24
> 3.8 / 4.6 GHz
> 105W
> 499 USD
> 
> Ryzen 7 3800X
> 7nm 8/16
> 3.9 / 4.5 GHz
> 105W
> 399 USD
> 
> Ryzen 7 3700X
> 7nm 8/16
> 3.6 / 4.4 GHz
> 65W
> 329 USD
> 
> Ryzen 5 3600X
> 7nm 6/12
> 3.8 / 4.4 GHz
> 95W
> 249 USD
> 
> Ryzen 5 3600
> 7nm 6/12
> 3.6 / 4.2 GHz
> 65W
> 199 USD
> 
> The 3600X has a higher TDP compared to the 3700X, with only 0.2 GHz higher base clock and the same 4.4 GHz boost clock, while having 2 cores less...
> The 3600 has the same TDP as the 3700X, despite having 2 cores less, the same base clock and a lower boost clock...
> The 3800 and 3900 have the same TDP, despite the 3900 have 4 additional cores (that's 50% more cores), with only 0.1 GHz lower base clock and a 0.1 GHz higher boost clock...
> 
> If this was a leak, I would call it fake lol...
> But in all seriousness... We know that the 3900X uses two 6 core chiplets. These are definitely binned much higher compared to the 3600 and 3600X. I don't think the 3600 and 3600X are using two 3 core chiplets. Maybe they are also binning the I/O dies to lower power consumption on the more expensive parts, because I see no other way that the TDP could be like it is now.


It tells me AMD is Sandbagging. They likely are holding back some of the higher quality chiplets this time around for an x50 refresh down the line (and also for Threadripper) in response to any desperate moves by Intel. Stuff like this happened the last time AMD and Intel did the rounds with the Athlon/Athlon64/AthlonFX and Pentium 3/4.


----------



## Dreamliner

AlphaC said:


> Or you could just not buy ASUS and get something as cheap as the X570 TUF board from another vendor (Asrock/Gigabyte/MSI X570) that is better in every way (IO, power, features, aesthetic vs TUF and STRIX).
> 
> The TUF lineup is no longer a good lineup, it's literally their lowest end board besides the -K boards and the ASUS no name ones. If you look at z390 and Nvidia GPUs for example it's ROG Crosshair/Maximus > STRIX > PRIME/Dual > TUF
> 
> Update: the article over on https://edgeup.asus.com/2019/the-x570-motherboard-guide-ryzen-to-victory-with-pci-express-4-0/2/ suggests it's 12 powerstages but I'll believe it when actual reviewers look at it


That was kind of my point. If you're going to spend the money for Asus, you may as well get something for it. I just noticed Asus dropped the TUF warranty from 5-years to 3-years. Disappointing. I don't know a ton about AMD boards anymore but when I was looking for a x299 board I liked what I saw on the Asrock Fatal1ty XE...it was just too much money and I was able to score a TUF x299 Mark 1 for $148. Half price boards are always worth it. 



chrisjames61 said:


> THe legendary TUF series boards like the Sabertooth 990FX R2 are long gone. The TUF branded boards of today are garbage.


It does look like TUF is an echo of what Sabertooth used to be. I don't care about anything except stability and reliability. RGB, liquid cooling, heck even case windows all seem pointless to me. Asus has always delivered me reliable boards and have given 1+ Ghz overclocks to all my chips. I still think they need to focus on less boards, they have so many products often only a few dollars separating them. 

The 3900X is very tempting but I told myself I wouldn't upgrade again until single core performance is at least 50% greater than what I have now, so that will be quite awhile...although my board and chip alone are still worth $600, so you never know...


----------



## Maracus

Think I will grab the 3900x 12 core and BLCK overclock it to 4.7ghz boost


----------



## ibb27

Grin said:


> System Memory Specification 3200MHz
> System Memory Type DDR4
> Memory Channels 2
> 
> How about ECC support? Any rumors?


ECC support - Asus Pro WS X570 Ace, haven't seen workstation MB on other manufacturers.


----------



## poah

junglechocolate said:


> If the pricing is true. As much as I want to support AMD, I can nab a 9900k for 270ish with my employee discount for Intel. My eye was on the 3800x but I can get a 9900k much cheaper. Not worth it to do AMD no?
> 
> What technologies would the new Ryzen introduce I'd miss out on?



pricing is very pretty much the same as the releases of previous ryzen cpus at launch. I bought my 1700 7 months after launch and it was almost £100 cheaper.


----------



## junglechocolate

poah said:


> pricing is very pretty much the same as the releases of previous ryzen cpus at launch. I bought my 1700 7 months after launch and it was almost £100 cheaper.


I'm on an X58 build. There no fricking way I am waiting 7 more months after July to upgrade from a 11 yeard old platform. I've waited long enough.


----------



## poah

junglechocolate said:


> I'm on an X58 build. There no fricking way I am waiting 7 more months after July to upgrade from a 11 yeard old platform. I've waited long enough.



you'll just need to suck it up then lol


----------



## junglechocolate

poah said:


> you'll just need to suck it up then lol


suck what up? Waiting for a 100 dollar price reduction or just using my discount to nab a 9900k for 270?


----------



## Dreamliner

junglechocolate said:


> suck what up? Waiting for a 100 dollar price reduction or just using my discount to nab a 9900k for 270?


It looks like the 9900K and 3800X will be pretty close in performance. It also looks like the 3900X will be pretty much be a 9900K + 4 more cores (so total scores will look like ~30% faster). The 3900X also looks similar to Threadripper as they've spread the cores out to a couple dies which means you'll probably have to mess with that Ryzen Master software and toggle "Creator Mode" & "Game Mode" depending on what your doing like with Threadripper (something about games seeing it as 2 CPUs or something).

You'll have to buy DDR4 memory either way but AMD is more sensitive to memory performance so you'll likely spend a bit more on that side too. My sticks are 2400 so I'd probably have to upgrade if I switched. If you were wanting the 3900X it might be a tougher decision, but I'd easily take the 9900k for $270 over a 3800X for $400. No question.

You got lucky with the X58 platform, it had very long legs. I'd pickup that 9900K, a reasonable board, memory and D15S cooler (reliability) and not look back.


----------



## mito1172

Quesoblanco said:


> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qn3rd6N9vGM
> 
> your mobo will be more than enough for a new 8 core.


Not enough for the 3900X?


----------



## Ph42oN

I was hoping for ryzen 5 with 8 cores, that would have been great. But since its not true, i will have to wait benchmarks and see if it will be worth paying extra for 8 cores over 6.

I think i will get 3600, 3600x or 3700x to replace my 1600x, while keeping my Prime x370 Pro.


----------



## junglechocolate

Dreamliner said:


> It looks like the 9900K and 3800X will be pretty close in performance. It also looks like the 3900X will be pretty much be a 9900K + 4 more cores (so total scores will look like ~30% faster). The 3900X also looks similar to Threadripper as they've spread the cores out to a couple dies which means you'll probably have to mess with that Ryzen Master software and toggle "Creator Mode" & "Game Mode" depending on what your doing like with Threadripper (something about games seeing it as 2 CPUs or something).
> 
> You'll have to buy DDR4 memory either way but AMD is more sensitive to memory performance so you'll likely spend a bit more on that side too. My sticks are 2400 so I'd probably have to upgrade if I switched. If you were wanting the 3900X it might be a tougher decision, but I'd easily take the 9900k for $270 over a 3800X for $400. No question.
> 
> *You got lucky with the X58 platform, it had very long legs*. I'd pickup that 9900K, a reasonable board, memory and D15S cooler (reliability) and not look back.


I really did. I loved this thing man. I don't know if there will ever be another platform that can last as long for a reaosnable price. only drawback to it today is no native SATA 3 and USB 3 headers. And it lags in demanding 3D vision games. I remember not needing to overspend at all for my 930 and Asrock extreme 3 mobo. Now the equivalent of Intel's X series are now stupid expensive so i gotta settle with normal ethusiast 9900k build. Any idea on how long the 9900k can last?

Yeah I looked at 3900x and as much as i like AMD, i as a student right now cannot bring myself to spend 500 bucks on it. I wish them the best but if indeed the 9900k is gonna be close to these two, AND nad thats a big AND, I am not losing an peripheral gen leaps that will actually make a differnce in day to day gaming, like PCIE 4 and USB 4 or whatever, then yeah I guess the 9900k might be migth best option. I don't think i need 12 cores for gaming yes? 

I'll keep an eye out for a 9900KS since those are suppoesd to go to 5GHz. I think our internal store should have them if its consumer. NVM its not supposed to be until Q4. do i really need the extra 300mhz. The 9900k goes to 4.7ghz no on air?


----------



## Dreamliner

junglechocolate said:


> I really did. I loved this thing man. I don't know if there will ever be another platform that can last as long for a reaosnable price. only drawback to it today is no native SATA 3 and USB 3 headers. And it lags in demanding 3D vision games. I remember not needing to overspend at all for my 930 and Asrock extreme 3 mobo. Now the equivalent of Intel's X series are now stupid expensive so i gotta settle with normal ethusiast 9900k build. *Any idea on how long the 9900k can last?
> 
> Yeah I looked at 3900x and as much as i like AMD, i as a student right now cannot bring myself to spend 500 bucks on it. I wish them the best but if indeed the 9900k is gonna be close to these two, AND nad thats a big AND, I am not losing an peripheral gen leaps that will actually make a differnce in day to day gaming, like PCIE 4 and USB 4 or whatever, then yeah I guess the 9900k might be migth best option. I don't think i need 12 cores for gaming yes?
> 
> I'll keep an eye out for a 9900KS since those are suppoesd to go to 5GHz. I think our internal store should have them if its consumer.*


*
At this point it's anyone's guess. It is easy to see right now the name of the bragging rights game is cores....4, 8, 12, 16...who knows where or if it will end. For gaming, I'd bet it will be an extremely long time before we see anything benefiting from more than 8-cores, especially since its a GPU bottleneck and most 4-core chips see no issues. I only ended up on Intel HEDT again due to a special circumstance (similar to yours) but the value isn't there for 99.9% of people. OC'd my 7820X barely catches a 9900K, unless you're doing video editing or similar, Intel HEDT just doesn't make sense.

AMD has made it hard to choose the 3700X over 3800X and the 3800X over 3900X, they are all priced so closely. I think most people would be best served with the power-sipping 3700X but I suspect most enthusiasts on here will be grabbing the 3800X for the OC headroom. Building from scratch at MSRP, AMD is the clear winner if the keynote benches are accurate...but not everyone pays MSRP. *


----------



## junglechocolate

Dreamliner said:


> At this point it's anyone's guess. It is easy to see right now the name of the bragging rights game is cores....4, 8, 12, 16...who knows where or if it will end. For gaming, I'd bet it will be an extremely long time before we see anything benefiting from more than 8-cores, especially since its a GPU bottleneck and most 4-core chips see no issues. I only ended up on the Intel HEDT again due to a special circumstance (similar to yours) but the value isn't there for 99.9% of people. OC'd my 7820X barely catches a 9900K, unless you're doing video editing or similar, Intel HEDT just doesn't make sense.
> 
> AMD has made it hard to choose the 3700X over 3800X and the 3800X over 3900X, they are all priced so closely. I think most people would be best served with the power-sipping 3700X but I suspect most enthusiasts on here will be grabbing the 3800X for the OC headroom.


I could get the 9900X for 500 bucks but then it would not only cost the same as a better Ryzen but the mobo will be expensive AF. makes no sense to buy at all with Ryzen. 

belay that on the KS. I don't think the extra 300mhz gonna help me much. Not worth the Q4 wait. Why did you buy the x btw? The threadcount for video editing?


----------



## miklkit

Malkorath said:


> How would X370 boards like the Crosshair VI Hero cope with the 3800X and 3900X? Will there be official support for the 3900X or would I have to upgrade to an X570 board?
> 
> Money's been tight so I can afford only the 3900X on X370 or else I would have to drop down to the 3700X or even the 3600X if I have to upgrade to X570, depending on pricing.



I intend to drop a 3800X onto this Biostar X370 board. It uses the same vrms as the Crosshair so should be good to go after the bios update. If it doean't work out so well, then a new Biostar board and ram will happen so I can give this cpu, board, & ram to my grandson.


----------



## junglechocolate

Wait I actually just noticed the 3700x. *** is the point of a 3800x with a 3700x. Actually that makes no sense. Can anyone say why that thing exists? What the difference is? It would make buying a 9900k difficult in the sense of I really wanna support AMD


----------



## Damaging Excess

junglechocolate said:


> Wait I actually just noticed the 3700x. *** is the point of a 3800x with a 3700x. Actually that makes no sense. Can anyone say why that thing exists? What the difference is? It would make buying a 9900k difficult in the sense of I really wanna support AMD


The 3800x has a higher tdp if I remember right 

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk


----------



## Digitalwolf

junglechocolate said:


> Wait I actually just noticed the 3700x. *** is the point of a 3800x with a 3700x. Actually that makes no sense. Can anyone say why that thing exists? What the difference is? It would make buying a 9900k difficult in the sense of I really wanna support AMD



Without actually having reviews of how they run and/or overclock it's hard to say. To me it's not really much different than current gen where you have an X and non X version. Sure if you just want to drop a chip in and let XFR do it's thing the X makes sense... but with a tiny bit of tweaking the Non X version will likely run at the same clocks and on all cores (that's my personal experience).

So I guess those two exist so that people who just want the extra base clock and little bit extra boost clock guaranteed out of the box... can pay for it. *edit* I do realize there is a higher TDP on the 3800X but... I've also overclocked previous CPU's that had a lower TDP listed to the same levels as the higher TDP versions. That's why until there are actual reviews... this is my best guess.


----------



## Dreamliner

junglechocolate said:


> Wait I actually just noticed the 3700x. *** is the point of a 3800x with a 3700x. Actually that makes no sense. Can anyone say why that thing exists? What the difference is? It would make buying a 9900k difficult in the sense of I really wanna support AMD


3700x is 65w, 3800X is 105w. Won't that affect OC potential or no? Either way a $270 9900K is cheaper and faster than a $329 3700X. I'd also like to support AMD but Intel's discount program makes sticking with Intel a no-brainer.

I'll be real interested to see a 3700X/3800X OC vs 9900K OC, my bet is still on Intel. Like I said earlier: Building from scratch at MSRP, AMD is the clear winner if the keynote benches are accurate...but not everyone pays MSRP.


----------



## Roaches

Ryzen 2000 series SKU and price segmentation was pretty generous compared to this as compared to first gen Ryzen. I find Ryzen 3000 series to be somewhat confusing for still topping at 8 cores at R7 segment as it has been with the 1800X, 1700X and 1700. Motherboard pricing isn't very attractive in X570 finding it hard getting this over X399 or the future X499. I'll be staying on TR4 but will be getting an ITX for a 12 or 16 core mobile workstation build.

My expectations before Computex is increased core counts to trickle down across the stack hoping that:
R9 would be 2 16 core SKUs
R7 be 2 12 core SKUs
R5 be 2 8 core SKUs
R3 be 2 6 core SKUs
And leave out quad cores as Athlons at the bottom of the stack.

To me this means X470s R7 2700 and 2700X owners see very little reason to upgrade other than for new platform features and IPC uplift.

Computex keynote as expected pretty meh as always from AMD but still positive energy of the company's position moving forward.
Good for stockholder as this means big confidence of whats to come. I smell a bit of complacency from AMD if third gen Ryzen topped at 12 cores for the rest of the year and releasing 16 in a refresh.


----------



## raysheri

From what I've heard from content creators at Computex, the x570+Ryzen 3000 achieve a huge memory speed boost and word is 4000 speed ram OC is pretty doable. Apparently Asus have a new implementation to take advantage of this on some auto level. Maybe this has a connection to Samsung removing bdie ram sales to the mainstream as they can achieve high OC and push people to buy new high speed ram at high speed prices.

I'm wary of investing too much cash into X570 as in 2 yrs time, at most, they'll be new AMD socket and quantum leap in performance with Zen 4.
But for me the time has now come to retire the awesome 2600k and Maximus IV Extreme.


----------



## Quesoblanco

mito1172 said:


> Not enough for the 3900X?


Youre good for normal use case. He talks about it.


----------



## rediornot

I am really happy to see all of it when they come out with the new stuff, all of the "old" ones go on sale. That was how I got my 1700. I really wanted an 8 core 16 thread but I was not spending over $300 US to get it. When the 2nd gen came out, the first gen was reduced and the mobos with them so I got one. Price is already coming down on the 2nd gen.


----------



## AlphaC

rediornot said:


> I am really happy to see all of it when they come out with the new stuff, all of the "old" ones go on sale. That was how I got my 1700. I really wanted an 8 core 16 thread but I was not spending over $300 US to get it. When the 2nd gen came out, the first gen was reduced and the mobos with them so I got one. Price is already coming down on the 2nd gen.


There's an early adopter tax for sure.

If you want something day 1 it's going to cost more than if you buy in one or two fiscal quarters after launch (3-6 months) let alone a year after.


R7 2700X was launched April 2018 so it's over a year old.


----------



## Desolutional

If they had increased the PCIe lanes available to the graphics stack to 24 I would actually consider buying it, but it is still stuck on 16 lanes according to the current leaks, effectively forcing one to go with Intel HEDT (mitigations slow) or Threadripper (NUMA issues) for more lanes.


----------



## pmc25

raysheri said:


> From what I've heard from content creators at Computex, the x570+Ryzen 3000 achieve a huge memory speed boost and word is 4000 speed ram OC is pretty doable. Apparently Asus have a new implementation to take advantage of this on some auto level. Maybe this has a connection to Samsung removing bdie ram sales to the mainstream as they can achieve high OC and push people to buy new high speed ram at high speed prices.
> 
> I'm wary of investing too much cash into X570 as in 2 yrs time, at most, they'll be new AMD socket and quantum leap in performance with Zen 4.
> But for me the time has now come to retire the awesome 2600k and Maximus IV Extreme.


More than 4000. The X570 boards wouldn't be listing 4400-4600Mhz as top supported speed if they didn't go significantly in excess of 4000Mhz.

I'll be interested to see whether good X470 boards do the same with new BIOS, since I think almost all are daisychain configuration (whereas pretty much only the Taichi was in the X370 generation). But maybe the layout was further refined.



Desolutional said:


> If they had increased the PCIe lanes available to the graphics stack to 24 I would actually consider buying it, but it is still stuck on 16 lanes according to the current leaks, effectively forcing one to go with Intel HEDT (mitigations slow) or Threadripper (NUMA issues) for more lanes.


Zen 2 TR4 should be out around August again, per the previous 2 launch cycles. NUMA should be fixed.


----------



## bastian

MSI says AMD is being a little too generous with their 15% IPC improvements:

https://wccftech.com/amd-msi-claim-different-ipc-increase-numbers-ryzen-3000-cpus/

They say its 13%. Not 15%.

This is why we wait before you believe everything AMD says in their own conference.

This is what an AMD employee said about it:



> Clarification on 13% or 15%:
> 
> Prior to presenting onstage @ Computex , we planned to use a Cinebench 1T-derived IPC figure. That is 13%. Slides were made and shared.
> 
> In the end, we decided it would be best to use a more rigorous SPECint-derived figure. That is 15%.


What is essentially being said is they decided to use the higher number, because it looks better. The fact is what I knew all along, the 15% IPC improvement is an "UP TO". It will depend on the application. Not across the board.



junglechocolate said:


> Wait I actually just noticed the 3700x. *** is the point of a 3800x with a 3700x. Actually that makes no sense. Can anyone say why that thing exists? What the difference is? It would make buying a 9900k difficult in the sense of I really wanna support AMD


I have a strong belief that voltages will be a weakness with the new CPUs. From what leaks are showing, the voltage at stock seems to be fairly high, which could signal issues for overclocking and heat/power. As per Intel, take the 65W and 105W with a huge grain of salt. Things totally change once you start going out of stock spec. The fact that the 3700X vs the 3800X changes from 65W to 105W with the 3800X getting a little bump in base/boost speed shows that too.


----------



## Kpjoslee

pmc25 said:


> Zen 2 TR4 should be out around August again, per the previous 2 launch cycles. NUMA should be fixed.


Zen 2 TR4 is not coming out this year. It is no longer on the list of AMD’s 2019 plans.


----------



## pmc25

Kpjoslee said:


> Zen 2 TR4 is not coming out this year. It is no longer on the list of AMD’s 2019 plans.


Haha. Are you sure it's not been cancelled entirely? That's what the clickbait you've been reading has been implying.

Also, of course it's coming out this year, and it should be in the same time window unless it suffers delays.


----------



## MacMus

pmc25 said:


> Haha. Are you sure it's not been cancelled entirely? That's what the clickbait you've been reading has been implying.
> 
> Also, of course it's coming out this year, and it should be in the same time window unless it suffers delays.


Announcing too much too far away from release would kill current Zen+ TR sales.. They will stick to 2-3 month release window notice. I would say that would put TR will end of the year.
I cannot believe they will cancel TR line .. this is marvelous piece of engineering which Intel does not have completely response too. It's flexible, cheap and multipurpose depending on workload.

With new Zen2 TR this will be ultimate platform for any HEPC.


----------



## Kpjoslee

pmc25 said:


> Haha. Are you sure it's not been cancelled entirely? That's what the clickbait you've been reading has been implying.
> 
> Also, of course it's coming out this year, and it should be in the same time window unless it suffers delays.


It is not a clickbait. Their official slide had 3rd Gen Threadripper in March, but disappeared on May version of their roadmap, which implies that it might have been pushed off to early 2020. Also, I am not hearing any news about motherboards (X699? ) for Ryzen 3 Threadrippers from Computex at all, which also indicates it is not coming out this year as well.


----------



## ShrimpBrime

Dreamliner said:


> 3700x is 65w, 3800X is 105w. Won't that affect OC potential or no?


That really might depend on if AMD bins those 3700 and 3800 chips or not. (bet they do) 

The clock different between the 3700X and 3800X and x voltage used is where you get the difference in thermal design power. If in theory they both can reach 5Ghz, the 3800X simply just has less OC head room.


----------



## HiTekJeff

It has already been confirmed by Lisa Sue (in an interview) at the show they are NOT abandoning the Threadripper chips by any means. They didn't know how the rumors took off and some ran with it as near fact when all they did was leave it off the slides they showed prior to the show. Reason was it will not be ready for 2019 but won't say when next year to expect it. Also, AMD is waiting to make some bigger jumps, not just a slight bump for Threadripper since those chips are fairly high-end now. Most are speculating a Threadripper of 64 cores and 80-100 threads, but no one will know until next year when more info comes out. For now, AMD is focused on Ryzen 3000 and most likely working on finalizing the 16 core chip after Intel releases their updated 9900 to see what they do.


----------



## R99photography

Does anyone know boost frequency on how many cores come for the 3900x?
Another thing I would be interested in: based on your experience on previous Ryzen Zen+ gen, what could be the OC frequency, again for the 3900x?

Thank you.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## FlanK3r

Yes, Ryzen 9 3900X is 12C/24T and has up to 4.6 GHz XFR Boost. Base clock is 3.8 GHz.
OC is hard to say. More cores means hard to stabilize it all in load at high frequency. Ussually u can get more MHz with less cores or with SMT disabled. Also high cores with OC means higher peak of power consumption. If, Im talking IF, 8-cores would be able hit 4.6 GHz stable, than 12C could hit around 4.3-4.4 GHz stable. The main issue could be hot...



THreadripper is confirmed by Lisa Su:
https://videocardz.com/newz/amd-you-will-definitely-see-more-threadripper-from-us
-my tip is Q4 2019 (November/December time) for new monsters.


----------



## R99photography

FlanK3r said:


> Yes, Ryzen 9 3900X is 12C/24T and has up to 4.6 GHz XFR Boost. Base clock is 3.8 GHz.
> 
> OC is hard to say. More cores means hard to stabilize it all in load at high frequency. Ussually u can get more MHz with less cores or with SMT disabled. Also high cores with OC means higher peak of power consumption. If, Im talking IF, 8-cores would be able hit 4.6 GHz stable, than 12C could hit around 4.3-4.4 GHz stable. The main issue could be hot...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> THreadripper is confirmed by Lisa Su:
> 
> https://videocardz.com/newz/amd-you-will-definitely-see-more-threadripper-from-us
> 
> -my tip is Q4 2019 (November/December time) for new monsters.




Yeas, I know the boost frequency, but I was wondering on how many cores simultaneously. For instance, as comparison, the i9 9900K has a boost frequency on 8 cores of 4.7 GHz.
For this Ryzen I don’t know if it has been disclosured such info.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## FlanK3r

No, but propably it will depends (again) on cooling system. It could be around 4.05 to 4.15 GHz on all cores


----------



## Yosar

bastian said:


> MSI says AMD is being a little too generous with their 15% IPC improvements:
> 
> https://wccftech.com/amd-msi-claim-different-ipc-increase-numbers-ryzen-3000-cpus/
> 
> They say its 13%. Not 15%.
> 
> This is why we wait before you believe everything AMD says in their own conference.
> 
> This is what an AMD employee said about it:
> 
> What is essentially being said is they decided to use the higher number, because it looks better. The fact is what I knew all along, the 15% IPC improvement is an "UP TO". It will depend on the application. Not across the board.



Yeah. Because we all know there is only one correct tool to measure IPC changes. The fact is it could be even 18%, if CB R20 shows 13%, SPEC shows 15% etc. There is difference even in CB between R15 and R20.



bastian said:


> I have a strong belief that voltages will be a weakness with the new CPUs. From what leaks are showing, the voltage at stock seems to be fairly high, which could signal issues for overclocking and heat/power. As per Intel, take the 65W and 105W with a huge grain of salt. Things totally change once you start going out of stock spec. The fact that the 3700X vs the 3800X changes from 65W to 105W with the 3800X getting a little bump in base/boost speed shows that too.


The only voltage we saw was for overclocked 16-core monster. It was above 1.5V for 4.25GHz all cores, and above 1.4V for 4.1(5?) GHz all cores. And the second one is already quite common in only 8-core Ryzen 2000 overclocked chips. So nothing shocking here. It's never about voltage, it's always about heat (yeah, they're two connected but not in so direct way). And I believe after all more in 65W TDP for 3700X than 95W TDP for i9-9900K.


----------



## Gigabytes

Malkorath said:


> How would X370 boards like the Crosshair VI Hero cope with the 3800X and 3900X? Will there be official support for the 3900X or would I have to upgrade to an X570 board?
> 
> Money's been tight so I can afford only the 3900X on X370 or else I would have to drop down to the 3700X or even the 3600X if I have to upgrade to X570, depending on pricing.


The first gen boards like X370 have memory compatibility issues, never really could get my 3200 sticks running stable at full speed. A few months back I got a deal on a CH7 X470 board and tossed my 1700X into it, can get memory stable at 3333 with very little tweaking now. 
I suggest you upgrade your X370 even with a X470 if you can get a good price.


----------



## PriestOfSin

Gigabytes said:


> The first gen boards like X370 have memory compatibility issues, never really could get my 3200 sticks running stable at full speed. A few months back I got a deal on a CH7 X470 board and tossed my 1700X into it, can get memory stable at 3333 with very little tweaking now.
> I suggest you upgrade your X370 even with a X470 if you can get a good price.


I only really had memory issues with my X370 Taichi when I tried to populate all the memory slots. Running two sticks (as opposed to four), I had zero problems. 3200 CL14, 3000 CL16, no issues. I'm not sure upgrading to an X470 board if he's already got an X370 board that suits him is good advice, but we really need to see how the CPU he's interested in stresses out his current board.

Here's hoping I can slot the 12-core in my X370 Taichi without problems. I'm kind of assuming that an 8-core is a better choice, since the VRMs do get relatively warm with just a 2700X.


----------



## zealord

I am so excited for the gaming performance of those CPUs. I hope the 3600X and 3700X overclock well.


----------



## mito1172

Gigabytes said:


> The first gen boards like X370 have memory compatibility issues, never really could get my 3200 sticks running stable at full speed. A few months back I got a deal on a CH7 X470 board and tossed my 1700X into it, can get memory stable at 3333 with very little tweaking now.
> I suggest you upgrade your X370 even with a X470 if you can get a good price.


ASUS ROG CROSSHAIR VI HERO G.SKILL Flare X DDR4-3200Mhz C14 32GB (4x8GB) 4 ram 3200mhz c14 no problem. memory problem processor related


----------



## Leopardi

https://cpu.userbenchmark.com/SpeedTest/810675/AMD-Ryzen-5-3600-6-Core-Processor

R5 3600 userbenchmark, beats 8700K in multicore, slightly slower singlecore.


----------



## diggiddi

FlanK3r said:


> No, but propably it will depends (again) on cooling system. It could be around 4.05 to 4.15 GHz on all cores


Is that a Hitler moustache on the baby in the Avatar?


----------



## drmrlordx

mito1172 said:


> Not enough for the 3900X?


3900X is only a 105W TDP CPU by default. If you aren't using PBO or XFR and you don't overclock it, it should do okay-ish. Problem is that most X370 boards have poor VRM configurations compared to what you can get from X470 or X570. X370 also had "routing problems" compared to X470. Take that for what it's worth.

The only X370 board truly worthy of a 3900x is the X370 Taichi (12+4, completely overbuilt). Sadly, the UEFI support for this board is um. Terrible? Don't expect top-notch performance from a 3900x in this board, especially for RAM OC. X470 Taichi or Crosshair VII Hero would be better choices if you don't want to go X570.


----------



## Grin

Leopardi said:


> https://cpu.userbenchmark.com/SpeedTest/810675/AMD-Ryzen-5-3600-6-Core-Processor
> 
> R5 3600 userbenchmark, beats 8700K in multicore, slightly slower singlecore.


MC Read 30.9
MC Write 18.5
MC Mixed 29.3
Latency 91.5

It has no chance to beat 8700K. Memory write is 1/2 speed of read? LoL 
It looks like each chiplet attached to his own one channel MC. As I remember userbench results of the 12 cores two chiplets eng sample it was no such terrible disproportion between MC read and MC write. Disappointed.


----------



## Grin

Two chiplets looks much better https://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/16910589

MC Read 44.7
MC Write 39.9
MC Mixed 36.2
Latency 79.8


----------



## NightAntilli

Grin said:


> MC Read 30.9
> MC Write 18.5
> MC Mixed 29.3
> Latency 91.5
> 
> It has no chance to beat 8700K. Memory write is 1/2 speed of read? LoL
> It looks like each chiplet attached to his own one channel MC. As I remember userbench results of the 12 cores two chiplets eng sample it was no such terrible disproportion between MC read and MC write. Disappointed.


That's for 2400 MHz CL15... Hardly the best memory there is, and it's well known that Ryzen requires fast memory to stretch its legs.

Here's the best 8700K result, using 3200 MHz (CL latency is unknown);
MC Read 40.6
MC Write 41
MC Mixed 29.5

The majority of workloads will be mixed anyway... So... I don't see the issue.

Here's the worst bench for both (although the 3600 only has 4 samples...)

3600 (2133 MHz);
MC Read 29.1
MC Write 18
MC Mixed 26.5

8700k (2400 MHz);
MC Read 29.8
MC Write 30.9
MC Mixed 25.4

Seems fine really... Read speeds are a lot more important than write speeds anyway. But it's funny how you're trying to trash the 3600 by comparing it to a CPU that basically costs twice as much... Anyone sensible would pick the 3600 and get faster RAM. You'll end up spending less money and most likely getting more performance than the 8700K.



Grin said:


> Two chiplets looks much better https://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/16910589
> 
> MC Read 44.7
> MC Write 39.9
> MC Mixed 36.2
> Latency 79.8


Yeah... It does. But it's also 3200 MHz, most likely.


----------



## Grin

Seems fine really...

Sorry, but not for me - write and read speeds must be similar. If not it’s a sign of wrong design of MC


----------



## NightAntilli

Grin said:


> Seems fine really...
> 
> Sorry, but not for me - write and read speeds must be similar. If not it’s a sign of wrong design of MC


Maybe... Did you notice that the MC write speed is basically the same for single core and multicore? Only the read speeds increase with the additional cores. This is again only true for the 3600, not the 12 core.


----------



## Grin

Yep Until now we did not have much data, but if it’s true the one chiplet Ryzen 5-7 will loose a lot of memory speed compared to the two chiplets Ryzen 9.


----------



## mito1172

drmrlordx said:


> 3900X is only a 105W TDP CPU by default. If you aren't using PBO or XFR and you don't overclock it, it should do okay-ish. Problem is that most X370 boards have poor VRM configurations compared to what you can get from X470 or X570. X370 also had "routing problems" compared to X470. Take that for what it's worth.
> 
> The only X370 board truly worthy of a 3900x is the X370 Taichi (12+4, completely overbuilt). Sadly, the UEFI support for this board is um. Terrible? Don't expect top-notch performance from a 3900x in this board, especially for RAM OC. X470 Taichi or Crosshair VII Hero would be better choices if you don't want to go X570.


Is c6h so bad?  ram only works at DOCP setting and c14 3200mhz. Will it not happen at 3900x?


----------



## rdr09

mito1172 said:


> Is c6h so bad?  ram only works at DOCP setting and c14 3200mhz. Will it not happen at 3900x?


The B350F Strix can do better than that


----------



## Mad Pistol

I'm very seriously considering an upgrade.

I currently have an MSI B450 Tomahawk and a R5 2600.

Thinking about changing it out for either a 3800X or 3900X.


----------



## mito1172

rdr09 said:


> The B350F Strix can do better than that


c6h B350F Too bad from Strix? so?


----------



## VPII

NightAntilli said:


> That's for 2400 MHz CL15... Hardly the best memory there is, and it's well known that Ryzen requires fast memory to stretch its legs.
> 
> Here's the best 8700K result, using 3200 MHz (CL latency is unknown);
> MC Read 40.6
> MC Write 41
> MC Mixed 29.5
> 
> The majority of workloads will be mixed anyway... So... I don't see the issue.
> 
> Here's the worst bench for both (although the 3600 only has 4 samples...)
> 
> 3600 (2133 MHz);
> MC Read 29.1
> MC Write 18
> MC Mixed 26.5
> 
> 8700k (2400 MHz);
> MC Read 29.8
> MC Write 30.9
> MC Mixed 25.4
> 
> Seems fine really... Read speeds are a lot more important than write speeds anyway. But it's funny how you're trying to trash the 3600 by comparing it to a CPU that basically costs twice as much... Anyone sensible would pick the 3600 and get faster RAM. You'll end up spending less money and most likely getting more performance than the 8700K.
> 
> 
> Yeah... It does. But it's also 3200 MHz, most likely.


CPU clock speed plays a role as well. Here's with my 2700X running 4.24ghz, yes the link states 4.25 but trust me it is actually 4.24. You'll see the memory speeds also better, but probably due to the fact that my memory is basically running 3480mhz.

https://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/17446163


----------



## Grin

So, what we really have with Zen2: 4 NUMA nodes aka CCX in two chiplets asymmetrically attached to two MCs in I/O by 64/32 links. Inside a chiplet each core attached by 32 link. So for any single core MC read/write will have the same speed, for one chiplet MC read/write will be in the ratio 2/1 and MC write is limited by 32 link between chiplet and I/O. For two chiplets we have 64+64/32+32 links working together and memory speed will be limited from the DIMM side. Therefore, we observed similar speeds for read and write in two chiplets configuration. This is a pure speculation based on nothing, we will see


----------



## ShrimpBrime

Mad Pistol said:


> I'm very seriously considering an upgrade.
> 
> I currently have an MSI B450 Tomahawk and a R5 2600.
> 
> Thinking about changing it out for either a 3800X or 3900X.


Been looking hard at the same chips also. So tempting. Originally figured go with the 3700X, good speed decent price. slaps right in the board.
I'm running the Asus B450M-A Prime. Decent board, pushed my 2700X to 4.5ghz at top clocks. 

Anyhow the 3800X would be a considerably decent upgrade from that 2600.


----------



## Hale59

*Ryzen 5 3600*

Details for Result ID AMD Ryzen 5 3600 6-Core Processor (6C 12T 4.19GHz, 1.33GHz IMC, 6x 512kB L2, 2x 16MB L3)

https://ranker.sisoftware.co.uk/sho...d5e2dae8dee7dff98bb686a0c5a09dad8bf8c5fd&l=en


----------



## drmrlordx

@mito1172

C6H is an 8+4 board with historically good support from Asus (in terms of UEFI updates, etc). You might be able to get away with it on a 3900x. I *think* the current limits per phase on C6H are 60a, but I could be wrong. To contrast, the new Impact board from Asus has 8+4 with 70a per phase. I think the 3900x will work okay on that board. 

Personally I would not bother with anything less than a 12+2 or 12+4 config for a 3900x, except maybe in special circumstances (such as the Impact). Yes, the 3900x is only 105W by default, but the current demand at given clockspeed/voltage levels should be higher for this chip compared to 1800x/2700x or any 8c Matisse. Raising clockspeed or voltage in any way, shape, or form will make the CPU pull more current. That will increase VRM duty cycle and potentially cause other problems. As long as the 3900x clockspeeds remain relatively low (close to base clock of 3.8 GHz), I don't see that there will be a lot of trouble. The issue will come from some kind of CPU overclocking or using PBO/XFR to let the system start boosting towards call-core turbos.

I will add as a caveat that ASRock's extended support for the X370 Taichi has been very frustrating for a lot of users. I have already lost DDR4-3466 (down to DDR4-3333) due to successive UEFI updates that feature Spectre mitigations and support for Pinnacle Ridge. That's with my R7 1800x. I would not be very serious about running high memory OC on an X370 Taichi + 3900x. C6H might offer you better support for memory overclocking in the same scenario.
@Mad Pistol

Are you going to put a 3900x on a B450 Tomahawk? If so, could you document that process? That's a 4+2 config . . . I don't see that going very well. Not trying to be rude. It would be interesting to watch someone try to make that work, though.


----------



## ShrimpBrime

> Are you going to put a 3900x on a B450 Tomahawk? If so, could you document that process? That's a 4+2 config . . . I don't see that going very well. Not trying to be rude. It would be interesting to watch someone try to make that work, though.


A lot of people will probably do it... because it's supported by the bios and manufacturer. 
The artificial intelligent overclocking system (aios) will do all the boosting for people to the near max OC any of these processors will likely hit, and this is just speculation here. Generally when you buy the top cpu, there's little OC headroom anyways. 

Looking at the nature of these processors when hit with an instant full load is they seem to spike up pretty high, then, level off the temps rather quickly. But if 4 VRMs can produce and deliver a mere 105w, I don't see the issue.

In AMD history, the 220W chips just where cut out of the bios support for 4+2 boards. Since CPU support lists aren't updated to the bios's recently released, well, just have to wait and see if B350/450 chipsets actually support the 3900x.


----------



## VPII

Well I'm looking to get a Ryzen 9 3900X and drop it in my CH7 board. I think power will not be an issue taken that I'll have 600amps of power available and it should work just as well. My plan is to later look at a X570 board. Obviously I'll first check to see what the reviews state about the chip, but knowing myself I'll probably have it on pre-order already.


----------



## mito1172

drmrlordx said:


> @mito1172
> 
> C6H is an 8+4 board with historically good support from Asus (in terms of UEFI updates, etc). You might be able to get away with it on a 3900x. I *think* the current limits per phase on C6H are 60a, but I could be wrong. To contrast, the new Impact board from Asus has 8+4 with 70a per phase. I think the 3900x will work okay on that board.
> 
> Personally I would not bother with anything less than a 12+2 or 12+4 config for a 3900x, except maybe in special circumstances (such as the Impact). Yes, the 3900x is only 105W by default, but the current demand at given clockspeed/voltage levels should be higher for this chip compared to 1800x/2700x or any 8c Matisse. Raising clockspeed or voltage in any way, shape, or form will make the CPU pull more current. That will increase VRM duty cycle and potentially cause other problems. As long as the 3900x clockspeeds remain relatively low (close to base clock of 3.8 GHz), I don't see that there will be a lot of trouble. The issue will come from some kind of CPU overclocking or using PBO/XFR to let the system start boosting towards call-core turbos.
> 
> I will add as a caveat that ASRock's extended support for the X370 Taichi has been very frustrating for a lot of users. I have already lost DDR4-3466 (down to DDR4-3333) due to successive UEFI updates that feature Spectre mitigations and support for Pinnacle Ridge. That's with my R7 1800x. I would not be very serious about running high memory OC on an X370 Taichi + 3900x. C6H might offer you better support for memory overclocking in the same scenario.
> 
> @Mad Pistol
> 
> Are you going to put a 3900x on a B450 Tomahawk? If so, could you document that process? That's a 4+2 config . . . I don't see that going very well. Not trying to be rude. It would be interesting to watch someone try to make that work, though.


Thanks for the detailed information. As for the tests everything will be clear.  +Rep


----------



## mtrai

VPII said:


> Well I'm looking to get a Ryzen 9 3900X and drop it in my CH7 board. I think power will not be an issue taken that I'll have 600amps of power available and it should work just as well. My plan is to later look at a X570 board. Obviously I'll first check to see what the reviews state about the chip, but knowing myself I'll probably have it on pre-order already.


I too am getting the 3900x (preorder when they are up) for my C7H wifi board....will continue using the board for a few months as I wait and watch which new boards work best with ram. Though I am doubting I will go with ASUS anymore but anything is possible. After we lost all AMD support from ASUS here, I do not feel the need to look to them anymore.


----------



## FlanK3r

mito1172 said:


> Is c6h so bad?  ram only works at DOCP setting and c14 3200mhz. Will it not happen at 3900x?


Not true, sometimes if we are benchamrking with ROG Czech OC team, it is able to do 3600 MHz 11-10-10 on C6H or 3866 12-12-12 for benchmarks with b-die chips.


----------



## mito1172

FlanK3r said:


> Not true, sometimes if we are benchamrking with ROG Czech OC team, it is able to do 3600 MHz 11-10-10 on C6H or 3866 12-12-12 for benchmarks with b-die chips.


I agree


----------



## AlphaC

Mad Pistol said:


> I'm very seriously considering an upgrade.
> 
> I currently have an MSI B450 Tomahawk and a R5 2600.
> 
> Thinking about changing it out for either a 3800X or 3900X.


 3900X might be a stretch on that board if you plan on using PBO or such but 8 core should be fine


It's using 8x Onsemi 4c024N + 4c029N , so it's on par with the X470 Gaming Plus but without doublers





drmrlordx said:


> @*mito1172*
> 
> C6H is an 8+4 board with historically good support from Asus (in terms of UEFI updates, etc). You might be able to get away with it on a 3900x. I *think* the current limits per phase on C6H are 60a, but I could be wrong. To contrast, the new Impact board from Asus has 8+4 with 70a per phase. I think the 3900x will work okay on that board.
> 
> Personally I would not bother with anything less than a 12+2 or 12+4 config for a 3900x, except maybe in special circumstances (such as the Impact). Yes, the 3900x is only 105W by default, but the current demand at given clockspeed/voltage levels should be higher for this chip compared to 1800x/2700x or any 8c Matisse. Raising clockspeed or voltage in any way, shape, or form will make the CPU pull more current. That will increase VRM duty cycle and potentially cause other problems. As long as the 3900x clockspeeds remain relatively low (close to base clock of 3.8 GHz), I don't see that there will be a lot of trouble. The issue will come from some kind of CPU overclocking or using PBO/XFR to let the system start boosting towards call-core turbos.
> 
> I will add as a caveat that ASRock's extended support for the X370 Taichi has been very frustrating for a lot of users. I have already lost DDR4-3466 (down to DDR4-3333) due to successive UEFI updates that feature Spectre mitigations and support for Pinnacle Ridge. That's with my R7 1800x. I would not be very serious about running high memory OC on an X370 Taichi + 3900x. C6H might offer you better support for memory overclocking in the same scenario.
> 
> @*Mad Pistol*
> 
> Are you going to put a 3900x on a B450 Tomahawk? If so, could you document that process? That's a 4+2 config . . . I don't see that going very well. Not trying to be rude. It would be interesting to watch someone try to make that work, though.


C6H was using 8x TI NexFETs (40A Dual-N Fet) , same as Taichi but Taichi had 12 of them


https://www.ti.com/product/CSD87350Q5D



Taichi was the best X370 board


----------



## MacMus

mtrai said:


> I too am getting the 3900x (preorder when they are up) for my C7H wifi board....will continue using the board for a few months as I wait and watch which new boards work best with ram. Though I am doubting I will go with ASUS anymore but anything is possible. After we lost all AMD support from ASUS here, I do not feel the need to look to them anymore.


Asus dropped whole support for AMD, even bioses for new X399 platforms are complete garbage. 

I predict same issues for new Ryzen kids. Better go with Asrock or MSI (as HEPC)


----------



## Grin

https://videocardz.com/newz/amd-ryzen-9-3950x-to-become-worlds-first-16-core-gaming-cpu

They’ve said that it is a gaming processor, I thought about WS but now I got that it’s not for my purpose


----------



## bmaxa

Every processor can be gaming processor. They mean mainstream processor.


----------



## AlphaC

Grin said:


> https://videocardz.com/newz/amd-ryzen-9-3950x-to-become-worlds-first-16-core-gaming-cpu
> 
> They’ve said that it is a gaming processor, I thought about WS but now I got that it’s not for my purpose



They want you to buy threadripper for workstation use


----------



## PriestOfSin

AlphaC said:


> They want you to buy threadripper for workstation use


PCIe lanes for daaaaays. Other than the lanes and quad-channel memory, is there anything specific that makes TR4 the superior platform for workstation use?


----------



## Grin

bmaxa said:


> Every processor can be gaming processor. They mean mainstream processor.


Sure? I am not. We have gaming and pro video cards. Here they offer first gaming CPU. 16 cores at 105W It’s telling me that some parts of the chip will be inactive all the time because all games are not using them.


----------



## Grin

PriestOfSin said:


> PCIe lanes for daaaaays. Other than the lanes and quad-channel memory, is there anything specific that makes TR4 the superior platform for workstation use?


Multiprocessor in one socket with NUMA and all it’s penalties working in some applications slower than 2700x


----------



## roco_smith

drmrlordx said:


> 3900X is only a 105W TDP CPU by default. If you aren't using PBO or XFR and you don't overclock it, it should do okay-ish. Problem is that most X370 boards have poor VRM configurations compared to what you can get from X470 or X570. X370 also had "routing problems" compared to X470. Take that for what it's worth.
> 
> The only X370 board truly worthy of a 3900x is the X370 Taichi (12+4, completely overbuilt). Sadly, the UEFI support for this board is um. Terrible? Don't expect top-notch performance from a 3900x in this board, especially for RAM OC. X470 Taichi or Crosshair VII Hero would be better choices if you don't want to go X570.


What about the Asus CrossHair VI Extreme .I owe one and planing to drop the 3900X .Looking the review from TECHTOWN look overkill for me 

The VRM is in an 8+4 phase configuration. The ASP1405 produces 4+2 phases and is most likely an IR35201 with support for up to 6+2 phases or 8+0 phases. Here the four CPU phases and two SoC phases are doubled to 8+4 phases through six IR3599 doublers/quadruplers working in doubler mode located on the back of the motherboard. Each power stage is made up or an IR3555M, International Rectifier's latest 60A PowIRstages, and best in class. ASUS is also using their 10K solid capacitors and micro-fine alloy inductors. The VRM is pretty much overkill for the platform.

Read more: https://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/8...treme-amd-x370-motherboard-review/index3.html


----------



## AlphaC

Realistically if you cool the powerstages you can easily push 40A through each , aka 320A total for 8 phases. The reason I would say around 40A because the chokes are listed as 45A for ASUS' new generation of boards. That's more than enough though.


The only thing I would say is you need to cool them. The FP capacitors are 10K hours at 105°C


----------



## Fissa

Pry still inferior IPC to intel.


----------



## ZXMustang

Fissa said:


> Pry still inferior IPC to intel.


This


----------



## Hale59

AMD Ryzen 9 3950X available in September, 2019.


----------



## bmaxa

Grin said:


> Sure? I am not. We have gaming and pro video cards. Here they offer first gaming CPU. 16 cores at 105W It’s telling me that some parts of the chip will be inactive all the time because all games are not using them.


No, 105W TDP tells you that under certain workload processor dissipates that much, which means lowest clock. But fire prime95 and you will get probably 180W no problem on lowest clock.


----------



## rdr09

Grin said:


> Sure? I am not. We have gaming and pro video cards. Here they offer first gaming CPU. 16 cores at 105W It’s telling me that some parts of the chip will be inactive all the time because all games are not using them.


Have not encountered any game that did use all 8 core and 16 threads on my 65 TDP 2700. I think windows balances it out. Sure there are cores with higher usage. TDP in gaming is around 40W.

http://imgur.com/a/gw8TNhU


----------



## Grin

I have a twice more on my 2700x cooled by AIO. During some photo-video converting tasks when they are using avx, the cpu power consumption is 150-180W easy.


----------



## Grin

Ok finally 3950x is a common processor, nothing special for gaming only.


----------



## bmaxa

My 2700X has power consumption of about 140W on 3.6Ghz 1.18V, when 16 threads are working for WCG.


----------



## Hale59

For interest sake of clarification.

On Computex 2019, AMD mentioned the 3800X with a TDP of 105W.
Yesterday at E32019, AMD announced the 3800X with a TDP of 95W.
Which one is real?

Computex2019



E32019


----------



## deepor

@Hale59:

Another place where "105W" is mentioned is on their website in the product overviews. The new CPUs are all already listed there. Here's the link to the 3800X page:

https://www.amd.com/en/products/cpu/amd-ryzen-7-3800x


----------



## jakemfbacon

I also have a C6H board and I am going to get a 3900x. Right now I have a 1700. So I'll probably also have to upgrade my mobo  
Does anyone know when preorders will be up? And how much teh x570 boards will be?


----------



## mito1172

jakemfbacon said:


> I also have a C6H board and I am going to get a 3900x. Right now I have a 1700. So I'll probably also have to upgrade my mobo
> Does anyone know when preorders will be up? And how much teh x570 boards will be?


no need. c6h says enough. elmor

https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...og-crosshair-vi-overclocking-thread-4079.html


----------



## Grin

jakemfbacon said:


> I also have a C6H board and I am going to get a 3900x. Right now I have a 1700. So I'll probably also have to upgrade my mobo /forum/images/smilies/frown.gif
> Does anyone know when preorders will be up? And how much teh x570 boards will be?


I will replace my mobo for sure, sitting on the promised beta bios with the new processor is not a good idea


----------



## Grin

Hale59, who cares about TDPs? TDP is just telling you about minimal specification of a cpu cooler. There is no good direct correlation with real consumption of modern CPUs. Intel 9900k has TDP 95W but easily eats 200-250W with avx2 and water cooling.


----------



## rdr09

jakemfbacon said:


> I also have a C6H board and I am going to get a 3900x. Right now I have a 1700. So I'll probably also have to upgrade my mobo
> Does anyone know when preorders will be up? And how much teh x570 boards will be?


I upgraded from 14 to 12 nm without much effort. I expect same with 12 to 7 nm.


----------



## splangie

This looks Good on paper and could end up being a real game changer. But until we get our greasy hands on them we won't know for sure. I am starting to become more and more frustrated I wasn't able to hold out another 9 months or so and not pick up a 9700k. Oh well. If I had waited until February I guess that would have made make it even worse. So at least it is not as bad as it might have been. I wouldn't preorder anything until the real tests start.


----------



## mito1172

Grin said:


> I will replace my mobo for sure, sitting on the promised beta bios with the new processor is not a good idea


How do you know it's gonna be bad?


----------



## Grin

“I wouldn't preorder anything until the real tests start.”

Me ether, I am also start looking on W-32xx Xeon as alternative. Because I need to build a home WS, so I am not sure now about gaming Zen2


----------



## Grin

“How do you know it's gonna be bad?”

Based on my previous experience with 1700 which I bought on the spring of 2017 together with Asus x370 prime pro. I got segfault, unstable ECC and lot of other fun. Than I bought 2700x and got another portion including overheating of VRMs. No more beta products from AMD.


----------



## VPII

Grin said:


> “How do you know it's gonna be bad?”
> 
> Based on my previous experience with 1700 which I bought on the spring of 2017 together with Asus x370 prime pro. I got segfault, unstable ECC and lot of other fun. Than I bought 2700x and got another portion including overheating of VRMs. No more beta products from AMD.


Then you get someone like myself, who purchased a Ryzen 1700 and Asus Crosshair VI Hero and was pleasantly surprised coming from an Intel 5930K on an Asus X99 Strix motherboard. Shortly after, on release I got a Ryzen 2700X and had to settle at first for a Asus X370 Strix mobo as the Asus Crosshair VII Hero not available yet in SA, but again I was so happy, all good and no issue with a chip that was doing 4.36 all core, but not all day due to vcore needed.


----------



## defaulticus

I wonder if my noctua nh-u14s cpu cooler with additional fan on it will be enough to handle 3900x with a little bit oc to it? Any guess?


----------



## Hale59

3950X 16 Cores/32 Thread on a X470 - GeekBench v4

https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/13495867


----------



## Hale59

*AMD Zen 2 CPUs Come With A Few New Instructions*

AMD Zen 2 CPUs Come With A Few New Instructions - At Least WBNOINVD, CLWB, RDPID

https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=AMD-Zen-2-New-Instructions


----------



## mito1172

Grin said:


> “How do you know it's gonna be bad?”
> 
> Based on my previous experience with 1700 which I bought on the spring of 2017 together with Asus x370 prime pro. I got segfault, unstable ECC and lot of other fun. Than I bought 2700x and got another portion including overheating of VRMs. No more beta products from AMD.


you say Asus x370 prime pro. this has nothing to do with c6h


----------



## Hale59

Hale59 said:


> 3950X 16 Cores/32 Thread on a X470 - GeekBench v4
> 
> https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/13495867


AMD Ryzen 9 3950X Beats $2,000 Intel Core i9-9980XE In Geekbench Test
https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-ryzen-3950x-vs-intel-i9-9980xe-geekbench,39640.html

And they failed to mention it was done on a X470


----------



## drmrlordx

AlphaC said:


> C6H was using 8x TI NexFETs (40A Dual-N Fet) , same as Taichi but Taichi had 12 of them


Ahh thanks for the clarification. Still should be okay-ish for a 3900x as long as you don't go to crazy with it. Would rather have an Impact . . .



> Taichi was the best X370 board


It was until I started using UEFI revs past 3.30. Bleh! Still had the best VRM config, though.



MacMus said:


> Asus dropped whole support for AMD, even bioses for new X399 platforms are complete garbage.


First I'm hearing of that. That's bad news. Asus did a great job with C6H for quite some time, despite early boards bricking themselves and all that madness.



> I predict same issues for new Ryzen kids. Better go with Asrock or MSI (as HEPC)


Based on the VRM configs, it looks like Gigabyte has some real winners on their hands.



bmaxa said:


> No, 105W TDP tells you that under certain workload processor dissipates that much, which means lowest clock. But fire prime95 and you will get probably 180W no problem on lowest clock.


Unless you have some feature like PBO and/or XFR working that permits the processor to violate its TDP limits, I don't think you're correct. Deprived of those features, a 2700x will stay @ 105W pretty faithfully, while a 2700 will stick to 65W.



mito1172 said:


> no need. c6h says enough. elmor


Yeah, no surprise there.


----------



## Hale59

What changed the third generation Ryzen and the Radeon RX 5700 from the previous generation [Overview]

https://news.mynavi.jp/article/20190614-843285/


----------



## mito1172

woovv... a lot of money


----------



## Rafx

mito1172 said:


> woovv... a lot of money


No, its a very reasonably price.


Want to know what's a lot of money?

Check Intel 16 cores cpu price. And that Intel cpu is slower and with higher power consuption.


----------



## Hale59

*MADE MY CHOICE*

"It would also make sense that AMD wants healthier margins; after three generations of Zen and Ryzen, AMD isn’t exactly the underdog anymore in terms of technology. And AMD’s Bulldozer days are firmly behind it at this point. Chiang said that X470 could exist in the market as the value alternative, for those who don’t need PCIe 4.0. That’s also a point AMD’s Donny Woligroski elaborated on earlier this month."

"If someone’s searching for a platform, and doesn’t really need that enthusiast-class PCIe Gen4 storage, or you’re not planning to buy a PCIe Gen 4 graphics card in the next six months to a year, it makes a lot of sense to look at those lower-tier boards like the X470 and B450, which will offer the same performance on those 3rd Gen Ryzen processors as the X570 will, said Woligroski." 

https://www.gamersnexus.net/news-pc/3483-hw-news-x570-expensive-comcast-fraud 

1. Donny Woligroski, the X470 is TOP-tier board for the Ryzen 2nd generation. 
2. I don't need PCIe 4.0 
3. Glad to read that the X470 will offer the same performance on those 3rd Gen Ryzen processors as the X570 will. 
4. According to AMD, backward compatibility is valid until 2020. It will be the end of AM4. A new socket will be needed due to new technologies, such as DDR5, etc.
5. Therefore, I will keep my X470 (CH7) and go for a 3600X/3700X.


----------



## mito1172

Rafx said:


> No, its a very reasonably price.
> 
> 
> Want to know what's a lot of money?
> 
> Check Intel 16 cores cpu price. And that Intel cpu is slower and with higher power consuption.


Expensive compared to our country. Turkey.


----------



## AlphaC

Some interesting slides


----------



## iNeri

AlphaC said:


> Some interesting slides


What i see here is with PBO we will have: 

4.4 ghz turbo + 200 mhz PBO = 4.6 GHz for 3700x
4.5 ghz turbo + 200 mhz PBO = 4.7 GHz for 3800x
4.6 ghz turbo + 200 mhz PBO = 4.8 GHz for 3900x

This may be true?


----------



## jakemfbacon

So, this thing is coming out in 2 weeks and there are still no preorders?


----------



## criminal

https://www.shopblt.com/item/amd-10...-wraith/amd_100100000023box.html#Availability


----------



## nick name

AMD Ryzen 3800X Geekbench 4 score.

http://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/13567135


----------



## AlphaC

nick name said:


> AMD Ryzen 3800X Geekbench 4 score.
> 
> http://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/13567135


 Wow that memory latency is abysmal at 104.8ns.


1065MHz (2133 MHz effective) memory clock is probably too low for Ryzen 3rd gen


----------



## nick name

AlphaC said:


> Wow that memory latency is abysmal at 104.8ns.
> 
> 
> 1065MHz (2133 MHz effective) memory clock is probably too low for Ryzen 3rd gen


I'm assuming they are testing the board or the CPU and are starting from the bottom. It's what they seemed to have done with the Ryzen 3600 scores I've seen and those got up to 4400MHz. Hopefully, they will increase that speed in their next tests. Geekbench didn't have any motherboard info so I'm assuming it's what they are testing.

Edit:
The board says X470 southbridge so I'm not sure what's going on with the other board info not being present. Perhaps they obfuscated it.


----------



## Hwgeek

IMO AMD leaks those scores and they are sandbagging, why none of the used PBO until now on 3600? AMD is having fun since those CPU's supposed to compete with IceLake.


----------



## criminal

criminal said:


> https://www.shopblt.com/item/amd-10...-wraith/amd_100100000023box.html#Availability


Dang, they pulled the listing.


----------



## Zefram0911

criminal said:


> Dang, they pulled the listing.



Before they pulled the listing there were around 50 preorders with 4000 availability. That's pretty good, likely means that these things would be in shortage at launch and we dont have to worry as much about price gouging.


----------



## gronetwork

nick name said:


> AMD Ryzen 3800X Geekbench 4 score.
> 
> http://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/13567135


Yes, it is a better performance than the Intel Core i7-9700K's one, with 17% more power:

AMD Ryzen 7 3800X vs Intel Core i7-9700K - GadgetVersus

Really promising as it will probably be optimized over time


----------



## AlphaC

https://www.pcgamesn.com/amd/ryzen-3700x-overclocking-performance




> AMD’s Travis Kirsch explained to us which of the new processors will be your best bet in terms of overclocking, and… spoilers… it’s definitely not going to be the Ryzen 9 chips. “I think the top of the stack, you’re going to be fairly limited initially,” says Krisch. “You know, with our boost algorithms, we eke out just about everything you can get. So maybe a couple hundred megahertz. With the 65W parts you’ll get a lot more because their specs are run with a lower power. So you can overclock the thing, get all the power of it, and, obviously, you get more headroom out of it.”


R7 3700X might be the best buy for OC-ing


----------



## Grin

Might be or might be not depending on binning 1700x is not 2700x is not good for OCing I am not expecting that 3700x will be better


----------



## Hale59

Intel to Cut Prices of its Desktop Processors by 15% in Response to Ryzen 3000...LOL

https://www.techpowerup.com/256700/...op-processors-by-15-in-response-to-ryzen-3000


----------



## agatong55

jakemfbacon said:


> So, this thing is coming out in 2 weeks and there are still no preorders?


Pre orders start on July 1st


----------



## jakemfbacon

agatong55 said:


> Pre orders start on July 1st


Thank you! But how do you know? I couldn't find anything about it


----------



## AlphaC

https://www.pcgamesn.com/amd/ryzen-3000-memory-overclocking-sweet-spot




> “The max speed we’ve gotten it stably is about 1,800MHz, a little bit over 1,800MHz. It’s tied two-to-one to the memory clock, so that’s why 3,733MHz is the max frequency that you can get in that link. Once you go beyond that our software decouples them so that that GMI link won’t crash.”
> That means there’s a hard switch during memory overclocking, so once the software stack see it hit that 3,733MHz mark it then decouples the Infinity Fabric and the actual memory latency drops quite considerably.
> 
> 
> ...
> “So the lowest memory latencies you’re going to get, in the reasonable memory overclock world, is 3,733MHz. When you guys test it, we recommend using the 3,600MHz, with CL 16 or lower – if you can get it lower than that stable it’s great – because that’s going to give you the optimal memory latency. It’s also going to give you a very good price performance module. But with that said, if you’re an enthusiast and you want your high clock speeds, we do allow a path for that”


3600C16 or lower supposedly (reiterated)


----------



## Martin778

What happens when you set 3733 on boards that 'scam' results by setting BCLK to like 100.4 etc.? Crash?


----------



## AlphaC

Yes, I'm guessing it bluescreens because the GMI link can't handle it.


----------



## iNeri

Martin778 said:


> What happens when you set 3733 on boards that 'scam' results by setting BCLK to like 100.4 etc.? Crash?


Or you can set ram to 3666+102bclk and get 3733 mhz on RAM.

3800x Cpu 45x multiplier + PBO 200MHZ =4700x102 bclk =4800 mhz boost 

Enviado desde mi ONEPLUS A6000 mediante Tapatalk


----------



## TeslaHUN

I dont really get , why ppl say 3700X woul be best choice for OC ? 65W TDP is so low. Its like "T" processors on intel ,u cant oc them.
3800X with 105W TDP sounds better for me.
Also when u overclock a VGA and u run out of TDP limit, u are pretty much screwed, even if the GPU could clock higher with watercooling , u cant do anything.


----------



## Frosted racquet

There's no TDP limit on CPUs, only what your MB VRM and cooling can do.

The reason the 3700X has good OC potential is it has lower clocks out of the box, so more MHz until you hit the limit of the CPU. Not because it can achieve higher clocks than the 3800X.


----------



## poah

Martin778 said:


> What happens when you set 3733 on boards that 'scam' results by setting BCLK to like 100.4 etc.? Crash?



all MSI x570's will be set to 100


----------



## nick name

iNeri said:


> -snip-
> 
> PBO 200MHZ
> 
> -snip-


What are you talking about with this PBO 200MHz?


----------



## Martin778

iNeri said:


> Or you can set ram to 3666+102bclk and get 3733 mhz on RAM.
> 
> 3800x Cpu 45x multiplier + PBO 200MHZ =4700x102 bclk =4800 mhz boost [emoji14]
> 
> Enviado desde mi ONEPLUS A6000 mediante Tapatalk


I mostly refer to 'stock' situation,some board are adjusting BCLK a bit to their own liking. I know this is a Z390 chart but maybe X470/570 do the same? My GB B450 Aorus Pro runs at 99.8 according to HWInfo.


----------



## nick name

I think I've seen one board run at the actual 100 BCLK that it was set to. And that might have just been the timing on when it was polled. All others I've seen set to 100 run around 99.8 including mine. Which is why I set it to 100.2, but don't ask me why that doesn't fall down to 100.


----------



## AlphaC

It's also partly down to the SuperIO reading the clockrate wrong and _spread spectrum_.


----------



## Nighthog

Someone shared a link on another suite to a Review of the Ryzen 5 3600 on a Gigabyte x470 Gaming 7.

https://elchapuzasinformatico.com/2019/06/amd-ryzen-5-3600-x470-review/

The 3600 6 core seems to perform quite similar to the older 8 core 1700X. Much better single core but doesn't reach 9900K.
Memory seems a bit disappointing.


----------



## Grin

Nighthog said:


> Someone shared a link on another suite to a Review of the Ryzen 5 3600 on a Gigabyte x470 Gaming 7.
> 
> https://elchapuzasinformatico.com/2019/06/amd-ryzen-5-3600-x470-review/
> 
> The 3600 6 core seems to perform quite similar to the older 8 core 1700X. Much better single core but doesn't reach 9900K.
> Memory seems a bit disappointing.


As I told before, MC write is not good in one chiplet configuration. Gaming processor was designed for fun only.


----------



## Leopardi

Grin said:


> As I told before, MC write is not good in one chiplet configuration. Gaming processor was designed for fun only.


So you're saying the 8+8 or 8+4 on the 3900X/3950X would perform better for memory? I heard that single chiplet would be better


----------



## NightAntilli

Leopardi said:


> So you're saying the 8+8 or 8+4 on the 3900X/3950X would perform better for memory? I heard that single chiplet would be better


It's probably going to be 6+6, not 8+4.


----------



## Grin

Leopardi said:


> Grin said:
> 
> 
> 
> As I told before, MC write is not good in one chiplet configuration. Gaming processor was designed for fun only.
> 
> 
> 
> So you're saying the 8+8 or 8+4 on the 3900X/3950X would perform better for memory? I heard that single chiplet would be better
Click to expand...

Exactly two chiplets will perform much better because of links to MC 64+64/32+32 One chiplet is limited 64(enough)/32(not enough)
3900x is 6+6


----------



## deepor

NightAntilli said:


> It's probably going to be 6+6, not 8+4.


I think it'll be 8+4 because there's still the same CCX as in Zen 1, with four cores in one CCX. There's two CCX inside one chiplet. I'm then guessing that for a 12-core CPU they will disable one whole CCX, meaning half of one chiplet, meaning you'll end up with an 8+4 setup.


----------



## VeritronX

deepor said:


> I think it'll be 8+4 because there's still the same CCX as in Zen 1, with four cores in one CCX. There's two CCX inside one chiplet. I'm then guessing that for a 12-core CPU they will disable one whole CCX, meaning half of one chiplet, meaning you'll end up with an 8+4 setup.


They aren't doing 8+4 because when you disable one of the ccx's on zen you lose the cache from the disabled one. The advertised cache amount is the same for the 12 core and the 16 core so the 12 core has to be 6+6.


----------



## nick name

Welp the guy that had the first 3950X Geekbench 4 score seems to be active again. This time, though, he has overclocked it to 5.27GHz all-core. I'm assuming it's on LN2 as it was at E3. 

http://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/13669966


----------



## Bohefus

deepor said:


> I would assume it's the same hardware design, it's just the turbo clocks set up differently for the default BIOS settings. The 105W model will keep the clock higher when all cores are in use.


The 3800X may be a higher binned chip. We'll find out once they do comparisons and overclock the 3700X to 3800X levels. I would imagine that the overclocked 3700X would raise the TDP to 105w like the 3800X if the silicone allows it.


----------



## AlphaC

If the bin is 100MHz then I don't think it's really worth the ~10% increase in price as it's going to be 2-3% faster than a R7 3700X. Additionally if you feel you want to run low power for the summertime you can achieve better results on the R7 3700X with its 65W TDP. 

The only time I could see the R7 3800X being 10% faster is when both are constrained to stock TDP and you exceed 4 cores which leads to clocks dropping. If you enable PBO settings and loosen power limit I could definitely see no additional gain from R7 3800X other than 100MHz.

R7 3800X = 105W , 4.5GHz Boost and 3.9 Base
R7 3700X = 65W, 4.4GHz Boost and 3.6 Base

With R7 2700X vs R7 2700 you were getting a better cooler as well. I sold mine on EBay for around $30 which negated the additional cost.

I suspect it will be similar to R7 1700 vs R7 1700X/R7 1800x and R7 2700 vs R7 2700X. It will be more down to luck although higher probability of slightly better overclocks at custom loop water temperatures due to leakier parts.

See
https://www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-ryzen-7-2700/16.html


----------



## drmrlordx

@AlphaC

I think the difference between 3700x and 3800x will be similar to the difference between R7 2700 and R7 2700x. R7 2700 would sometimes have problems maintaining all-core clocks higher than 3.4 GHz while 2700x could easily do 4 GHz.


----------



## AlphaC

AMD is stating PBO is enabled on all the chips time around.


With R7 2700X to R7 2700 as you see in the techpowerup graph the max clock for R7 2700X is 4.35GHz vs 4.1GHz of the R7 2700. That's ~6% difference and the boxed coolers weren't the same.



If the R7 3800X is 4.5GHz and R7 3700X is 4.4GHz the gap isn't as large and PBO would make it more or less moot (100MHz is about 2%). Per their slides PBO +200MHz on R7 3700X applies +9 pts in CB R20 single thread while it's +3 pts for the R7 3800X. R5 3600 gets the most of all of them with +21 pts.



This situation is similar to R7 1700 vs R7 1700X except R7 1700 came with a cooler which strengthened its value even more due to how Precision Boost failed over 4 cores on Zen1. My 3.9GHz 1700X isn't better than some 1700 chips ; at launch R7 1800X was $500 and boost was 4.1GHz.


----------



## Hwgeek

I am interested who can test the new Ryzen with power limit of 3~3.5W per core to see what's the max frequency it can operate, since this will give us some info on the new 64C TR that will be 250W TDP for backwards compatibility[50W+ will go for the IO chiplet]


----------



## magnek

AlphaC said:


> AMD is stating PBO is enabled on all the chips time around.
> 
> 
> With R7 2700X to R7 2700 as you see in the techpowerup graph the max clock for R7 2700X is 4.35GHz vs 4.1GHz of the R7 2700. That's ~6% difference and the boxed coolers weren't the same.
> 
> 
> 
> If the R7 3800X is 4.5GHz and R7 3700X is 4.4GHz the gap isn't as large and PBO would make it more or less moot (100MHz is about 2%). Per their slides PBO +200MHz on R7 3700X applies +9 pts in CB R20 single thread while it's +3 pts for the R7 3800X. R5 3600 gets the most of all of them with +21 pts.
> 
> 
> 
> This situation is similar to R7 1700 vs R7 1700X except R7 1700 came with a cooler which strengthened its value even more due to how Precision Boost failed over 4 cores on Zen1. My 3.9GHz 1700X isn't better than some 1700 chips ; at launch R7 1800X was $500 and boost was 4.1GHz.


So I'm mostly talking out of my rear here, but if as you've previously alluded to the 3700X is probably a binned low leakage part, could this end up being a better overclocker than 3800X? It seems Ryzen hits a hard clockspeed wall, and unless you're willing to go sub-ambient (not practical for everyday use), no amount of voltage you pump through the chip will push it further. 

In this sense, the chip that can sustain the clockspeeds at the lowest possible VID would likely have the most headroom, is that right?


----------



## nick name

magnek said:


> So I'm mostly talking out of my rear here, but if as you've previously alluded to the 3700X is probably a binned low leakage part, could this end up being a better overclocker than 3800X? It seems Ryzen hits a hard clockspeed wall, and unless you're willing to go sub-ambient (not practical for everyday use), no amount of voltage you pump through the chip will push it further.
> 
> In this sense, the chip that can sustain the clockspeeds at the lowest possible VID would likely have the most headroom, is that right?


That seems to be true about chips once they get to mobile, but I'm not sure that would apply here. It's something I was thinking too though.


----------



## AlphaC

magnek said:


> So I'm mostly talking out of my rear here, but if as you've previously alluded to the 3700X is probably a binned low leakage part, could this end up being a better overclocker than 3800X? It seems Ryzen hits a hard clockspeed wall, and unless you're willing to go sub-ambient (not practical for everyday use), no amount of voltage you pump through the chip will push it further.
> 
> In this sense, the chip that can sustain the clockspeeds at the lowest possible VID would likely have the most headroom, is that right?


 Sorry for the late reply but that was my thinking, if it's binned for low leakage unless you're going for world sub-ambient records you want the lowest possible voltage for less power use.


As I often leave my machines to BOINC on idle that is going to be a huge difference in power as power usually goes up with square of voltage. I wouldn't want to run over 1.35-1.4V all core anyhow even if 1.45-1.55 is possible.


Even if it's just the IPC gain of 13-15% over Zen1, it's already worthwhile to me to upgrade 1st gen Zen since AVX2 is doublewide now as well.



A few posts back you will see the pcgamesn article quoting an AMD employee that the R7 3700X is the overclocking star of their lineup. The "overclocking" star could mean overclock percentage or the amount of improvement over stock using PBO. They also stated that the overclocking limits haven't been established, so the binning might just be roughly for the top clocks overall at a specified stock voltage.


https://www.overclock.net/forum/28011938-post150.html , article: https://www.pcgamesn.com/amd/ryzen-3700x-overclocking-performance


----------



## phillyman36

Does anyone know what time pre orders are going live?


----------



## jakemfbacon

phillyman36 said:


> Does anyone know what time pre orders are going live?



I don't even see anything about it or any retailers having them? Is July 1st even official?


----------



## tpi2007

I just posted this in the news section: https://www.overclock.net/forum/225...silicon-lottery-bin-sell-ryzen-3000-cpus.html


----------



## drmrlordx

AlphaC said:


> AMD is stating PBO is enabled on all the chips time around.


That's a relief.




> With R7 2700X to R7 2700 as you see in the techpowerup graph the max clock for R7 2700X is 4.35GHz vs 4.1GHz of the R7 2700. That's ~6% difference and the boxed coolers weren't the same.


That was single core. All-core, 2700x could easily sustain 4.0 GHz without PBO and go faster than that with PBO. 2700 was stuck at 3.4 GHz and PBO was only enabled on a vendor-by-vendor basis. I don't know of a single board that allowed PBO with the 2700. That was meaningless for anyone overclocking by hand, of course . . . anyway, if Matisse has PBO enabled on everything, we won't see situations like that again.



phillyman36 said:


> Does anyone know what time pre orders are going live?


Looks like pre-orders are a bust for today. Lots of people saying there won't be any. Really frustrating.


----------



## AlphaC

These are the slides by the way , it's been all over the Internet 











https://www.anandtech.com/show/14525/amd-zen-2-microarchitecture-analysis-ryzen-3000-and-epyc-rome/2
https://www.techpowerup.com/256660/...ecks-ryzen-3000-zen-2-radeon-rx-5000-navi-etc


----------



## nick name

AlphaC said:


> These are the slides by the way , it's been all over the Internet
> 
> View attachment 277326
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.anandtech.com/show/14525/amd-zen-2-microarchitecture-analysis-ryzen-3000-and-epyc-rome/2
> https://www.techpowerup.com/256660/...ecks-ryzen-3000-zen-2-radeon-rx-5000-navi-etc


Ahhh that's what that guy was talking about with PBO +200MHz.


----------



## nick name

Has everyone seen the new 3700X Geekbench scores? The single core is looking daaaaamn good. 

http://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/search?utf8=✓&q=3700x


----------



## Heuchler

Robert Hallock on Precision Boost Overdrive for the AMD Ryzen 3000 Series





edit:

You can configure a boost offset from +25 to +200MHz, in 25MHz steps, for all 3rd Gen Ryzen. Via BIOS or Ryzen Master. The override will be treated as the new max boost clock, and the CPU will self-manage as usual.
https://twitter.com/dcominottim/status/1145794400351641600


----------



## Hale59

AMD Ryzen 9 3900X 12 Core & Ryzen 7 3700X 8 Core CPU Benchmarks Leak Out in 3DMark – $329 US Ryzen Trades Blows With $499 US Core i9-9900K

https://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-9-3900x-and-ryzen-7-3700x-cpu-benchmark-3dmark-leak/


----------



## iNeri

Hale59 said:


> AMD Ryzen 9 3900X 12 Core & Ryzen 7 3700X 8 Core CPU Benchmarks Leak Out in 3DMark – $329 US Ryzen Trades Blows With $499 US Core i9-9900K
> 
> https://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-9-3900x-and-ryzen-7-3700x-cpu-benchmark-3dmark-leak/


Interesting..

If scored that with ram at 3200 mhz i wanna see how far this thing go with 3733 for RAM and IF + bclk OC to extend PBO


----------



## Heuchler

CPU-Z 1.89.1 Matisse support - https://www.cpuid.com/softwares/cpu-z.html

Preliminary support of AMD Ryzen 3000 (1.89.1)
Intel Cascade Lake processors (1.89.1)
Zhaoxin ZX-5000 and ZX-6000 processors families support.
AMD APU Ryzen Picasso detection fix.

ver 1.85 added displaying AMD AGESA version number


----------



## Hale59

3900x

https://twitter.com/TUM_APISAK/status/1146791456717193216


----------



## Hale59

Japan - Prices for the 3000's

https://pc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/news/1194541.html


----------



## Hale59

3700x up to 20% more fps compared to the 2700x, up to 50% more performance in workloads like 7Zip

https://imgur.com/a/YkoOCgM


----------



## deepor

Hale59 said:


> 3700x up to 20% more fps compared to the 2700x, up to 50% more performance in workloads like 7Zip
> 
> https://imgur.com/a/YkoOCgM



Is there a link to that article somewhere? I can't find anything with Google.

It seems there's a whole bunch of graphs that are missing in the screenshot because on the actual webpage you were supposed to click to flip through several different graphs.


----------



## Hale59

deepor said:


> Is there a link to that article somewhere? I can't find anything with Google.
> 
> It seems there's a whole bunch of graphs that are missing in the screenshot because on the actual webpage you were supposed to click to flip through several different graphs.


See 


this thread: https://www.overclock.net/forum/379...zen-3900x-3700x-review-pcgh.html#post28027058


----------



## AlphaC

https://www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-zen-2-memory-performance-scaling-benchmark/2.html


memory scaling is odd in Blender


Peak power per core = 15-18W https://www.anandtech.com/show/14605/the-and-ryzen-3700x-3900x-review-raising-the-bar/18


----------



## Heuchler

AlphaC said:


> https://www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-zen-2-memory-performance-scaling-benchmark/2.html
> 
> 
> memory scaling is odd in Blender
> 
> 
> Peak power per core = 15-18W https://www.anandtech.com/show/14605/the-and-ryzen-3700x-3900x-review-raising-the-bar/18



Pretty close to 20-22W that was estimated. Always better of safer when playing with VRMs.


----------



## Nizzen

Overclocking Ryzen 3k LOL

Epic fail.


----------



## Damaging Excess

Nizzen said:


> Overclocking Ryzen 3k LOL
> 
> 
> 
> Epic fail.


Correct me if I'm wrong but overclocking only looks bad because turbo boost is just working really well

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk


----------



## Heuchler




----------



## AlphaC

https://forum.level1techs.com/t/ryzen-3000-booting-linux-and-you/144702




> *Fedora 30 (and Pop!_OS 19.0 and probably any linux based on 5.x kernels) won’t boot on Ryzen 3000?! What the heck?*
> 
> It’s true. AMD is aware of the issue and it is being worked on. In the slides from the E3 event, changes to virtualization and new instructions were mentioned. Not a lot is known about this yet, but I have been working on it as I have time.
> In a pinch, you can boot older kernels like 4.14 or use a distro like Ubuntu 18.04.2 LTS or Debian 9.9; those seem to work fine.


----------



## anethema

Damaging Excess said:


> Correct me if I'm wrong but overclocking only looks bad because turbo boost is just working really well



I dunno. Most of the chips aren't even hitting their advertised boost clocks even with high end liquid cooling, never mind OC.

PBO is doing literally nothing in every place I could find. I wonder if we will see some changes to that with more mature BIOSs. Some classic Fine Wine(tm)


----------



## Sturmer

Damaging Excess said:


> Correct me if I'm wrong but overclocking only looks bad because turbo boost is just working really well
> 
> Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk



Im little worried about that CPUs are not hitting boost clocks at all. In best case 4.4Ghz and even that really really rare cases.


Makes 3800X completely useless. Because 3700 and 3800 hit same boost wall before their advertised boost max


----------



## Damaging Excess

Sturmer said:


> Im little worried about that CPUs are not hitting boost clocks at all. In best case 4.4Ghz and even that really really rare cases.
> 
> 
> Makes 3800X completely useless. Because 3700 and 3800 hit same boost wall before their advertised boost max


Part of me feels like there may be something wrong but I'm not smart enough to base that off anything solid 

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk


----------



## Sturmer

Damaging Excess said:


> Part of me feels like there may be something wrong but I'm not smart enough to base that off anything solid
> 
> Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk



Agree. Have same feeling.
I base my story on info that we now have. There might be something in AGESA that is limiting or bugged.
Really hope that 3000 series hits promised boost clocks with high end cooling.


----------



## kundica

anethema said:


> I dunno. Most of the chips aren't even hitting their advertised boost clocks even with high end liquid cooling, never mind OC.
> 
> PBO is doing literally nothing in every place I could find. I wonder if we will see some changes to that with more mature BIOSs. Some classic Fine Wine(tm)


According to this review, there seem to be issues with various bios and boost clocks. Some bios gave them proper boost with poor PBO while others show poor boost. Relevant info starts about halfway down. https://www.xanxogaming.com/reviews...n-espanol-destronando-al-intel-core-i9-9900k/


----------



## Unoid

Nizzen said:


> Overclocking Ryzen 3k LOL
> 
> Epic fail.


why you mad? 16 core on regular consmer desktop will force intel to release bigger core counts to high end desktops for fanboys like you to buy 

Be thankful


----------



## Nizzen

Unoid said:


> Nizzen said:
> 
> 
> 
> Overclocking Ryzen 3k LOL
> 
> Epic fail.
> 
> 
> 
> why you mad? 16 core on regular consmer desktop will force intel to release bigger core counts to high end desktops for fanboys like you to buy /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
> 
> 
> 
> Be thankful
Click to expand...

This is OCN, not stock-clock.net 😉

I'm a performancefanboy. What brand, or name/color the hardware have, I don't care 😉


----------



## Leopardi

Sturmer said:


> Im little worried about that CPUs are not hitting boost clocks at all. In best case 4.4Ghz and even that really really rare cases.
> 
> 
> Makes 3800X completely useless. Because 3700 and 3800 hit same boost wall before their advertised boost max





Sturmer said:


> Agree. Have same feeling.
> I base my story on info that we now have. There might be something in AGESA that is limiting or bugged.
> Really hope that 3000 series hits promised boost clocks with high end cooling.





kundica said:


> According to this review, there seem to be issues with various bios and boost clocks. Some bios gave them proper boost with poor PBO while others show poor boost. Relevant info starts about halfway down. https://www.xanxogaming.com/reviews...n-espanol-destronando-al-intel-core-i9-9900k/


Anandtech is now running all the tests again with new BIOS.


----------



## d0mini

Leopardi said:


> Anandtech is now running all the tests again with new BIOS.



4.5GHz is higher than any reviewer got their CPUs to, even when manually overclocking. It would be interesting to know what kind of a load was put on the CPU during this test, and how long it held the clockspeeds for as this is just a 2 second period. I can't wait to see the updated review!

AMD's firmware clearly wasn't ready for the launch date they set. The CPUs are still holding up well against the competition, but there are clear optimisations that have yet to be fully realised. You can't go from 4.25GHz to 4.5GHz and not get an improvement. Launch day reviews should not have to be updated days later to reflect significant firmware changes that affect something so fundamental as the default clockspeeds!


----------



## JeyD02

Leopardi said:


> Anandtech is now running all the tests again with new BIOS.


And that's without PBO working.... 

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk


----------



## RossiOCUK

Needs time to settle with new AGESA and BIOS release and then onto tackling the AMD's boost power constraints. 

A bit of a rocky release, as usual, but it will steady to something greater.


----------



## ajc9988

Nizzen said:


> This is OCN, not stock-clock.net 😉
> 
> I'm a performancefanboy. What brand, or name/color the hardware have, I don't care 😉


Are you though? At 4.4GHz, the CB15 scores are around a 9900K running at 5.2GHz. And that is before fully optimizing the ram timings. You'll still need a cherry chip to top some of the higher Intel 9900K scores on air/water, but you seem to be missing something.

Edit:
On LN2, ranked #6 for 8 core 3800X
https://hwbot.org/submission/4189838_tsaik_cinebench___r20_ryzen_7_3800x_6660_marks


----------



## Nizzen

ajc9988 said:


> Are you though? At 4.4GHz, the CB15 scores are around a 9900K running at 5.2GHz. And that is before fully optimizing the ram timings. You'll still need a cherry chip to top some of the higher Intel 9900K scores on air/water, but you seem to be missing something.
> 
> Edit:
> On LN2, ranked #6 for 8 core 3800X
> https://hwbot.org/submission/4189838_tsaik_cinebench___r20_ryzen_7_3800x_6660_marks


Not everyone plays Cinebench 24/7 


I ordered 3900x, and it will arrive soon 

Fun to test hardware, and not being a fanboy of one brand, like others here


----------



## ajc9988

Nizzen said:


> Not everyone plays Cinebench 24/7
> 
> 
> I ordered 3900x, and it will arrive soon
> 
> Fun to test hardware, and not being a fanboy of one brand, like others here


Very true. Just had to point out that nothing matters but dem points! 

Looking forward to seeing what you can rack up with that chip! What kind of cooling do you have planned for it? 

Bearded Hardware is going to live stream his LN2 benching the 3700X tomorrow (he did memory overclocking today with some amazing Trident Royals doing [email protected] 11 11 11 21 33 tRFC 180 tCKE 1, tCWL 11, 1.9V). Was hitting at Intel 5.3 levels with CB15 there, crashed on CB20, but sets it up for some good viewing tomorrow. 

I'm keeping an eye for more scores to pour in on HWBot.org. Some may be waiting for SL, which I want to see what they will have on categories and chips for what frequency and voltage.

Still, I'm waiting for the next Threadripper for my upgrade (already have a 1950X, so will upgrade the board at a later date).


----------



## chakku

Anyone able to give their 3900X a spin on RPCS3?


----------



## Leopardi

Going strong in europe


----------



## CaptainZombie

Looks like some stores are starting to get the 3800x in stock. I have an aging 4790k that I want to replace so badly since last year, and was considering the 3800x or 3900x, but might go with the 3800x and use that extra $100 towards something else for my system.

Just sucks that there is no good mATX boards available right now, and I wanted to go mATX since the ATX is a bit more than I need.


----------



## Frosted racquet

Why go for the 3800x instead of the 3700x?


----------



## AlphaC

I think the R9 3900X is going to be thermally limited in most cases unless you're on custom water:


> The stress load obtained with Prime95 29.8 raises the CPU's nominal temperature to 95 degrees (with Noctua NH-U14S cooler), and the motherboard power converter reports about 190 W of power consumption by the processor.


https://3dnews.ru/990367/obzor-amd-ryzen-9-3900x





https://3dnews.ru/990334/obzor-amd-ryzen-7-3700x said:


> the maximum frequency we managed to squeeze out when manually accelerating the Ryzen 7 3700X was just 4.2 GHz. When the power supply voltage increased to 1.4 V, the processor was stable at this frequency and underwent stress testing in Prime95, but the temperature under load increased to 105 degrees, which can hardly be considered normal operation.



=====


Anandtech tested on stock Wraith Prism cooler which is weaker than NH-U14S by at least 10 degrees at 180W or so.


Bittech used EKWB MLC Phoenix which is on par with custom water except for the 6W pump https://bit-tech.net/reviews/tech/cpus/amd-ryzen-9-3900x-review/4/


IgorsLab used Eisbaer 280 (full copper , <5W pump) https://www.tomshw.de/2019/07/07/amd-ryzen-3900x-und-3700x-im-test-igorslab/



Gain from Prism to NH-U14s seen at https://www.computerbase.de/2019-07...hnitt_gut_gekuehlte_cpus_sind_etwas_schneller


> For the Ryzen 9 3900X, AMD is offering up to 13 percent performance growth in the Cinebench R20 multi-core test when switching from a conventional 95-watt cooler at 32 °C ambient temperature to the Noctua NH-D15S at 20 degrees ambient temperature.
> 
> In the editorial test, performance differences between the use of the AMD boxed cooler Wraith Prism (test) and the Noctua NH-U14S (test) on the Ryzen 9 3900X can certainly be proven, albeit not so large. However, the temperature was also just over 20 °C in both cases.


----------



## Streetdragon

i think i go for liquid metal as my tim. hope that will save me even more degrees with my loop^^


----------



## CaptainZombie

Frosted racquet said:


> Why go for the 3800x instead of the 3700x?


Figuring that the 3800X in the long run may give out a little bit more power with some OC, but I do kind of feel like it may not be a good OC for the money. I game at 1440p and some 4K depending on the game. At the end of the day I should just go with a 3900X and call it a day. I was tempted by the 9900K earlier in the year, but man Intel has taken us for a ride for so long that I would prefer to support AMD this go around.


----------



## fursko

So what is the final conclusion ? 

3900X can't reach advertised 4.6 ghz with 1-2 core workloads ?

3800X can't reach advertised 4.5 ghz with 1-2 core workloads ?

3700X can't reach advertised 4.4 ghz with 1-2 core workloads ?

3600X can't reach advertised 4.4 ghz with 1-2 core workloads ?

3600 can reach advertised 4.2 ghz with 1-2 core workloads ?

PBO oc is irrelevant anything above 3600 ?

What you guys experiencing for the boost clocks ? With or without pbo


----------



## Nizzen

Leopardi said:


> Going strong in europe


Biggest online shop in scandinavia ( Norway, denmark, Sweeden, finland) Komplett.no/se etc..

Looks like they sold some 3900x the last few days


----------



## Medusa666

I'm using an X370 Asus Crosshair VI Hero, and my Ryzen 9 3900X reaches 4,6GHz with PBO enabled. 

Everything is stock, nothing is changed in the BIOS except using the memory XMP / DOCP profile, 3200MHz / CL14. 

Runs smooth and with almost zero hiccups


----------



## mito1172

Medusa666 said:


> I'm using an X370 Asus Crosshair VI Hero, and my Ryzen 9 3900X reaches 4,6GHz with PBO enabled.
> 
> Everything is stock, nothing is changed in the BIOS except using the memory XMP / DOCP profile, 3200MHz / CL14.
> 
> Runs smooth and with almost zero hiccups


which bios?


----------



## OCmember

Wondering if Bios updates will increase all core overclocks.


----------



## Medusa666

mito1172 said:


> which bios?


Sorry, BIOS version 7106.


----------



## JeyD02

OCmember said:


> Wondering if Bios updates will increase all core overclocks.


What do you mean exactly? You should be able to manually overclock all core to a specific freq but defentitvely not max boost freq.

If you are talking about xfr or PBO, all core were never expected and will not all overclock to max freq. Only core 1 or 2 to max.


----------



## mito1172

Medusa666 said:


> Sorry, BIOS version 7106.


thanks


----------



## obiwansotti

JeyD02 said:


> What do you mean exactly? You should be able to manually overclock all core to a specific freq but defentitvely not max boost freq.
> 
> If you are talking about xfr or PBO, all core were never expected and will not all overclock to max freq. Only core 1 or 2 to max.


I know my personal question is if PBO will start providing a benefit.

I'm still trying to piece together what is expected, and what is considered "overclocking". I would've expected everything to hit boost clock for 1 or 2 cores out of the box. Then PBO would maybe go higher? I can't figure out with all the bios talk if that is still something that may become available.

They say PBO should allow for up to 200mhz over the max boost speed. For a 3900X that says 4600mhz on the box and 4650mhz in hardware that would be the last little bit of perf that would put the chip beyond what an intel would be expected to do (with overclocking), even if it's only 4.75. But it sounds like this is fantasy land, even with the best AIO and air coolers and a mobo that can drive all the power you'd need.

It seems like the best you can expect is what it says on the box. PBO is doing nothing for any of the chips and these processors are so tightly binned and the boost clock is equivalent of what we used to do in the good old days there isn't anything left for overclockers.


----------



## egandt

*3900X (water) on Gigabyte AORUS Master max single core 4.375*

Just got it up and running went to run some simply (CPU-Z) benchmarks, now all core with PBO enabled I see 4075, but single core speeds are only about 4375 max, which seems very low. Ryzen Master shows nothing as a limiting factor, but I've never seen any core boost over 4425 ever. The single seems close to what I see in reviews between 515 and 525, it is teh core speed that is concerning. This is WIndows 1903 with latest drivers installed and I'm on the latest 5f bios for the board as well. 

Max temp seen (with CPU-Z running all cores for 20 minutes) was only 59c (now it does not stress much, need to try the new Beta version 19), but still that means it should not be temp, so I'm lost as to why boost clocks are so slow for single core (reasonable happy with multi-core), exceeding 4 without any effort, still seems there should be more to get from it even here.

Also what is the suggested apps for stress testing with 24 threads?

Ideas?
ERIC


----------



## Bart

PBO has made overclocking confusing for everyone, LOL! It also seems that PBO is changing behavior lately for me on X470, so I'm wondering if newer BIOS updates for these new CPUs contain new PBO code. My old 2700X *used* to boost all 8 cores to 4,374mhz under PBO L3, but now it only boosts to 4,175mhz all core. I wonder if these lower boost clocks people are seeing on X570 are related to PBO, and are affecting me on X470 (Crosshair 7 Hero). If only I could get my hands on one of these new toys!


----------



## OCmember

egandt said:


> Just got it up and running went to run some simply (CPU-Z) benchmarks, now all core with PBO enabled I see 4075, but single core speeds are only about 4375 max, which seems very low. Ryzen Master shows nothing as a limiting factor, but I've never seen any core boost over 4425 ever. The single seems close to what I see in reviews between 515 and 525, it is teh core speed that is concerning. This is WIndows 1903 with latest drivers installed and I'm on the latest 5f bios for the board as well.
> 
> Max temp seen (with CPU-Z running all cores for 20 minutes) was only 59c (now it does not stress much, need to try the new Beta version 19), but still that means it should not be temp, so I'm lost as to why boost clocks are so slow for single core (reasonable happy with multi-core), exceeding 4 without any effort, still seems there should be more to get from it even here.
> 
> Also what is the suggested apps for stress testing with 24 threads?
> 
> Ideas?
> ERIC


Could it be the PPT (Package Power Tracking)? Anandtech article says the 105w chips are allowed up to 142w
https://www.anandtech.com/show/14605/the-and-ryzen-3700x-3900x-review-raising-the-bar/19
I don't know I'm just throwing that out there.


----------



## mongoled

OCmember said:


> Could it be the PPT (Package Power Tracking)? Anandtech article says the 105w chips are allowed up to 142w
> https://www.anandtech.com/show/14605/the-and-ryzen-3700x-3900x-review-raising-the-bar/19
> I don't know I'm just throwing that out there.


Yes this ^^^^^

Thats what I would like to know before I purchase.

But unfortunately it looks like we will have to wait.

What it comes down to is if the CPUs that are rated at 65W will be allowed to bypass the PPT, TDC and EDC limits imposed as per below

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Package Power Tracking (PPT): The power threshold that is allowed to be delivered to the socket.
This is 88W for 65W TDP processors, and 142W for 105W TDP processors.

Thermal Design Current (TDC): The maximum amount of current delivered by the motherboard’s voltage regulators when under thermally constrained scenarios (high temperatures)
This is 60A for 65W TDP processors, and 95A for 105W TDP processors.

Electrical Design Current (EDC): This is the maximum amount of current at any instantaneous short period of time that can be delivered by the motherboard’s voltage regulators.
This is 90A for 65W TDP processors, and 140A for 105W TDP processors.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If these cannot be surpassed, it means that we wont have the tools available to us to be able to push the lower tdp CPUs to these higher clocks.......


----------



## egandt

*egandt*



OCmember said:


> Could it be the PPT (Package Power Tracking)? Anandtech article says the 105w chips are allowed up to 142w
> https://www.anandtech.com/show/14605/the-and-ryzen-3700x-3900x-review-raising-the-bar/19
> I don't know I'm just throwing that out there.


Need to check again, but Ryzen Master showed low power draw, maybe to low.

ERIC


----------



## majestynl

OCmember said:


> Wondering if Bios updates will increase all core overclocks.


Dont hope to much  Maybe new Agesa will come with better adjusted PBO/XFR to push some extra mhz.
I think we can hope more for tuning the TDC/EDC etc. like ASUS did with their PE levels.


----------



## dev1ance

If I undervolt via offset .175 in the BIOs (all-core load becomes ~1.19-1.2v), my performance drops off to the level of a 2700x in SC. Temps reach a maximum of 59-60 degrees running FPU stress test with AIDA64. Clocks in HWInfo seem high (4.19GHz MC and 4.392 SC max boost) but I assume that clocks aren't actually being maintained. 
CPU-Z single-core hovers between 425-445 and multi-core is ~4600.

If I manually set my voltage to between 1.23v to 1.285v, my SC performance suffers a lot still and my multi-core performance is slow but still much faster. Temps are still quite low and don't crack 60 as above.
CPU-Z single-core hovers around 420-450 but multi-core ranges ~4900-5100.

If the undervolt via offset is only .1, CPU-Z SC ~510-515 and MC ~5400-5500. Temperatures in CPU-Z alone jumps to mid-high 60s. FPU stress leads to max temps of ~71 degrees.
If the undervolt via offset is only .075, CPU-Z SC ~525-530 and MC ~5500-5600. Similar situation but temps jump to a max of ~73.

Anyone else want to try undervolting to see if their performance substantially suffers at a particular point?


----------



## egandt

*egandt*



egandt said:


> Need to check again, but Ryzen Master showed low power draw, maybe to low.
> 
> ERIC


SO EDC is not an issue on Auto (all-core is then 3975 to 4025,) if I switch the PBO offset to 200 in BIOS then all core is closer to 4125-4150, and EDC is the limiting factor so a hundred MHZ gain from changing that setting.

However none of this affects single core which is still limited to about 4375.

With PBO and setting it at 200 I see about 525 Single thread and around 8000 Multithread, single-core is in line with what others are seeing while multi-core is a little lower, seems to avg closer to 8400 (so 5%) and that is without PBO active.

ERIC


----------



## majestynl

egandt said:


> SO EDC is not an issue on Auto (all-core is then 3975 to 4025,) if I switch the PBO offset to 200 in BIOS then all core is closer to 4125-4150, and EDC is the limiting factor so a hundred MHZ gain from changing that setting.
> 
> However none of this affects single core which is still limited to about 4375.
> 
> With PBO and setting it at 200 I see about 525 Single thread and around 8000 Multithread, single-core is in line with what others are seeing while multi-core is a little lower, seems to avg closer to 8400 (so 5%) and that is without PBO active.
> 
> ERIC


Could be locked by AMD deep in PBO. They did the same thing with 5700 and XT for the max boost clocks.
Otherwise the 3800x vs 3700x makes zero sense


----------



## Scotty99

Medusa666 said:


> I'm using an X370 Asus Crosshair VI Hero, and my Ryzen 9 3900X reaches 4,6GHz with PBO enabled.
> 
> Everything is stock, nothing is changed in the BIOS except using the memory XMP / DOCP profile, 3200MHz / CL14.
> 
> Runs smooth and with almost zero hiccups


Isnt pbo exclusive to x570 or am i missing something?


----------



## majestynl

Scotty99 said:


> Isnt pbo exclusive to x570 or am i missing something?


Nope, its a main feature! Its just that they have further developed it for 3x series (a.k.a. PBO2)


----------



## OCmember

mongoled said:


> What it comes down to is if the CPUs that are rated at 65W will be allowed to bypass the PPT, TDC and EDC limits imposed as per below
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Package Power Tracking (PPT): The power threshold that is allowed to be delivered to the socket.
> This is 88W for 65W TDP processors, and 142W for 105W TDP processors.
> 
> Thermal Design Current (TDC): The maximum amount of current delivered by the motherboard’s voltage regulators when under thermally constrained scenarios (high temperatures)
> This is 60A for 65W TDP processors, and 95A for 105W TDP processors.
> 
> Electrical Design Current (EDC): This is the maximum amount of current at any instantaneous short period of time that can be delivered by the motherboard’s voltage regulators.
> This is 90A for 65W TDP processors, and 140A for 105W TDP processors.
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> If these cannot be surpassed, it means that we wont have the tools available to us to be able to push the lower tdp CPUs to these higher clocks.......


This is the interesting part. 

I wonder if the limit is set on the CPU or if it's locked through the bios. If it's on the CPU could AMD be the ones who will tell the motherboard makers how to tweak it, or could and will it have to be hacked to surpass the limits?


----------



## fursko

Medusa666 said:


> I'm using an X370 Asus Crosshair VI Hero, and my Ryzen 9 3900X reaches 4,6GHz with PBO enabled.
> 
> Everything is stock, nothing is changed in the BIOS except using the memory XMP / DOCP profile, 3200MHz / CL14.
> 
> Runs smooth and with almost zero hiccups


What is boost clock without pbo ? and why ALMOST zero ?


----------



## fursko

egandt said:


> SO EDC is not an issue on Auto (all-core is then 3975 to 4025,) if I switch the PBO offset to 200 in BIOS then all core is closer to 4125-4150, and EDC is the limiting factor so a hundred MHZ gain from changing that setting.
> 
> However none of this affects single core which is still limited to about 4375.
> 
> With PBO and setting it at 200 I see about 525 Single thread and around 8000 Multithread, single-core is in line with what others are seeing while multi-core is a little lower, seems to avg closer to 8400 (so 5%) and that is without PBO active.
> 
> ERIC


Your problem is bios related. 3900X should reach 4575mhz. Some reviewers reaching 4375 like you with the wrong bios.


----------



## reqq

I waiting to find 3900c stock..meanwhile the only thing woryring is high 1.4v?? idle volt? How is that good in the long run? Can you make change this in bios and yet get all the good boost?


----------



## Hale59

Idle voltages

https://twitter.com/Thracks/status/1149041704881795072


----------



## Mad Pistol

3900x ordered from Best Buy. Will let you know when I get it.


----------



## LiquidHaus

Mad Pistol said:


> 3900x ordered from Best Buy. Will let you know when I get it.


Would love to know how fast they ship it out to you.

I bought my 3900x from Best Buy right at 7am on the the 7th, and after two days of no order update, they told me it was backordered.

Sooo i'm not too happy. But everywhere else is sold out as well so there's not much I can do.


----------



## Mad Pistol

lifeisshort117 said:


> Would love to know how fast they ship it out to you.
> 
> I bought my 3900x from Best Buy right at 7am on the the 7th, and after two days of no order update, they told me it was backordered.
> 
> Sooo i'm not too happy. But everywhere else is sold out as well so there's not much I can do.


Really hoping both of our chips ship soon. We shall see.


----------



## Hale59

Just pure curiosity

DAW performance


----------



## Heuchler

Hale59 said:


> Idle voltages
> 
> https://twitter.com/Thracks/status/1149041704881795072


Nice catch. Zen[1] cores where already very efficient just the SOC [uncore] wasn't at the same level. Seem like Zen2 improved things even more.

"Some of the monitoring tools have aggressive polling intervals. They frequently wake every core to ask for status, which the CPU interprets as 'PLS BOOST'

CPU-Z is reporting correct values" - Robert Hallock


----------



## m9viper

Hale59 said:


> Just pure curiosity
> 
> DAW performance


Interesting that 3900X numbers are like 5-7% better then 3700X, is it due to 3900X higher single core boost clocks or there are some internal IOdie settings making double-chiplet 3900X more efficient in this? Pics are from 3dnews.ru reviews: 
https://3dnews.ru/990334/
https://3dnews.ru/990367/

Memory settings, relevant to cross-core (IF) perfromance, stated the same.


----------



## Streetdragon

i called some bigger retailers in germoney.
3900X is nowhere in stock and wont be in stock this month. MAYBE next month. I could puke-.-
now im official pissed


----------



## kamil234

gonna download cinebench tonight and test my 3900x.

Weird thing so far just seen from CPU-Z benchmarks, i got higher scores with ram running on stock profile (no XMP) 2133mhz C16, vs when i overclocked it (3600c14)
Stock score single core was 533-534
Overclocked score dropped to 517-519

Will try cinebench tonight and report back


----------



## VPII

Streetdragon said:


> i called some bigger retailers in germoney.
> 
> 3900X is nowhere in stock and wont be in stock this month. MAYBE next month. I could puke-.-
> 
> now im official pissed


Well Ill be honest with you, when you in South Africa and the retailers say there is no certainty when stock will arrive then you feel really sad.

Ive ordered and paid for a 3900x but dont know when Ill get it so Im sitting with a computer I cannot use.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk


----------



## OCmember

@kamil234 looking forward to some screen shots


----------



## Streetdragon

VPII said:


> Well Ill be honest with you, when you in South Africa and the retailers say there is no certainty when stock will arrive then you feel really sad.
> 
> Ive ordered and paid for a 3900x but dont know when Ill get it so Im sitting with a computer I cannot use.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk


Hope you get it soon^^

Someone already ordert something directly on amd.com?
They say its in stock, but i dont trust there side


----------



## rdr09

VPII said:


> Well Ill be honest with you, when you in South Africa and the retailers say there is no certainty when stock will arrive then you feel really sad.
> 
> Ive ordered and paid for a 3900x but dont know when Ill get it so Im sitting with a computer I cannot use.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk


At least your country is beautiful and there are so much to do, places to see. But, PC parts are so so expensive.


----------



## VPII

Streetdragon said:


> Hope you get it soon^^
> 
> 
> 
> Someone already ordert something directly on amd.com?
> 
> They say its in stock, but i dont trust there side


Thanks my friend, I hope so to. I logged a request online with AMD to get some feedback. At present one shop here hss 3600 in stock and Im actually considering getting one just to use till, but dont want to waste.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk


----------



## heavyarms1912

Can the 88W PPT limit be bypassed for Ryzen 3700X to make it clock higher?


----------



## kamil234

Here;s my results with a few benches from Ryzen 3900x, Aorus Elite motherboard, 3200cL14 b die ram (tuned to 3600c14)

CPU-Z showing the memory speeds:










CPU @ auto everything:










CPU @ 'normal' voltage preset, offset -.102v











CPU @ 'normal' voltage preset, offset -.120v .. you can see here the multicore performance starts to degrade.











EDIT: ran another one with PBO enabled in BIOS instead of AUTO, the results are identical.


----------



## obiwansotti

The cinebench r15 single threaded tests are pretty disappointing to me. My current 5820K @ 4.375ghz I get 180 points.


----------



## majestynl

obiwansotti said:


> The cinebench r15 single threaded tests are pretty disappointing to me. My current 5820K @ 4.375ghz I get 180 points.


The 9900k scores around 210-215 @ 5GHZ , what did you expected ?


----------



## LancerVI

Already have my Crossfire VIII Hero (wifi). 3900x scheduled for delivery tomorrow. Looking forward to it.


----------



## obiwansotti

majestynl said:


> The 9900k scores around 210-215 @ 5GHZ , what did you expected ?



I was hoping for 220+


----------



## mito1172

kamil234 said:


> Here;s my results with a few benches from Ryzen 3900x, Aorus Elite motherboard, 3200cL14 b die ram (tuned to 3600c14)
> 
> CPU-Z showing the memory speeds:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CPU @ auto everything:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CPU @ 'normal' voltage preset, offset -.102v
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CPU @ 'normal' voltage preset, offset -.120v .. you can see here the multicore performance starts to degrade.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EDIT: ran another one with PBO enabled in BIOS instead of AUTO, the results are identical.


----------



## heavyarms1912

mito1172 said:


>


?? why?


----------



## AlphaC

Someone didn't pay attention. R20 uses AVX and has different scoring, a R7 1800X would get about 1.8K in CB R15.


----------



## majestynl

AlphaC said:


> Someone didn't pay attention. R20 uses AVX and has different scoring, a R7 1800X would get about 1.8K in CB R15.


LOL..


----------



## kamil234

AlphaC said:


> Someone didn't pay attention. R20 uses AVX and has different scoring, a R7 1800X would get about 1.8K in CB R15.


Lol, Thanks for clarification for those that didn't catch it :')
Weird thing is R15 shows im using windows 8, but im using windows 10 1903 Professional. Is that normal? 

edit: quick google search finds alot of these issues..


----------



## OCmember

@kamil234 I think with some better tuning and a bios update you can get better results. On the Anandtech article CB15 the single core went from 204 to 209.

https://www.anandtech.com/show/14605/the-and-ryzen-3700x-3900x-review-raising-the-bar/9

EDIT: I just read there is an AMD Ryzen High Performance Power Plan if you have an X470 board:
https://www.amd.com/en/support/chipsets/amd-socket-am4/x470

EDIT2: https://www.amd.com/en/support


----------



## majestynl

kamil234 said:


> Weird thing is R15 shows im using windows 8, but im using windows 10 1903 Professional. Is that normal?
> 
> edit: quick google search finds alot of these issues..


Its a bug in Cinebench R15, if i remember well Windows 10 wasn't supported in first place. It doesn't effect anything so no worries!


----------



## kamil234

OCmember said:


> @kamil234 I think with some better tuning and a bios update you can get better results. On the Anandtech article CB15 the single core went from 204 to 209.
> 
> https://www.anandtech.com/show/14605/the-and-ryzen-3700x-3900x-review-raising-the-bar/9
> 
> EDIT: I just read there is an AMD Ryzen High Performance Power Plan if you have an X470 board:
> https://www.amd.com/en/support/chipsets/amd-socket-am4/x470
> 
> EDIT2: https://www.amd.com/en/support


 @OCmember i'm using latest BIOS that was posted yesterday in the gigabyte thread. Newest chipset drivers as well. I don't feel like playing around with tuning at this time too much, but part of the problem is my CPU doesnt boost past 4.25ghz.. Im using x570 motherboard..

I might tinker around a little again today, but don't expect any changes.


----------



## OCmember

kamil234 said:


> @OCmember i'm using latest BIOS that was posted yesterday in the gigabyte thread. Newest chipset drivers as well. I don't feel like playing around with tuning at this time too much, but part of the problem is my CPU doesnt boost past 4.25ghz.. Im using x570 motherboard..
> 
> I might tinker around a little again today, but don't expect any changes.


I would personally wipe out the old Intel OS install and do a fresh install with the AMD rig. This way you have a better foundation to go from.


----------



## kamil234

OCmember said:


> I would personally wipe out the old Intel OS install and do a fresh install with the AMD rig. This way you have a better foundation to go from.


I might end up doing that if i have some extra time tonight


----------



## Hwgeek

*AIDA64 mem test for 3800X? is it half write speed or not?*


----------



## RossiOCUK

Hwgeek said:


> *AIDA64 mem test for 3800X? is it half write speed or not?*


It's a single CCD part, so will be half write speed.


----------



## Duvar

I have some screenies too 4 u guys:
(SotTR DEMO 1080p with no AA/AF/AO everything else maxed out)
Currently i switched to 3600CL14 and i am dropping the voltage (1.472V atm)
Will keep you updated if you want.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Not bad for a 6 core.


----------



## tpi2007

Where is the Ryzen 7 3800X? Not a single reviewer was even able to get one through a third party to review, there aren't any for sale, what's the word on it? 

This is the CPU that was supposed to go hand in hand with the 9900K for ~$100 less. With a 105w TDP vs the 65w of the 3700X, it was supposed to hold a higher all core boost, along with a slightly higher single core boost. It should also be better binned, I'd say, if previous gen Ryzen chips are anything to go by.


----------



## ThrashZone

AlphaC said:


> Someone didn't pay attention. *R20 uses AVX* and has different scoring, a R7 1800X would get about 1.8K in CB R15.


Hi,
If it does it sure isn't enough to trigger an avx offset setting.


----------



## Duvar

In SotTR only +~10% infront an optimized 2600 (4.2GHz) with 3533CL14 with tuned subtimings...


----------



## lightsout

Duvar said:


> I have some screenies too 4 u guys:
> 
> (SotTR DEMO 1080p with no AA/AF/AO everything else maxed out)
> 
> Currently i switched to 3600CL14 and i am dropping the voltage (1.472V atm)
> 
> Will keep you updated if you want.




Nice ram speed. What sticks?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Duvar

3600 Gskill RGB (17-18...) B Dies of course, but not the best ones 
I could go up to 3800CL14 but of course it was not stable, but could do some benchruns without issues.
I think 3600CL14 is more than enough, you dont gain much like you did with f.e. Zen+ because of the bigger L3 cache.


----------



## untouchable247

tpi2007 said:


> Where is the Ryzen 7 3800X? Not a single reviewer was even able to get one through a third party to review, there aren't any for sale, what's the word on it?
> 
> This is the CPU that was supposed to go hand in hand with the 9900K for ~$100 less. With a 105w TDP vs the 65w of the 3700X, it was supposed to hold a higher all core boost, along with a slightly higher single core boost. It should also be better binned, I'd say, if previous gen Ryzen chips are anything to go by.


They are available in some countries and I've seen reviews on youtube.

Hand in hand with the 9900k? In what sense? Gaming? No. 3600 (non x is) the sweet spot for gaming out of zen 2 lineup thus far. Productivity? 3700X beats the 9900K already. Personally I think the 3800X and 3700X are nice but massively overpriced compared to the 3600 and don't really offer more for the majority of users. 3600(x) offers almost the same gaming performance for less than half the price. But the 3800X might be the best amd cpu specifially for playing and streaming CS:GO. Oh, better than intel, too. But that's really the only reason to go for the 3800x or even 3700x when you're looking at things from a gaming perspective. One title.


That being said I'll probably buy one. LOL


----------



## Scotty99

How close is the 3600 to the 3600x if you leave everything at stock? Im pretty impressed with the 3000 series, but as an mmo player i really cant consider anything other than intel unless AMD raises clockspeeds significantly.

People on these boards either tend to forget or dont know that mmo's are the SINGLE most cpu bound titles in gaming today:





I get 20-30 fps higher than this guy testing 3600x with my 8700k.


----------



## AlphaC

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> If it does it sure isn't enough to trigger an avx offset setting.


 Well when it was released it was touted to support the AVX instruction sets.




https://www.computerbase.de/2019-03...agramm-cinebench-r20-single-thread-ergebnisse


> The new name already reveals it: Cinebench R20, like Cinebench R15, is based on the technology of the well-known rendering tool Cinema 4D, but now on the basis of Release 20 and not Release 15. This means that a revised rendering engine is used that also supports the AVX command set. The minimum requirement is the SSE3 command set.


https://www.pcworld.com/article/335...mark-we-test-it-on-xeon-and-threadripper.html
https://www.tomshw.de/2019/03/06/der-cinebench-r20-tritt-in-den-fussstapfen-seines-vorgaengers/

https://www.sweclockers.com/nyhet/27153-maxon-lanserar-cinebench-r20-for-moderna-processorer


Main change is update to support 256 threads IIRC however.


----------



## tpi2007

untouchable247 said:


> They are available in some countries and I've seen reviews on youtube.
> 
> Hand in hand with the 9900k? In what sense? Gaming? No. 3600 (non x is) the sweet spot for gaming out of zen 2 lineup thus far. Productivity? 3700X beats the 9900K already. Personally I think the 3800X and 3700X are nice but massively overpriced compared to the 3600 and don't really offer more for the majority of users. 3600(x) offers almost the same gaming performance for less than half the price. But the 3800X might be the best amd cpu specifially for playing and streaming CS:GO. Oh, better than intel, too. But that's really the only reason to go for the 3800x or even 3700x when you're looking at things from a gaming perspective. One title.
> 
> 
> That being said I'll probably buy one. LOL



Where are those reviews on YouTube? I can't find any. Give me a link to a reputable channel that actually showed the chip on screen.


----------



## majestynl

tpi2007 said:


> Where are those reviews on YouTube? I can't find any. Give me a link to a reputable channel that actually showed the chip on screen.


yeap, i cant find anything since 7/7. Looking every day. Some fake Korean youtube guy, but dont believe him!
I also cant find ant retailer selling it...

Maybe he is surfing on another WEB ??


----------



## untouchable247

tpi2007 said:


> Where are those reviews on YouTube? I can't find any. Give me a link to a reputable channel that actually showed the chip on screen.


Why does the chip have to be shown on screen?







You can buy one yourself if you don't believe him. It's available in most (south east) asian countries and the US as well. Show up at micro center and grab one.


----------



## Scotty99

The crazy thing is if you are buying a mid tier amd chip you are likely budget constrained, and at microcenter you can get a 1600 for a measly 79.99. Obviously the 3600 is a faster chip, but there is zero chance its going to match that 1600 for price/performance. 3600 wont be truly appealing until it gets price cuts down to where the 2600 was ~150.


----------



## Frosted racquet

tpi2007 said:


> Where are those reviews on YouTube? I can't find any. Give me a link to a reputable channel that actually showed the chip on screen.


Wendell mentions that the frequency on the 3800x being better than 3700x @6:55 approx.
https://youtu.be/et6AkXI72T8?t=387

It's an unrelated video to the review of 3800x, but it's something.


----------



## untouchable247

Btw why would AMD send out the 3700X and 3800X to the big US reviewers? None of them would recommend the 3800X. Same performance, higher price.


----------



## untouchable247

majestynl said:


> yeap, i cant find anything since 7/7. Looking every day. Some fake Korean youtube guy, but dont believe him!
> I also cant find ant retailer selling it...
> 
> Maybe he is surfing on another WEB ??


https://www.dotatech.com.my/products/amd-ryzen-7-3800x-processor-amd-am4?variant=29399717511271
https://www.lelong.com.my/amd-ryzen...ead-netstorecommy-I6200171-2007-01-Sale-I.htm
https://www.alternate.de/html/product/1553397


----------



## Hwgeek

tpi2007 said:


> Where is the Ryzen 7 3800X? Not a single reviewer was even able to get one through a third party to review, there aren't any for sale, what's the word on it?
> 
> This is the CPU that was supposed to go hand in hand with the 9900K for ~$100 less. With a 105w TDP vs the 65w of the 3700X, it was supposed to hold a higher all core boost, along with a slightly higher single core boost. It should also be better binned, I'd say, if previous gen Ryzen chips are anything to go by.


Until I see a proof- I believe it's dual chip design.


----------



## Hale59

AMD Ryzen 3600, 3700X & 3900X DaWBench tested

http://www.scanproaudio.info/2019/0...00x-dawbench-tested-3-is-it-the-magic-number/


----------



## majestynl

untouchable247 said:


> https://www.dotatech.com.my/products/amd-ryzen-7-3800x-processor-amd-am4?variant=29399717511271
> https://www.lelong.com.my/amd-ryzen...ead-netstorecommy-I6200171-2007-01-Sale-I.htm
> https://www.alternate.de/html/product/1553397


I'm saying real in stock. Alternate and most others have listed them since launch but constantly lifting the availability date.

We also have no real reviews yet..


----------



## untouchable247

majestynl said:


> I'm saying real in stock. Alternate and most others have listed them since launch but constantly lifting the availability date.
> 
> We also have no real reviews yet..


It's in stock in pretty much all online stores in Malaysia, Thailand and India. Those I know for sure. And they are available in traditional local stores as well, not many but micro center sells them for example.

No real reviews? Well, as I said, same game performance as the 3700X which is almost the same as the 3600 in almost all scenarios. But 3800X is even more expensive. AMD wouldn't be smart to send those out to reviewers. 3800X is for crazy enthusiasts, not for mainstream users. Low value for money. AMD doesn't want that image hence no review samples for popular reviewers. But you can buy them already, people already have them.

But availability is limited for some countries right now, that's true.


----------



## gilljoy

Idle voltage of around 1.4V normal?

The fan seems to contanstantly spin up and down as well which is irritating.

Running a 3700x with a crosshair vii x470


----------



## kamil234

gilljoy said:


> Idle voltage of around 1.4V normal?
> 
> The fan seems to contanstantly spin up and down as well which is irritating.
> 
> Running a 3700x with a crosshair vii x470


Yeah its normal, espcially if you use temp monitoring software, since the cores keep getting woken up from idle state over and over when the temp software queries it for data. Also when the cores are asleep, the monitoring software cant retrieve the data for it, so it displays the last known data before the core went to sleep.

Close out all programs, including other monitoring programs and just run cpu-z, it should give you the 'real' idle voltage. I saw below 1.0v on my 3900x when idle on CPU-z when other software showing 1.4-1.45v

There is a twitter / reddit post from AMD Robert about the behavior


----------



## gilljoy

I'm just using Cpu-Z and on it's own following his advice.

It does ocassionally drop to 0.9v but generally it's sitting at 1.4Ghz at max.

Time to get a new heatsink I think


----------



## schoolofmonkey

So what is the default/stock voltage of the 3900x, when I powered on for the first time the bios set it to 1.425v
Following Jayz2cents video I dropped it down to 1.3 manually, so now it's on manual voltages and doesn't drop down on idle.


----------



## ThrashZone

AlphaC said:


> Well when it was released it was touted to support the AVX instruction sets.
> .


Hi,
Fair enough but if it were true all my minimum core clock readings would be 4.5 not 4.8 same as max 
My last I didn't show the core clocks min-max but here's one it never triggers avx 
https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=268238&d=1557028349

Blender classroom though it triggers the avx always 
https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=274620&d=1560623258


----------



## majestynl

schoolofmonkey said:


> So what is the default/stock voltage of the 3900x, when I powered on for the first time the bios set it to 1.425v
> Following Jayz2cents video I dropped it down to 1.3 manually, so now it's on manual voltages and doesn't drop down on idle.


Don't panic if you see 1.425v in bios. The cores are very sensitive for waking up. In bios there is a small demand so voltages will go up. But again. Those voltages are save cause there is no full load on all cores.

Just boot in to windows and you can monitor voltages will go low. And again with some small load they will go up , even small amount of time to 1.47-.1.5v. Just use your machine and keep an eye on average voltages. You will see those are perfect. If you go full load you also will see voltages are oke.

This is just the behavior of ZEN and has zero risks.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

majestynl said:


> Don't panic if you see 1.425v in bios. The cores are very sensitive for waking up. In bios there is a small demand so voltages will go up. But again. Those voltages are save cause there is no full load on all cores.
> 
> Just boot in to windows and you can monitor voltages will go low. And again with some small load they will go up , even small amount of time to 1.47-.1.5v. Just use your machine and keep an eye on average voltages. You will see those are perfect. If you go full load you also will see voltages are oke.
> 
> This is just the behavior of ZEN and has zero risks.


So that fact I've got the manual voltage at 1.3v is too low?
I haven't had any problems so fair with running Cinebench etc.

I'm new to Ryzen, so still learning the ropes, Intel on the other hand...


----------



## majestynl

schoolofmonkey said:


> So that fact I've got the manual voltage at 1.3v is too low?
> I haven't had any problems so fair with running Cinebench etc.
> 
> I'm new to Ryzen, so still learning the ropes, Intel on the other hand...


If you run CB you will go full load all cores so your clocks will be 4.1-4.2ghz. Then 1.3v will mostly be enough. But can't say if your silicon can sustain 1.3v on single cores high boosts.(4.4 - 4.6ghz). Just use your PC with relative light loads e.g. surfing/YouTube etc. Then PBO will do his job and you will see if 1.3v is enough. Personally I would leave Auto voltages if you use PBO. And maybe some - offset on vcore.

Or manual voltage and manual OC. E.g. 4.3ghz. Then you can go with 1.3 - 1.35v.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

majestynl said:


> If you run CB you will go full load all cores so your clocks will be 4.1-4.2ghz. Then 1.3v will mostly be enough. But can't say if your silicon can sustain 1.3v on single cores high boosts.(4.4 - 4.6ghz). Just use your PC with relative light loads e.g. surfing/YouTube etc. Then PBO will do his job and you will see if 1.3v is enough. Personally I would leave Auto voltages if you use PBO. And maybe some - offset on vcore.
> 
> Or manual voltage and manual OC. E.g. 4.3ghz. Then you can go with 1.3 - 1.35v.


Right got you, very different than the Intel CPU's I'm used to.
Not enough voltage ends up in crashes or a BSOD...

It's only boosting to 4.025 sustained in a Cinebench.
But other cores jump around on light workloads.

Edit: I changed to a negative offset of 0.125, which gave me a BIOS voltage of aroung 1.322 - 1.345v, in Windows running Cinebench CPU-Z reports the voltage as 1.2v under sustained load.


----------



## egandt

*Ryzen PBO and frontend bus, what I'm seeing on my x3900*

What I'm finding on the Gigabyte Master using F5E or F5F is that PBO (Enabled/Auto/Manual) makes little difference, in fact Auto seems best for single core by about 10 points in CPU-Z and Manual nest by about 20 in Multi-core (so not any real change). Playing with the Infinity Fabric speeds helps some in certain cases (such as Cinebench 20), but again not much. 
What I've fallen back upon is changing the frontend bus from 100 to 102.5 now that does help as PBO still boosts the same, but now that is 2.5% higher. 

My x3900 on PBO looks like at 100 Frontend Bus: Using CPU Voltage Normal -0.05 Offset currently
Single core about 4350 to 4425 (yes it hits 4650, but for such a short period I can not physically see it, only as a recording).
Multi-core CPU-Z about 4075, Cinebench about 4050, Prime95 about 4100-4125 (Odd that prime95 is higher)
Prime95 (8 hour run is stable and max temp is 58.8C)

So not that amazing I keep here about 4300 on all cores using PBO, but I've only seen that on F3 bios, and the single core then maxed out about 4200, so single core CPU-Z was closer to 490.

Overall I think there is more headroom in the tank not being used (as I've not had a crash yet), but for now the best I've come up with for getting some of it is the FSB, as I really do not stress 100% very often and hence a manual OC is impractical.


EDIT: Rzyen Master thoughts.
1. Ryzen master does not report any OC from FSB
2. Ryzen Master is the only one that seems to show Cores that are sleeping, HWMON show 3600 as the min ever, CPU-Z is better, but still not dead on from what I can see.
3. Setting values through Ryzen master messed up the MB settings and even uninstalling it did not resolve it had to reinstall Windows before BIOS worked correctly again, thus I only use it for monitoring.
4. Ryzen Master hangs if I start Prime95 (even if I start only 23 threads), can not figure out why.

EDIT: Note I have 64GB of Memory (CAS16 3433 KIT) installed right now I can get CAS16 3133 max out of this (3200 simply fails to boot), 3133 seems reasonable stable for Prime 95 23 threads using 62GB Memory for 8 hours straight.

ERIC


----------



## Scotty99

If i bought ryzen 3000 id just leave everything on auto lol. GPU's have been basically maxxed out of the box for a while now, its about time cpu's caught up.


----------



## psyxeon

Medusa666 said:


> I'm using an X370 Asus Crosshair VI Hero, and my Ryzen 9 3900X reaches 4,6GHz with PBO enabled.
> 
> Everything is stock, nothing is changed in the BIOS except using the memory XMP / DOCP profile, 3200MHz / CL14.
> 
> Runs smooth and with almost zero hiccups


Fantastic, thanks for the nfo. I just ordered one 3900x


----------



## kamil234

OCmember said:


> I would personally wipe out the old Intel OS install and do a fresh install with the AMD rig. This way you have a better foundation to go from.


Wiped os yesterday. Same performance and benches.


----------



## east river

I've looked around but wasn't able to find much answers... but how are your temps for the Ryzen 3000 CPUs?

I have a Hyper 212 Evo... not the greatest cooler by any means today but it did a good enough job cooling my 1700X OC'ed to 3.8GHz.
Now I've upgraded to 3800X and the CPU runs hotter. Stress testing it easily brings it up to the 95C limit (Never exceeds it, the CPU clocks down to 3.9GHz and doesn't fall below that base clock). Playing demanding games like Battlefield seems to bring it to around 75-80C average with peaks reaching 85-90C.

Is this normal? Is it time for a cooler upgrade?


----------



## Duvar

psyxeon said:


> Fantastic, thanks for the nfo. I just ordered one 3900x


I dont think that he will see 4.6GHz under load, but @ desktop yes^^


----------



## dlbsyst

AiiGee said:


> I've looked around but wasn't able to find much answers... but how are your temps for the Ryzen 3000 CPUs?
> 
> I have a Hyper 212 Evo... not the greatest cooler by any means today but it did a good enough job cooling my 1700X OC'ed to 3.8GHz.
> Now I've upgraded to 3800X and the CPU runs hotter. Stress testing it easily brings it up to the 95C limit (Never exceeds it, the CPU clocks down to 3.9GHz and doesn't fall below that base clock). Playing demanding games like Battlefield seems to bring it to around 75-80C average with peaks reaching 85-90C.
> 
> Is this normal? Is it time for a cooler upgrade?


AiiGee, if your CPU is throttling itself from reaching thermal limit it is definitely time to get yourself a better cooler. Also, when you apply your thermal paste, be sure and cover the entire heat spreader of the CPU with a thin layer of paste and don't use the pea method. That said I would look at getting one of the Noctua air coolers or maybe one of the aio coolers like the Corsair h100i rgb.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

egandt said:


> My x3900 on PBO looks like at 100 Frontend Bus: Using CPU Voltage Normal -0.05 Offset currently
> Single core about 4350 to 4425 (yes it hits 4650, but for such a short period I can not physically see it, only as a recording).
> Multi-core CPU-Z about 4075, Cinebench about 4050, Prime95 about 4100-4125 (Odd that prime95 is higher)
> Prime95 (8 hour run is stable and max temp is 58.8C)


I followed suit with the -0.05 offset, which made it 1.406v in BIOS (1.425v when on Auto), the one thing I noticed is my Cinebench scores went up 30 points.
Now from what I know, well saw in a lot of video's was Ryzen when starved for voltage doesn't crash like Intel, it just performs worst, correct me if I'm wrong though.

I ran tests with Ryzen Master open and the voltages maxed out at 1.39v, but temps were a little higher, 74c up from 70c when I was using 1.35v, core speed the same.
PBO is set to Auto, so I'm guessing it's not on.

Edit:
Ok now I've lowered the voltages with -0.125 offset, enabled PBO and got my biggest Cinebench score.
But in Ryzen master the voltage hit 1.42v, so I'm guessing PBO is ignoring the set offset...maybe, it shows 1.42v but the temps are 70c, the same temp I was getting with the 1.35v before PBO being enabled, PBO is only giving me 15 - 20Mhz extra all core boost anyway.


----------



## psyxeon

Duvar said:


> I dont think that he will see 4.6GHz under load, but @ desktop yes^^


Im ready to use notepad at 4.6GHZ 

Under load it will drop the multiplayer on any chipset. Does it make a difference, will it run faster on x570?


----------



## dev1ance

schoolofmonkey said:


> I followed suit with the -0.05 offset, which made it 1.406v in BIOS (1.425v when on Auto), the one thing I noticed is my Cinebench scores went up 30 points.
> Now from what I know, well saw in a lot of video's was Ryzen when starved for voltage doesn't crash like Intel, it just performs worst, correct me if I'm wrong though.
> 
> I ran tests with Ryzen Master open and the voltages maxed out at 1.39v, but temps were a little higher, 74c up from 70c when I was using 1.35v, core speed the same.
> PBO is set to Auto, so I'm guessing it's not on.
> 
> Edit:
> Ok now I've lowered the voltages with -0.125 offset, enabled PBO and got my biggest Cinebench score.
> But in Ryzen master the voltage hit 1.42v, so I'm guessing PBO is ignoring the set offset...maybe, it shows 1.42v but the temps are 70c, the same temp I was getting with the 1.35v before PBO being enabled, PBO is only giving me 15 - 20Mhz extra all core boost anyway.


Pretty sure Ryzen Master is polling pre-loss voltage. It's roughly on par with the VID voltages in HWInfo. SVI2 TFN is the true voltage going into your chip and can be seen in HWInfo.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

dev1ance said:


> Pretty sure Ryzen Master is polling pre-loss voltage. It's roughly on par with the VID voltages in HWInfo. SVI2 TFN is the true voltage going into your chip and can be seen in HWInfo.


So according to HWiNFO the SVI2 TFN voltage is around 1.34v.
Sorry for the basic questions, been on Intel for so long now, very new to Ryzen.


----------



## SsXxX

friends, lets post our Ryzen 3000 temps both idle and cinebench and cinebench scores, also indicate your cpu model and which cooler.


you may do so in the thread in the link below if you wish to keep this specific discussion out of this thread:

https://www.overclock.net/forum/10-amd-cpus/1729368-ryzen-3000-cinebench-temps.html


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Ok so I've run into a oddity.
System is stable, not crashes, BSOD's and is on par with reviewers.
FPS is where it should be.

But I'm noticing in Even Viewer some WHEA warning, 1 was for the Samsung 970 Evo Pro when I had the Samsung driver install, roll back to the standard controller it stops, the other is for the RTX 2080ti, yet it's working perfectly, other one was for the onboard (yes onboard) Intel Nic and Bluetooth, turn them off in the BIOS it stops.
The other on I can't track down what it actually is.

The error is: PCI Express Upstream Switch Port / PCI EXPRESS ROOT PORT.

Yet the system is working perfectly, could it be the AMD chipset drivers cause the WHEA Event viewer errors, like I said the system is working perfectly, I would never of knew if I didn't scroll down to the bottom of HwInfo..

I'm running a x570 ROG Crosshair VIII Formula.


----------



## SsXxX

schoolofmonkey said:


> Ok so I've run into a oddity.
> System is stable, not crashes, BSOD's and is on par with reviewers.
> FPS is where it should be.
> 
> But I'm noticing in Even Viewer some WHEA warning, 1 was for the Samsung 970 Evo Pro when I had the Samsung driver install, roll back to the standard controller it stops, the other is for the RTX 2080ti, yet it's working perfectly, other one was for the onboard (yes onboard) Intel Nic and Bluetooth, turn them off in the BIOS it stops.
> The other on I can't track down what it actually is.
> 
> The error is: PCI Express Upstream Switch Port / PCI EXPRESS ROOT PORT.
> 
> Yet the system is working perfectly, could it be the AMD chipset drivers cause the WHEA Event viewer errors, like I said the system is working perfectly, I would never of knew if I didn't scroll down to the bottom of HwInfo..
> 
> I'm running a x570 ROG Crosshair VIII Formula.


i think AMD drivers suite has some issues yet, im having some issues too, im stable and everything, most games run fine, but some games run stupidly slow and stutters like im running from an iGPU!!


----------



## TK421

anyone know if this is good to cool a 3900x and lets the cpu reach its full pbo/oc potential? I own the 360mm version. 

https://www.swiftech.com/drive-x3-aio.aspx


----------



## Hale59

Geekbench4
i9-9900KS VS R7 3800X
RAM 3200

https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/compare/13894091?baseline=13896610


----------



## tpi2007

TechSpot: 4GHz CPU Battle: Ryzen 3900X vs. 3700X vs. Core i9-9900K - Instructions Per Cycle


They tested the 3900X with a 4+4 cores configuration to keep all the CPUs at 8 cores and that extra L3 cache seems to be the one making the difference (the 3900X wins over the 3700X). 

I'd say that if it weren't for the chiplet and 4 core CCX designs, AMD would even be winning in gaming at this point (at the same clocks of course; Intel still holds an advantage in that department). The memory latency + latency between worst matched cores is where AMD is behind Intel specs-wise and what probably affects the gaming scores.

I wonder how they will solve this in Zen 3. There are a few possibilities, eventually cumulative: more IPC to the point where the difference vs. Intel allows them to win despite the chiplet deficit, even more L3 cache, a native 8 core CCX, where most current and future games won't need to leave a CCX, lower Infinity Fabric latency and better memory controller, higher clocks afforded by 7nm EUV and beyond nodes that employ EUV.


----------



## EDSin87

AiiGee said:


> I've looked around but wasn't able to find much answers... but how are your temps for the Ryzen 3000 CPUs?
> 
> I have a Hyper 212 Evo... not the greatest cooler by any means today but it did a good enough job cooling my 1700X OC'ed to 3.8GHz.
> Now I've upgraded to 3800X and the CPU runs hotter. Stress testing it easily brings it up to the 95C limit (Never exceeds it, the CPU clocks down to 3.9GHz and doesn't fall below that base clock). Playing demanding games like Battlefield seems to bring it to around 75-80C average with peaks reaching 85-90C.
> 
> Is this normal? Is it time for a cooler upgrade?


I think you should use an AIO at minimum. I noticed I was averaging about 43-50c on idle after a mild 4.2ghz oc with PBO disabled for my 3700x. And that is with a Corsair AIO (pump maxed, with a custom curve fan setup). I saw a YTuber do a series of videos trying to OC his Ryzen chip this past weekend, but will tweak my settings to improve on temps. So far, everything has been stable. 

On another note, I am done with Asus Strix boards. I was getting BSOD with a stop code of uncorrectable hardware after adjusting my memory to advertized speed of 3200mhz. I swapped the board for a Gigabyte Aourus Pro Wifi and it was 1000x better. I had a history of bad luck with Gigabyte boards, but this one is definitely good!


----------



## mouacyk

tpi2007 said:


> TechSpot: 4GHz CPU Battle: Ryzen 3900X vs. 3700X vs. Core i9-9900K - Instructions Per Cycle
> 
> 
> They tested the 3900X with a 4+4 cores configuration to keep all the CPUs at 8 cores and that extra L3 cache seems to be the one making the difference (the 3900X wins over the 3700X).
> 
> I'd say that if it weren't for the chiplet and 4 core CCX designs, AMD would even be winning in gaming at this point (at the same clocks of course; Intel still holds an advantage in that department). The memory latency + latency between worst matched cores is where AMD is behind Intel specs-wise and what probably affects the gaming scores.
> 
> I wonder how they will solve this in Zen 3. There are a few possibilities, eventually cumulative: more IPC to the point where the difference vs. Intel allows them to win despite the chiplet deficit, even more L3 cache, a native 8 core CCX, where most current and future games won't need to leave a CCX, lower Infinity Fabric latency and better memory controller, higher clocks afforded by 7nm EUV and beyond nodes that employ EUV.


Indeed, that analysis is pretty revealing. The compromises AMD had to make on a lower budget and yet still scale core-count for their entire line-up is the direct cause of the latency deficit. Then, in order to stay competitive in gaming performance, they were fortunate to have moved to 7nm, which made doubling the L3 cache effective in cost, size, and power. This trifecta has always been the challenge of adding more cache.

While I would love to see a native 8-core CCX to see how low AMD can reduce latency for high frequency applications, it's not really an area they are vested in or can. Consoles are pushing for fidelity at ever higher resolutions with greater detail, rather than motion fluidity. AMD has barely any budget to push GPU performance -- they've only caught up to the 1080 Ti from 2 years ago.


----------



## Hwgeek

tpi2007 said:


> TechSpot: 4GHz CPU Battle: Ryzen 3900X vs. 3700X vs. Core i9-9900K - Instructions Per Cycle
> 
> 
> They tested the 3900X with a 4+4 cores configuration to keep all the CPUs at 8 cores and that extra L3 cache seems to be the one making the difference (the 3900X wins over the 3700X).
> 
> I'd say that if it weren't for the chiplet and 4 core CCX designs, AMD would even be winning in gaming at this point (at the same clocks of course; Intel still holds an advantage in that department). The memory latency + latency between worst matched cores is where AMD is behind Intel specs-wise and what probably affects the gaming scores.
> 
> I wonder how they will solve this in Zen 3. There are a few possibilities, eventually cumulative: more IPC to the point where the difference vs. Intel allows them to win despite the chiplet deficit, even more L3 cache, a native 8 core CCX, where most current and future games won't need to leave a CCX, lower Infinity Fabric latency and better memory controller, higher clocks afforded by 7nm EUV and beyond nodes that employ EUV.


*I am more interested at same 4+4 3900X to see how high can it boost on Auto/PBO since the heat per chiplet is reduced, can it make beter gaming CPU then 9900K at same price?*
Shame that 3800X is not 4+4 dual chiplet design with 64mb cache and same read/write mem bandwidth.


----------



## Hwgeek

AiiGee said:


> I've looked around but wasn't able to find much answers... but how are your temps for the Ryzen 3000 CPUs?
> 
> I have a Hyper 212 Evo... not the greatest cooler by any means today but it did a good enough job cooling my 1700X OC'ed to 3.8GHz.
> Now I've upgraded to 3800X and the CPU runs hotter. Stress testing it easily brings it up to the 95C limit (Never exceeds it, the CPU clocks down to 3.9GHz and doesn't fall below that base clock). Playing demanding games like Battlefield seems to bring it to around 75-80C average with peaks reaching 85-90C.
> 
> Is this normal? Is it time for a cooler upgrade?


Under volt


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Hwgeek said:


> Under volt
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sX20NspCpa4


Yeah worked well for me, got 100 points lower in my Cinebench score and that was only 1.28v, any lower and it won't boot.
So he must have a golden chip there...


----------



## reqq

seriously worried running all stock and just surfing the web and download a game and the voltage is 1.46... ***?? According to AMD_Robert this is supposed to be alright.. but yeah..


----------



## JeyD02

reqq said:


> seriously worried running all stock and just surfing the web and download a game and the voltage is 1.46... ***?? According to AMD_Robert this is supposed to be alright.. but yeah..



It depends. If overall cpu load or usage it's low then it's fine and as expected. You'll sometimes see high volt specifically when only 1 or few cores are working.


----------



## reqq

JeyD02 said:


> It depends. If overall cpu load or usage it's low then it's fine and as expected. You'll sometimes see high volt specifically when only 1 or few cores are working.


its 10% … so its cool then?

10% in windows task manager


----------



## Heuchler

Hwgeek said:


> *I am more interested at same 4+4 3900X to see how high can it boost on Auto/PBO since the heat per chiplet is reduced, can it make beter gaming CPU then 9900K at same price?*
> Shame that 3800X is not 4+4 dual chiplet design with 64mb cache and same read/write mem bandwidth.


RYZEN 9 3900X @4.7 GHz on CCD1 with SMT enabled [6cores|12threads]





First Joey Riz video I have watched. I'm not sure if AMD is binning the 6-core CCD as he claims
or if is BIOS bug in power management related. A high performance 6-core CCD and a lower binned
CCD for the 2nd in the 3900X doesn't seem likely but could be the case. Sunday
Silicon Lottery should have their binned Ryzen 3000 for sale.




CCD Control: 1 CCD [4 minute mark]
https://youtu.be/M5uYpIDXMvw?t=249


----------



## JeyD02

reqq said:


> its 10% … so its cool then?
> 
> 
> 
> 10% in windows task manager


Ya, that's normal behavior. Specially according to Robert. If you still we those volt under full load that's an issue.


----------



## Section31

I'm in the process of setting up my Ryzen 3900X up (draining and removing the components) and wondering what would be the better drive for the operating system and Data. I have one 1Tb 960 Pro (that was my OS drive for my previous PC) and newly bought 1TB Wd Sn750. The SN750 performs faster than the 960Pro but for endurance, the 960Pro is better choice.


----------



## AvengedRobix

i'm love my 3900 =)


----------



## aDyerSituation

AvengedRobix said:


> i'm love my 3900 =)



is that an all core oc at 4.5?


----------



## Nizzen

AvengedRobix said:


> i'm love my 3900 =)


I want to see 3dmark physics benchmark


----------



## AvengedRobix

Nizzen said:


> I want to see 3dmark physics benchmark


https://www.3dmark.com/spy/7807702


----------



## sblantipodi

guys should we expect higher frequencies from the next Threadripper?
if yes, do you expect 300MHz more? 500MHz more?
I want more info damn AMD, give me the new Threadripper


----------



## Nizzen

AvengedRobix said:


> https://www.3dmark.com/spy/7807702


Can you please post Firestrike physics test?

I tested with the stock cooler LOL:


----------



## AvengedRobix

https://www.3dmark.com/fs/19886688


----------



## Martin778

What is your all core boost on 3900X? I'm getting crazy temps no matter how I use my 360mm AiO.
When running Aida64 stress test my boost is around 4025-4125 between cores.


----------



## OdinValk

So am I seeing this correctly? At idle I'm seeing 1.45V and under a load it DROPS? Temps are still showing in the 50s at idle and that is under water on a 360mm rad, that cannot be right. What software will actually show me correct temps?


----------



## Martin778

Yup, it idles very high, like 1.45V and drops to 'normal' voltages when under load.


----------



## majestynl

OdinValk said:


> So am I seeing this correctly? At idle I'm seeing 1.45V and under a load it DROPS? Temps are still showing in the 50s at idle and that is under water on a 360mm rad, that cannot be right. What software will actually show me correct temps?


Welcome to Ryzen. This is how it's Made. No issues don't worry!

Info directly from AMD (Robert) 8 days ago:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/cbls9g/the_final_word_on_idle_voltages_for_3rd_gen_ryzen/

Info from AMD last year:
https://amp.reddit.com/r/Amd/commen...22f23_with_ryzen_gen_1_on_gbt_gaming/dyxmc02/


----------



## OdinValk

majestynl said:


> Welcome to Ryzen. This is how it's Made. No issues don't worry!
> 
> Info directly from AMD (Robert) 8 days ago:
> 
> https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/cbls9g/the_final_word_on_idle_voltages_for_3rd_gen_ryzen/
> 
> Info from AMD last year:
> https://amp.reddit.com/r/Amd/commen...22f23_with_ryzen_gen_1_on_gbt_gaming/dyxmc02/


I never had this issue with my old 1600. I've read those posts the other day, it still seems backwards to me. So long as it's not harming the cpu I suppose, still though 50c seems a bit high for idle temps. In the bios it shows as being 27c.


----------



## JeyD02

OdinValk said:


> I never had this issue with my old 1600. I've read those posts the other day, it still seems backwards to me. So long as it's not harming the cpu I suppose, still though 50c seems a bit high for idle temps. In the bios it shows as being 27c.


Some monitoring tool don't have full support for ryzen 3000s try ryzen master, this will tell you the Temps and correct volts.


----------



## crakej

OdinValk said:


> I never had this issue with my old 1600. I've read those posts the other day, it still seems backwards to me. So long as it's not harming the cpu I suppose, still though 50c seems a bit high for idle temps. In the bios it shows as being 27c.


It's designed to work like this. Perfectly normal. If you're using HWInfo or AISuite to see temps, it will make them higher because it keeps waking cores. Ryzen master is currently best for temps. Do not run more than one monitoring program at once.


----------



## freak094

I´m also getting temperatures which are way too high.

I run my [email protected],37V with a Kraken X62.

When starting CB R15, the CPU temperature protection almost instantly gets triggered.

Already checked the contact between CPU and CLC twice. Pump ist also working.

Temps in bios are roughly 55°C.


----------



## Unoid

@freak 

4.450ghz at 1.375V might be hitting 90+C, 

my 3800X at 1.362V locked at 4.3ghz on a corsair 110i Extreme 280mm hits 82C on cinebench r20


----------



## majestynl

freak094 said:


> I´m also getting temperatures which are way too high.
> 
> I run my [email protected],37V with a Kraken X62.
> 
> When starting CB R15, the CPU temperature protection almost instantly gets triggered.
> 
> Already checked the contact between CPU and CLC twice. Pump ist also working.
> 
> Temps in bios are roughly 55°C.


Hitting that temp limit 95c sounds high for 1.37v if you ask me. Something isn't right there. What are your temps @ stock.

And are you running 4.5Ghz manual OC? Just with 1.37v ?


----------



## freak094

here are the temps @stock

In my opinion they are also bad for stock settings



@majestynl I usually run 4,[email protected] 1.37V



The strange thing is, that I could run CB runs and AIDA64 without a problem just a few days ago. AIDA64 showed under 80°C after a one hour stress test @1.37V.

I also noticed that from about 80°C upwards, RyzenMaster shows 15-20 degrees more than AIDA64. You can also see this behavior in HWiNFO64.

I think this could be a bios related problem


----------



## Contagion

freak094 said:


> here are the temps @stock
> 
> In my opinion they are also bad for stock settings
> 
> 
> 
> @majestynl I usually run 4,[email protected] 1.37V
> 
> 
> 
> The strange thing is, that I could run CB runs and AIDA64 without a problem just a few days ago. AIDA64 showed under 80Â°C after a one hour stress test @1.37V.
> 
> I also noticed that from about 80Â°C upwards, RyzenMaster shows 15-20 degrees more than AIDA64. You can also see this behavior in HWiNFO64.
> 
> I think this could be a bios related problem /forum/images/smilies/frown.gif


Reseat your CPU cooler and make sure the thermal compound get spread to the edge of the CPU as the heat is not centralized on Zen2


----------



## freak094

Contagion said:


> Reseat your CPU cooler and make sure the thermal compound get spread to the edge of the CPU as the heat is not centralized on Zen2


I already checked twice. Thats definitely not the problem.


----------



## Nighthog

Just started benching too see some limits and features in BIOS.

Tried a manual voltage and fixed multiplier core clock 4.4Ghz

Tested out the LLC and VRM controls. Started with some Medium LLC and "Performance" for VRM control.


----------



## Martin778

3900X is hitting 91*C in Aida64 on stock PBO (~4050MHz), tried on ML360R and H150i AIO's with 2000RPM Noctua's. Ambient temp about 27*C.


----------



## Martin778

(delete me, double post)


----------



## kamil234

Got single score @ 201 in CB15
Everything auto, voltage 'normal', offset -.102v

AIDA64


----------



## OdinValk

So If I cannot run more than one program at a time for monitoring. How can I run iCue for all the lighting and now my pump/res?


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Martin778 said:


> 3900X is hitting 91*C in Aida64 on stock PBO (~4050MHz), tried on ML360R and H150i AIO's with 2000RPM Noctua's. Ambient temp about 27*C.


Not normal that, I have a H150i Pro in push/pull and in AIDA64 my 3900x is hitting 73c max, ambient is about 20c.
I'll try again tonight when I turn the heater on, room is usually 24 - 25c, but even then I don't see over 68c in Cinebench, ADIA64 I'd say would push it to 75c.


----------



## Martin778

Well apparently it is or the BIOS'es are still bugged to hell as I refrain from touching any OC settings for 24/7 use yet except for the RAM. Both coolers gave the exact same result, though.
Maybe you're testing without AVX, what do you monitor the temperature with? Aida64 is sometimes way off.
I'm idling around 50*C all the time when using Ryzen Balanced profile.
When manual OC'ing when I start the Aida64 test, it jumps to 85-86*C straight away with occassional spikes to 95-97 (the known 'sawtooth' pattern). I tried cooler remounts etc etc. but nope, it's how it runs.

The temperatures are riddiculous, my chipset is already at 47*C after booting windows and now it's at 69*C.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Martin778 said:


> Well apparently it is or the BIOS'es are still bugged to hell as I refrain from touching any OC settings for 24/7 use yet except for the RAM. Both coolers gave the exact same result, though.
> Maybe you're testing without AVX, what do you monitor the temperature with? Aida64 is sometimes way off.
> I'm idling around 50*C all the time when using Ryzen Balanced profile.
> When manual OC'ing when I start the Aida64 test, it jumps to 85-86*C straight away with occassional spikes to 95-97 (the known 'sawtooth' pattern). I tried cooler remounts etc etc. but nope, it's how it runs.
> 
> The temperatures are riddiculous, my chipset is already at 47*C after booting windows and now it's at 69*C.


Just check my previous posts for the last few years, I'm not new to stress testing, I like to beat :thumb:
I test will FPU, Cache, CPU ind AIDA64, I've also tested with AVX Realbench 2.56, OCCT Small data set, all yield the same temps 73c - 75c, PBO isn't on, no form of overclocking on all stock, I did set a negative offeset of -0.100v which keeps the voltages 1.4v and under.

My idle temps are 33c - 40c, but as we know monitoring software makes it bounce all over the place.

I haven't bothered with manual overclocking, at the end of the day it's not really worth it at the moment anyway.

As for the chipset, mine (VIII Formula) idles at 58c, hits 75c when gaming/load.


----------



## Martin778

*PBO isn't ON* - there you have it. It's on by default on MSI.

+
Nope, disabling PBO and -0.100mV offset doesn't do much for the temps if anything. Flashing the BIOS doesn't do anything either, still 90C+ in Aida64.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Martin778 said:


> *PBO isn't ON* - there you have it. It's on by default on MSI.
> 
> +
> Nope, disabling PBO and -0.100mV offset doesn't do much for the temps if anything. Flashing the BIOS doesn't do anything either, still 90C+ in Aida64.


When I get home I'll do a 20 minute AIDA64 and show you the temps, I'm not hitting anything that higher even with PBO on.
We both have different motherboards though..


----------



## untouchable247

still surprised why amd didn't send the 3800x out to reviewers?


----------



## wuudu

Hi,


Running 3700x with Asus X570-F gaming and using Noctua NH-D14 cooler (two fans). And getting quite high temperatures when stress testing with Aida64 (peaks @ about 85C and running @ 75C). And the most strange thing is that the voltage is as high as 1.48v. But its about 1.344v (reported by hwmonitor) during gaming and stress testing all cores. This is the most strangely behaving cpu I ever had. The voltages are all over the place, sometimes the voltages are lower if the cpu is fully stressed and only spikes up during single, short tasks. And the temperatures are quite high comparing to my old i7 6700k and my second system which has Ryzen 1600. 



Anyone has some tips how to get the voltages down a little bit? Or is this normal behavior? Searched the web for info and seems that other users are reporting the same results. Tried undervolting the cpu in bios but it didn't have any effect. And looking at some of the reviews on 3700x it seems that the reviewers have much lower temperatures with smaller coolers like Noctua 12s.


----------



## Duvar

Also interesting, you can drop power consumption (CPU-Power) to 6-9W during Crysis 3 @ +100FPS^^ https://extreme.pcgameshardware.de/prozessoren/470191-sammelthread-amd-ryzen-1909.html#post9944809


----------



## majestynl

untouchable247 said:


> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PAGQwWDyURI
> 
> still surprised why amd didn't send the 3800x out to reviewers?


I'm not surprised. But I saw already at least 2 people with the 3800x getting higher manual OC . On of them had all core to 4.5. Never saw a 3700x doing that.

Probably the 3800x are the better chips like we thought!


----------



## Nighthog

majestynl said:


> I'm not surprised. But I saw already at least 2 people with the 3800x getting higher manual OC . On of them had all core to 4.5. Never saw a 3700x doing that.
> 
> Probably the 3800x are the better chips like we thought!


But not by much from what I can gather. Gamers Nexus got what 4.3Ghz @ 1.35-1.4V on their samples of the lower sku:s?
I've not really tested it fully but I can probably get 4.4Ghz @ ~1.400V fully stable. The quick bench I posted earlier wasn't 100% as it crashed in Prime95 but a little more voltage or more LLC etc should do it. I was kinda modest with the voltage and settings after all.

But really temperature is a real limit on these, it's hitting a brick wall @ 4000Mhz in efficiency and don't really scale at all above AMD stock settings @ 105Watt TDP. Draw more wattage and the cores get torched fast.
I had hoped they would scale further without hitting such temperatures though so it would been more like intel 9900K which can draw all the way to 200-300W? without too much issue.
Here we can barely draw more than 120-140W? without thermal limit/voltage coming against you.


----------



## sblantipodi

Guys I remember that the "previous ryzen 2xxx" series had some stuttering problems with games like BF5.

are those problem fixed in the new Ryzen 3000 CPUs?


----------



## wuudu

sblantipodi said:


> Guys I remember that the "previous ryzen 2xxx" series had some stuttering problems with games like BF5.
> 
> are those problem fixed in the new Ryzen 3000 CPUs?



Never played BF5 on ryzen 2 but have played few hours on i7 6700k and had major shuttering and problems because the cpu cores where maxed out most of the time. Now playing on the 3700x all cores are in use and sometimes I get a shutter or two but most of the time the game runs fine. Using all settings @ max with ray tracing enabled. Maybe that is causing a higher stress on the system and makes it shutter sometimes. 
So the game seems to run fine especially comparing to my old CPU. 

..anyone has ideas about my last post? ...


----------



## SaccoSVD

LM between IHS and cooler. (hey BTW, someone mentioned, the best way to clean a first LM application is to add a bit more LM, it will dissolve the alloy, then you can clean and reapply)

Hot winter day, 27c room temp.

At stock, the CPU reaches 85c in CB20


OC attempt 1:

4300 all cores at 1.325V reaches 76c,


OC attempt 2 (per CCX OC):

All done within ryzen master. I would not recommend using the WorkTool (explained further below)

4500 on CCX0
4400 on CCX1
4350 on CCX2-3

Vcore at 1.35V (vdroops to 1.26V at full load) Max temp on CB20 is 83c

Both with my h115i Pro AIO (4 fans push pull) at rather quiet fan curves and balanced pump. I call that a win.

My CB20 MT score is 7650 and my ST score in CPUz is 550 At stock my 3900X never went over 43Ghz. Stock MT score was "mere" 7050

RAM is 64gb 4dimm dual rank Hynix A die Vengeance running at XMP 3000Mhz. (I plan to go 3200Mhz as I did until I switched CPU)

Interestingly enough I also tried a per CCX OC at 1.35V as der8bauer did. The CPU temp shoot up all the way to 92c on the first two seconds of CB20 MT. I immediately stopped the test, no crash however, but I didn't let it go more than that.

So it seems the heat density is indeed a thing and no matter if you move the heat faster with LM it will still go as high as 92c after a relatively small vcore increase.

So past 4.3Ghz the vcore requirement doesn't seem as high for 1.35v compared to 1.32v but the temperature curve between them is incredibly steep.

I found out the CCX "WorkTool" bumps the vcore back to 1.48V after you apply a clock change BE CAREFUL! that's what sent my CPU to 92c

If I do the whole thing in Ryzen Master the vcore stays at the desired 1.35V and the temp stays at 83c

Let me know if anyone of you guys are trying with LM and an AIO. I wanna compare.

Here's my build. Notice what I did with the Wraith Prism fan enclosure.


----------



## xg4m3

Just got my 3700X today, together with the MBO and have a question. What's the best way to apply thermal paste on this CPU? I've read somewhere that a dot in the middle is not cutting it for 3000 series so where and how exactly should I put the paste? I have DR4 cooler.


----------



## Streetdragon

spread it like honey on the bread


----------



## SaccoSVD




----------



## wuudu

xg4m3 said:


> Just got my 3700X today, together with the MBO and have a question. What's the best way to apply thermal paste on this CPU? I've read somewhere that a dot in the middle is not cutting it for 3000 series so where and how exactly should I put the paste? I have DR4 cooler.



I used the dot method but sometimes it didn't spread evenly over the cpu so I started to use the spread method. I use thermal grizzly spatula to cover the cpu with thin layer of thermal grease (using noctua thermal paste at the moment) : https://www.amazon.com/Thermal-Grizzly-Spatula-Paste-Pieces/dp/B018HHGJA2


----------



## VPII

SaccoSVD said:


> LM between IHS and cooler. (hey BTW, someone mentioned, the best way to clean a first LM application is to add a bit more LM, it will dissolve the alloy, then you can clean and reapply)
> 
> Hot winter day, 27c room temp.
> 
> At stock, the CPU reaches 85c in CB20
> 
> 
> OC attempt 1:
> 
> 4300 all cores at 1.325V reaches 76c,
> 
> 
> OC attempt 2 (per CCX OC):
> 
> All done within ryzen master. I would not recommend using the WorkTool (explained further below)
> 
> 4500 on CCX0
> 4400 on CCX1
> 4350 on CCX2-3
> 
> Vcore at 1.35V (vdroops to 1.26V at full load) Max temp on CB20 is 83c
> 
> Both with my h115i Pro AIO (4 fans push pull) at rather quiet fan curves and balanced pump. I call that a win.
> 
> My CB20 MT score is 7650 and my ST score in CPUz is 550 At stock my 3900X never went over 43Ghz. Stock MT score was "mere" 7050
> 
> RAM is 64gb 4dimm dual rank Hynix A die Vengeance running at XMP 3000Mhz. (I plan to go 3200Mhz as I did until I switched CPU)
> 
> Interestingly enough I also tried a per CCX OC at 1.35V as der8bauer did. The CPU temp shoot up all the way to 92c on the first two seconds of CB20 MT. I immediately stopped the test, no crash however, but I didn't let it go more than that.
> 
> So it seems the heat density is indeed a thing and no matter if you move the heat faster with LM it will still go as high as 92c after a relatively small vcore increase.
> 
> So past 4.3Ghz the vcore requirement doesn't seem as high for 1.35v compared to 1.32v but the temperature curve between them is incredibly steep.
> 
> I found out the CCX "WorkTool" bumps the vcore back to 1.48V after you apply a clock change BE CAREFUL! that's what sent my CPU to 92c
> 
> If I do the whole thing in Ryzen Master the vcore stays at the desired 1.35V and the temp stays at 83c
> 
> Let me know if anyone of you guys are trying with LM and an AIO. I wanna compare.
> 
> Here's my build. Notice what I did with the Wraith Prism fan enclosure.
> 
> https://youtu.be/4C5QNGvpiq8


If I may ask, where do you see this 1.48vcore applied by the CCX clocking tool. What I've seen is that there are very few monitoring programs that actually show the true vcore of the Ryzen 3000 series processors. Even Hwinfo64 has such a glitch if you can call it that. In Hwinfo64 the cpu core voltage state 1.4v which is what is set in the bios with LLC5 and LLC8 as it causes no vdroop. However, the Core #0 - #5 VID state 1.488 and it stays at that vcore all the time untill load is applied then it drops to 1.44vcore. No I tested the vcore with a multimeter on the probelt and it is rock solid at 1.4vcore, seems to drop only a little under load, but nothing serious.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Ok so any ideas, currently I'm getting random reboots/BSOD when idle, it's happened twice now.
I'll locked the computer just then to cook dinner, Chrome was running, when I came back the machine had reboot, checked bluescreens and there was no dump logged other than the first BSOD.
The first BSOD I was just browsing the web (Chrome), and I actually saw the BSOD, the log on that was with the ntoskrnl.exe.

I've run Prime95, Realbench, Cinebench, Memtest all fine, heck I've played hours of GTA V, AC:O, Metro Last Light, so it's not load or memory related.

I have a 3900x (no oc) with a negative -0.100v offset, maybe I need to lower that to -0.05v, it's all I can think of that would be causing a idle crash.

I've notice even with Chrome open my idle voltages when not touching anything drop to about 0.496v occasionally.

System:
3900x
ROG Crosshair VIII Formula
32GB (2x16GB) Gskill Trident 3200Mhz 16-18-18 38 (1.36v)
Samsing Evo 970 Pro 250GB NVMe


----------



## VPII

schoolofmonkey said:


> Ok so any ideas, currently I'm getting random reboots/BSOD when idle, it's happened twice now.
> I'll locked the computer just then to cook dinner, Chrome was running, when I came back the machine had reboot, checked bluescreens and there was no dump logged other than the first BSOD.
> The first BSOD I was just browsing the web (Chrome), and I actually saw the BSOD, the log on that was with the ntoskrnl.exe.
> 
> I've run Prime95, Realbench, Cinebench, Memtest all fine, heck I've played hours of GTA V, AC:O, Metro Last Light, so it's not load or memory related.
> 
> I have a 3900x (no oc) with a negative -0.100v offset, maybe I need to lower that to -0.05v, it's all I can think of that would be causing a idle crash.
> 
> I've notice even with Chrome open my idle voltages when not touching anything drop to about 0.496v occasionally.
> 
> System:
> 3900x
> ROG Crosshair VIII Formula
> 32GB (2x16GB) Gskill Trident 3200Mhz 16-18-18 38 (1.36v)
> Samsing Evo 970 Pro 250GB NVMe


I may not be the best person to comment as most of my processors run a manual overclock, but decreasing the offset to 0.05 may help. I found a pretty good way to check stability of processor which takes literally a minute at most. In Aida64 under benchmarks run the FP64 Ray trace, it is literally worse than AVX 512. It will tell you very quickly if your processor need more juice or the speed need to be dropped. Seen that you running stock with a - offset, maybe run it with you normal - 0.1 offset and see if it runs through.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

VPII said:


> I may not be the best person to comment as most of my processors run a manual overclock, but decreasing the offset to 0.05 may help. I found a pretty good way to check stability of processor which takes literally a minute at most. In Aida64 under benchmarks run the FP64 Ray trace, it is literally worse than AVX 512. It will tell you very quickly if your processor need more juice or the speed need to be dropped. Seen that you running stock with a - offset, maybe run it with you normal - 0.1 offset and see if it runs through.


Ok it ran through with a -0.05v offset, I'd already lowered my offset from -0.100v after I posted.
Funny enough it just seems to be on idle with Chrome open.

I've come from a Intel, I just remember when the voltage was too low on idle the BSOD and reboots happen.


----------



## Martin778

Why do folks still downvolt these CPU's when running on default boost? Even AMD themselves said - don't do it. It disturbs it's boost tables so you might be seeing the same clocks but the performance in benchmarks etc. is actually dropping with lower voltage because it's starving the chip.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Martin778 said:


> Why do folks still downvolt these CPU's when running on stock boost? Even AMD themselves said - don't do it. It disturbs it's boost tables so you might be seeing the same clocks but the performance in benchmarks etc. is actually dropping with lower voltage because it's starving the chip.


I removed the undervolt to -0.001 which is nothing, then played with the LLC.
Set LLC level 1 and it's dropping the load voltages to about 1.26v - 1.28v.

It's all I can think is cause the idle crash, most of you all are using manual voltages anyway...


----------



## reqq

If you reinstalled windows.. remember it got some sleep bug.. i got random reboots because of this.. removed USB harddrives and cd player... and now its working good. I could force error with just letting my monitor turn off after one minut..computer just rebooted.. then i removed the cd player and problem gone. I remember this happened to my intel system too..updated something..dont remember what..


----------



## ridobe

Hello. I just got my 3900X/X570 Pro Wifi yesterday and got it running today. The probem is I'm only seeing 8 cores active. 

This is only running in linux so no Ryzen Master. I've reset the bios and eventually reset the cmos to no avail.
I'm not able to run any benchmarks due to being in linux. What I bought this upgrade for was to compile linux/android kernels. I'm seeing no upgraded numbers from my former Ryzen 1700 and that's a problem.

dmidecode -t 4 | grep -E 'Socket Designation|Count'
Socket Designation: AM4
Core Count: 12
Thread Count: 24

Yields the correct core/thread count. However,
nproc --all
8

shows that I only have 8 cores active. Conky says the same thing.

Now, here is the ouput of lscpu:

Architecture: x86_64
CPU op-mode(s): 32-bit, 64-bit
Byte Order: Little Endian
Address sizes: 43 bits physical, 48 bits virtual
CPU(s): 8
On-line CPU(s) list: 0-7
Thread(s) per core: 1
Core(s) per socket: 8
Socket(s): 1

This info is confirmed by:
lscpu | grep -E '^Thread|^Core|^Socket|^CPU\('
CPU(s): 8
Thread(s) per core: 1
Core(s) per socket: 8
Socket(s): 1

8 cores X 1 thread X 1 socket? That can't be right. But, compiling the kernel shows I'm no better off than the 1700.

Now, here's an interesting one. grep -E 'processor|core id' /proc/cpuinfo:

processor	: 0
core id : 0
processor	: 1
core id : 1
processor	: 2
core id : 2
processor	: 3
core id : 4
processor	: 4
core id : 5
processor	: 5
core id : 6
processor	: 6
core id : 8
processor	: 7
core id : 9

shows 0-7 processors but the core ID's are 0,1,2,4,5,6,8 and 9. I clearly have some cores that aren't even registering. 

Can anyone help with this?


----------



## kevindd992002

I’ll be getting a 3700x and wondering what is the best 16GB RAM, ITX mobo, and 240mm AIO for it? It’ll be used for light to medium rendering and I will be OC’ing it in the future for sure.


----------



## Martin778

Best RAM would be 3200 CL14 or 3600 C16 from G.Skill or Team Group. Anyway, anything with B-Die chips will do. ITX? Probably the Aorus atm. 
In regards to cooling, I'd say anything that's Gen6 Asetek based, think Corsair H100i.

I tried beating my 9900K Port Royal score with a stock 3900X but nope, not yet: https://www.3dmark.com/compare/pr/123894/pr/97034 it's too warm now.


----------



## kevindd992002

Martin778 said:


> Best RAM would be 3200 CL14 or 3600 C16 from G.Skill or Team Group. Anyway, anything with B-Die chips will do. ITX? Probably the Aorus atm.
> In regards to cooling, I'd say anything that's Gen6 Asetek based, think Corsair H100i.
> 
> I tried beating my 9900K Port Royal score with a stock 3900X but nope, not yet: https://www.3dmark.com/compare/pr/123894/pr/97034 it's too warm now.


I’m thinking 3200 cl14 b-die and just OC it to 3600. That should be easy enough, right?

I can wait for August if there’d be better boards. Any Asus / ASRock offers that are good?

The Corsair AIOs all use aluminum rads, right? I want copper but I’m not sure if that even matters for a closed loop. How’s the Corsair software? Is it not crap like the NZXT CAM?


----------



## Martin778

I have H150i myself, I don't think you'll find many AiO's with copper rads. I know Alphacool Eisbaer and Eisbaer Extreme had copper rads but they perform 'OK' nothing more. I think BeQuiet Silentloop are also copper, the construction looks similar to Alphacool.
Besides that, Zen2 is already cooking from inside out, alu vs copper won't make much of a difference. I run 90*C in Aida64 anyway with my 3900X.
Corsair iCue software is fine, I use it for my H150i, AX1600i and K70 keyboard, if you're using HWInfo64 or any onther monitoring program, make sure iCue starts first otherwise they can hijack the devices and Corsair iCue will be empty.

I run 3200C14 oc'ed to 3733 C16 without problems and that's a 32GB kit.

There won't be any 'new' X570 boards for now, what was about to launch has already launched and the only refresh of the current B450's is due to BIOS issues (thinking of you, MSI).


----------



## kevindd992002

Martin778 said:


> I have H150i myself, I don't think you'll find many AiO's with copper rads. I know Alphacool Eisbaer and Eisbaer Extreme had copper rads but they perform 'OK' nothing more. I think BeQuiet Silentloop are also copper, the construction looks similar to Alphacool.
> Besides that, Zen2 is already cooking from inside out, alu vs copper won't make much of a difference. I run 90*C in Aida64 anyway with my 3900X.
> Corsair iCue software is fine, I use it for my H150i, AX1600i and K70 keyboard, if you're using HWInfo64 or any onther monitoring program, make sure iCue starts first otherwise they can hijack the devices and Corsair iCue will be empty.
> 
> I run 3200C14 oc'ed to 3733 C16 without problems and that's a 32GB kit.
> 
> There won't be any 'new' X570 boards for now, what was about to launch has already launched and the only refresh of the current B450's is due to BIOS issues (thinking of you, MSI).


Ok. So the Zen2 is really know to run hotter than its Intel counterparts?

Are all 16GB 3200 CL14 G. Skill kits B-die? And it doesn’t have to be specifically the Flare X’s, does it?

I see. Any comments on the Asus Strix X570-I gaming?


----------



## Martin778

3200CL14 should always be B-Die, yes. I have the normal Trident Z kit and it runs fine at XMP speeds, Trident Z also has much (and I mean by a lot) nicer heatsinks on it compared to FlareX.


----------



## VeritronX

ridobe said:


> Hello. I just got my 3900X/X570 Pro Wifi yesterday and got it running today. The probem is I'm only seeing 8 cores active.
> 
> This is only running in linux so no Ryzen Master. I've reset the bios and eventually reset the cmos to no avail.
> I'm not able to run any benchmarks due to being in linux. What I bought this upgrade for was to compile linux/android kernels. I'm seeing no upgraded numbers from my former Ryzen 1700 and that's a problem.
> 
> dmidecode -t 4 | grep -E 'Socket Designation|Count'
> Socket Designation: AM4
> Core Count: 12
> Thread Count: 24
> 
> Yields the correct core/thread count. However,
> nproc --all
> 8
> 
> shows that I only have 8 cores active. Conky says the same thing.
> 
> Now, here is the ouput of lscpu:
> 
> Architecture: x86_64
> CPU op-mode(s): 32-bit, 64-bit
> Byte Order: Little Endian
> Address sizes: 43 bits physical, 48 bits virtual
> CPU(s): 8
> On-line CPU(s) list: 0-7
> Thread(s) per core: 1
> Core(s) per socket: 8
> Socket(s): 1
> 
> This info is confirmed by:
> lscpu | grep -E '^Thread|^Core|^Socket|^CPU\('
> CPU(s): 8
> Thread(s) per core: 1
> Core(s) per socket: 8
> Socket(s): 1
> 
> 8 cores X 1 thread X 1 socket? That can't be right. But, compiling the kernel shows I'm no better off than the 1700.
> 
> Now, here's an interesting one. grep -E 'processor|core id' /proc/cpuinfo:
> 
> processor	: 0
> core id : 0
> processor	: 1
> core id : 1
> processor	: 2
> core id : 2
> processor	: 3
> core id : 4
> processor	: 4
> core id : 5
> processor	: 5
> core id : 6
> processor	: 6
> core id : 8
> processor	: 7
> core id : 9
> 
> shows 0-7 processors but the core ID's are 0,1,2,4,5,6,8 and 9. I clearly have some cores that aren't even registering.
> 
> Can anyone help with this?


If you still need help maybe try the level1techs forums, they've been doing testing with x570 and linux.


----------



## vasyltheonly

Any chance there's going to be an overclock table on the front page for the different CPUs? Would be great for all the "is a 3700x better than a 3800x for the money" questions and to see what the silicon differences.
Created a crappy google survey:
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLScdk0IDrAqnZn81XPIZJMeC072uEAWOUuyKPXlHy-3bdyTgTg/viewform


----------



## schoolofmonkey

So far so good with the idle clock BSOD, temps suck though, maxing out at 80c.
I ended up with a offset of -0.00625, it wouldn't let me use -0.0001

CPU Power is hitting 147w on full load during a x264 encode.

Someone mentioned about limiting power and not messing with negative offsets to lower temps, I'm just not sure how to go about that..


----------



## majestynl

schoolofmonkey said:


> Ok it ran through with a -0.05v offset, I'd already lowered my offset from -0.100v after I posted.
> Funny enough it just seems to be on idle with Chrome open.
> 
> I've come from a Intel, I just remember when the voltage was too low on idle the BSOD and reboots happen.


That's because its not REAL on IDLE, some background proces/app is waking up the cores! Those are very sensitive now! I assume your offset is to low for SingleCore boost! Probably you just tested your offset for high loads!



Martin778 said:


> Why do folks still downvolt these CPU's when running on default boost? Even AMD themselves said - don't do it. It disturbs it's boost tables so you might be seeing the same clocks but the performance in benchmarks etc. is actually dropping with lower voltage because it's starving the chip.


I can confirm that. Done few thats on the CH7 forum. Boosting/PBO vs offset voltages. At a certain point i got higher measured boost-clocks but the performance was decreasing!
And also interesting. When PBO+200Mhz + maxing out everything related i got better performance when i applied a + offset!



kevindd992002 said:


> I’ll be getting a 3700x and wondering what is the best 16GB RAM, ITX mobo, and 240mm AIO for it? It’ll be used for light to medium rendering and I will be OC’ing it in the future for sure.


Done many test with RAM. And from my experience the B-die's are still the best. Some e-die's are doing well but again. Nothing beated the B-die's over here. And the CL14's are the best binned so far. Got the best OC with those kits!

For AIO it doesn't make a hugh difference for the 3x series if you ask me. These 7nm are just getting hot. Even my Custom loop with 360+240 push/pull is having a hard time. Personally i have good experience with the Corsairs!


----------



## schoolofmonkey

majestynl said:


> That's because its not REAL on IDLE, some background proces/app is waking up the cores! Those are very sensitive now! I assume your offset is to low for SingleCore boost! Probably you just tested your offset for high loads!


Posted my findings above :thumb:


----------



## kevindd992002

majestynl said:


> That's because its not REAL on IDLE, some background proces/app is waking up the cores! Those are very sensitive now! I assume your offset is to low for SingleCore boost! Probably you just tested your offset for high loads!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I can confirm that. Done few thats on the CH7 forum. Boosting/PBO vs offset voltages. At a certain point i got higher measured boost-clocks but the performance was decreasing!
> 
> And also interesting. When PBO+200Mhz + maxing out everything related i got better performance when i applied a + offset!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Done many test with RAM. And from my experience the B-die's are still the best. Some e-die's are doing well but again. Nothing beated the B-die's over here. And the CL14's are the best binned so far. Got the best OC with those kits!
> 
> 
> 
> For AIO it doesn't make a hugh difference for the 3x series if you ask me. These 7nm are just getting hot. Even my Custom loop with 360+240 push/pull is having a hard time. Personally i have good experience with the Corsairs!


Ok. Aren't these new Ryzen gen chips supposed to run cooler? Does this mean AMD messed up? How do they compare with their 9xxx series Intel counterparts in terms or temps?

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk


----------



## majestynl

kevindd992002 said:


> Ok. Aren't these new Ryzen gen chips supposed to run cooler? Does this mean AMD messed up? How do they compare with their 9xxx series Intel counterparts in terms or temps?
> 
> Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk


AFAIK they never said it was cooler. Their slogan's where more like: *MORE PERFORMANCE and LOWER POWER* !
So cant agree they messed up. They delivered both! Temperatures on the 9900K are higher!


----------



## Martin778

majestynl said:


> AFAIK they never said it was cooler. Their slogan's where more like: *MORE PERFORMANCE and LOWER POWER* !
> So cant agree they messed up. They delivered both! Temperatures on the 9900K are higher!


Nope, sorry. 9900K runs a lot cooler than 3700-3900X...I had it and now have the 3900X. In heavy workloads the 3900X is at the verge of thermal throttling all the time, no matter the cooler.


----------



## kamil234

Martin778 said:


> Nope, sorry. 9900K runs a lot cooler than 3700-3900X...I had it and now have the 3900X. In heavy workloads the 3900X is at the verge of thermal throttling all the time, no matter the cooler.


I dont hit more then 70-75C on my EVGA CLC 280mm on 3900x under load ... 
in games or games + streaming, it stays at 50-55C


----------



## Martin778

What kind of load? Because in Cinebench I don't get above 75*C either. 
Could be a broken BIOS on MSI but Aida64 is a sure 90*C+ without touching any BIOS settings.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Martin778 said:


> What kind of load? Because in Cinebench I don't get above 75*C either.
> Could be a broken BIOS on MSI but Aida64 is a sure 90*C+ without touching any BIOS settings.


I get the same in Cinebench 75c, but load up AIDA64 Stress test and it'll peak at 84c now that I got the idle BSOD sorted by upping the voltage a bit.


----------



## MrPhilo

I actually feel a bit relieved that I'm not the only one getting high temperature or similar to me as I didn't want to remove the cooler to re-paste as I thought my temp was ridiculously high compared to Zen+. So it seems to be normal.

I am using a 115i (the old one) and whenever I run Cinebench R20 it would shoot up to 82c then stay around there ish. With aida64 stress it would go to high 80's. It it's a bit hot in the UK for once so that might be a reason too...

I do have my 3800x at 4.5Ghz and 4.45Ghz with 1.375v, so might look into 1.325v and lower clocks.


----------



## kevindd992002

@Martin778

I don't see the ASUS X570-I Gaming for sale anywhere. I thought all X570 boards were released already?


----------



## Josu

Dark Rock Pro 4 or H110i GTX for 3900x?
Currently i have H110i GXT, but really unhappy with temps


----------



## Nizzen

Josu said:


> Dark Rock Pro 4 or H110i GTX for 3900x?
> Currently i have H110i GXT, but really unhappy with temps



I can run 3900x 4.2ghz all core on the stock cooler.... If the temps is bad, you maybe need more thermal paste


----------



## Josu

Nizzen said:


> I can run 3900x 4.2ghz all core on the stock cooler.... If the temps is bad, you maybe need more thermal paste


I can run. but temps are just high,because voltages are high all the time With paste everything was ok, maybe later i will try to re-apply and this time i will put Grizli there instead of mx4


----------



## mickeykool

Josu said:


> I can run. but temps are just high,because voltages are high all the time With paste everything was ok, maybe later i will try to re-apply and this time i will put Grizli there instead of mx4


I set my VCORE to 1.3 and X 42. I'm running off noctua D15 @4200 all cores max 76 running cinebench.


----------



## Nighthog

Did some benching for score validation in CPU-Z for fun.

Could do 5575Mhz with 3800Mhz 1:1 MEM. 

Reached a 6190.2 | 566.8 Points score in the end as best and not crash when submitting. 

http://valid.x86.fr/0ll9qw


----------



## 113802

Nighthog said:


> Did some benching for score validation in CPU-Z for fun.
> 
> Could do 5575Mhz with 3800Mhz 1:1 MEM.
> 
> Reached a 6190.2 | 566.8 Points score in the end as best and not crash when submitting.
> 
> http://valid.x86.fr/0ll9qw


4575Mhz on all 8 cores? Nice job.


----------



## Nighthog

WannaBeOCer said:


> 4575Mhz on all 8 cores? Nice job.


I was trying 4600Mhz for a while but had to concede it wasn't going to work getting a score unless I wanted to push 1.500V+ so had do drop down a little.


----------



## kevindd992002

G.Skill F4-3200C14D-16TZR (B-die, 16GB) or F4-3200C16D-32GTZ (non B-die, 32GB) for a rendering machine with a 3700X? They're both at the $150ish range so I'm not really sure which to go with.


----------



## CloudEffect

Does anyone experience odd behavior when enabling PBO with one of the new Ryzen processors? I just got a Ryzen 7 3700X and when I enable PBO I've noticed that when I run Cinebench R20 it will clock higher and score higher. With PBO off it'll be around 4.025Ghz and with it on it will be around 4.175Ghz. When I run a game it will boost slightly lower than it would with PBO off. For example, in Assassins Creed Odyssey with PBO off it will boost up to 4.325Ghz on all cores, but when it's on it will only boost up to 4.275Ghz and maybe 4.3Ghz every so often. It's like this in all the games I've tested so far. I have a MSI B350 Tomahawk with memory running at 3200mhz.


----------



## sblantipodi

Guys is x570 could be considered a stable platform?
Can I upgrade my intel with this platform without regretting for stability issues?

Can't wait to return to amd 👍


----------



## schoolofmonkey

sblantipodi said:


> Guys is x570 could be considered a stable platform?
> Can I upgrade my intel with this platform without regretting for stability issues?
> 
> Can't wait to return to amd 👍


I'll answer that honestly for you, no it's not.
As you all know I had a 3900x/x570 Crosshair VIII Formula, as of today I no longer have that setup, I took it all back and went with a 9900k/Apex XI.

My system is now stable, no more Warning or Error Events, Aura works, system is noticeably snappier out of the box.
I am using the same Windows 10 install that I had on the AMD machine, I didn't reinstall.

There's a lot of work AMD need to do on it's drivers and BIOS, it definitely was not ready for release.
I'd give it a least 12 months before taking the dive into x570, if at all...


----------



## Martin778

It has a lot of bugs, think WHEA errors in HWinfo...


----------



## rdr09

Nighthog said:


> Did some benching for score validation in CPU-Z for fun.
> 
> Could do 5575Mhz with 3800Mhz 1:1 MEM.
> 
> Reached a 6190.2 | 566.8 Points score in the end as best and not crash when submitting.
> 
> http://valid.x86.fr/0ll9qw


Is the Auros daisy chain? I saw you are using all four slots.

NVM, found a spread sheet.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...FnsZYZiW1pfiDZnKCjaXyzd1o/edit#gid=2112472504


----------



## Streetdragon

sblantipodi said:


> Guys is x570 could be considered a stable platform?
> Can I upgrade my intel with this platform without regretting for stability issues?
> 
> Can't wait to return to amd 👍


i say its stable enough for gaming/streaming and other private things. 
i have 2 gpus(nvidia), hdd raid, ssd etc and everything is working great as long as you dont try to overclock the IF hard^^

Had some of this errors to(whea or what they are called) and my system is still stable, no bluescreens with normale clocks etc.
The only thing is the boost/voltageproblem. But thats not really a problem i would say


----------



## sblantipodi

schoolofmonkey said:


> I'll answer that honestly for you, no it's not.
> As you all know I had a 3900x/x570 Crosshair VIII Formula, as of today I no longer have that setup, I took it all back and went with a 9900k/Apex XI.
> 
> My system is now stable, no more Warning or Error Events, Aura works, system is noticeably snappier out of the box.
> I am using the same Windows 10 install that I had on the AMD machine, I didn't reinstall.
> 
> There's a lot of work AMD need to do on it's drivers and BIOS, it definitely was not ready for release.
> I'd give it a least 12 months before taking the dive into x570, if at all...


can you elaborate better what are the reasons why you switched back to 9900K?
what warnings and errors you had?

it's pretty difficult to see performance difference if not in benchmarks between the two CPUs, how can you feel the system more snappier? 

thanks for the precious feedback.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

sblantipodi said:


> can you elaborate better what are the reasons why you switched back to 9900K?
> what warnings and errors you had?
> 
> it's pretty difficult to see performance difference if not in benchmarks between the two CPUs, how can you feel the system more snappier?
> 
> thanks for the precious feedback.


Where do I start.
A mountain of WHEA errors, having to reinstall Windows 10 3 times due to problems with the chipset drivers.
My motherboards RGB completely stopped working when I uninstalled Aura, I mean it wouldn't turn on at all, reinstalling Aura on 2 fresh installs didn't fix it, installing Aura BEFORE the chipset driver fixed it, but sometimes the Lighting Service wouldn't load, funny enough it's working perfectly now on the Apex even though I didn't reinstall Windows 10, just stuck the nvme drive in and booted.

When I pasted text from somewhere it would take a good 5 - 10 seconds to show up, now it's instant, apps are loading visibly quicker.
Heck my benchmark results in AC:O were higher.

Just a lot of small things.

But like I said, the Windows 10 install I'm using now is straight out of the Ryzen machine and it's working perfectly, no WHEA, no Aura problems, nothing.


----------



## sblantipodi

schoolofmonkey said:


> Where do I start.
> A mountain of WHEA errors, having to reinstall Windows 10 3 times due to problems with the chipset drivers.
> My motherboards RGB completely stopped working when I uninstalled Aura, I mean it wouldn't turn on at all, reinstalling Aura on 2 fresh installs didn't fix it, installing Aura BEFORE the chipset driver fixed it, but sometimes the Lighting Service wouldn't load, funny enough it's working perfectly now on the Apex even though I didn't reinstall Windows 10, just stuck the nvme drive in and booted.
> 
> When I pasted text from somewhere it would take a good 5 - 10 seconds to show up, now it's instant, apps are loading visibly quicker.
> Heck my benchmark results in AC:O were higher.
> 
> Just a lot of small things.
> 
> But like I said, the Windows 10 install I'm using now is straight out of the Ryzen machine and it's working perfectly, no WHEA, no Aura problems, nothing.


pretty sad to read those lines. I was pretty sure that this is the right moment to buy a ryzen cpu :°(
damn, 10 seconds for a cut and paste?

but are you talking of an overclocked system?
have you tried with stock settings?

but are those problems present even on Ryzen 2xxx? Are temporary problems?


----------



## Martin778

I only have the WHEA issues but so far nothing seems to go corrupt or anything. Zen+ doesn't have any WHEA / copying issues.
What schoolofmonkey is mentioning I've also experienced when using a GPU riser, the whole system became slo-mo. Removed the riser and poof all the problems gone.


----------



## rdr09

lol. Took me 10 secs to paste.


----------



## sblantipodi

Martin778 said:


> I only have the WHEA issues but so far nothing seems to go corrupt or anything. Zen+ doesn't have any WHEA / copying issues.
> What schoolofmonkey is mentioning I've also experienced when using a GPU riser, the whole system became slo-mo. Removed the riser and poof all the problems gone.


"ONLY HAVE WHEA" and you call ONLY?
does this WHEA issues solved if you disable OC?


----------



## rdr09

sblantipodi said:


> "ONLY HAVE WHEA" and you call ONLY?
> does this WHEA issues solved if you disable OC?


If you have not owned an amd system for awhile, i suggest you wait a little while longer or just build an intel system. Ryzen 3000 is a new node. It is still in its infancy. New to AMD combine with being an early adopter will surely make things difficult for you. It is not for the faint of heart i may say so.


----------



## kamil234

rdr09 said:


> lol. Took me 10 secs to paste.


this, lol


----------



## ThrashZone

schoolofmonkey said:


> *Where do I start.*
> A mountain of WHEA errors, having to reinstall Windows 10 3 times due to problems with the chipset drivers.
> My motherboards RGB completely stopped working when I uninstalled Aura, I mean it wouldn't turn on at all, reinstalling Aura on 2 fresh installs didn't fix it, installing Aura BEFORE the chipset driver fixed it, but sometimes the Lighting Service wouldn't load, funny enough it's working perfectly now on the Apex even though I didn't reinstall Windows 10, just stuck the nvme drive in and booted.
> 
> When I pasted text from somewhere it would take a good 5 - 10 seconds to show up, now it's instant, apps are loading visibly quicker.
> Heck my benchmark results in AC:O were higher.
> 
> Just a lot of small things.
> 
> But like I said, the Windows 10 install I'm using now is straight out of the Ryzen machine and it's working perfectly, no WHEA, no Aura problems, nothing.


Hi,
Usually starting with using Rig Builder and listing all your hardware adding it to your signature would be a good idea.
Otherwise don't bother 
WHEA is power issues whether that is coming pulling out the wall ...... feeding the cpu is anyone's guess.


----------



## kevindd992002

Dammit, I just bought a 3700x. So do you guys recommend sending it back and just going with Intel? If so, what'a the counterpart to the 3700x?

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk


----------



## LancerVI

schoolofmonkey said:


> Where do I start.
> A mountain of WHEA errors, having to reinstall Windows 10 3 times due to problems with the chipset drivers.
> My motherboards RGB completely stopped working when I uninstalled Aura, I mean it wouldn't turn on at all, reinstalling Aura on 2 fresh installs didn't fix it, installing Aura BEFORE the chipset driver fixed it, but sometimes the Lighting Service wouldn't load, funny enough it's working perfectly now on the Apex even though I didn't reinstall Windows 10, just stuck the nvme drive in and booted.
> 
> When I pasted text from somewhere it would take a good 5 - 10 seconds to show up, now it's instant, apps are loading visibly quicker.
> Heck my benchmark results in AC:O were higher.
> 
> Just a lot of small things.
> 
> But like I said, the Windows 10 install I'm using now is straight out of the Ryzen machine and it's working perfectly, no WHEA, no Aura problems, nothing.


I'm sorry that happened to ya. I'm running the Asus CHVIII with a 3900x and have had none of those errors, except the AURA one. AURA was a ***** to get working, but I finally got it to go. Got my two Samsung 970 EVO Plus 1TB nVMEs in RAID 0 and installed Windows with no problems at all.

As many have stated, not a lot of overclocking headroom at all. Got to 4300 all core @ 1.35v and my G.Skill F4-3600C17-8GTZR @ 3600 14-15-15-16 @ 1.45v. Ran a bit warm on a full, custom loop.(mid 80s at benching loads) With it being so warm in the Seattle area and having no AC in my house, I went back to stock. One of the key things I think with the Asus board is that damn Armour Crate thing. You have to disable it in BIOS. If you don't, it is basically automatically setup when you install Windows. I disabled it immediately and THEN installed Windows. 

Besides that, I've had none of the other issues you had.


----------



## RossiOCUK

kevindd992002 said:


> Dammit, I just bought a 3700x. So do you guys recommend sending it back and just going with Intel? If so, what'a the counterpart to the 3700x?


9900K


----------



## LancerVI

kevindd992002 said:


> Dammit, I just bought a 3700x. So do you guys recommend sending it back and just going with Intel? If so, what'a the counterpart to the 3700x?
> 
> Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk


I wouldn't jump the gun. The 9900k is a great proc, but so is the 3700x. I've had no problems with my setup as detailed above.


----------



## kevindd992002

LancerVI said:


> I wouldn't jump the gun. The 9900k is a great proc, but so is the 3700x. I've had no problems with my setup as detailed above.


I thought 9700K was the counterpart. 9900K is like a $100 more than the 3700X so that isn't going to happen. I just hope that staying with the 3700X is a good decision, you know, especially that this is going to be used as a rendering machine.

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk


----------



## rdr09

kevindd992002 said:


> I thought 9700K was the counterpart. 9900K is like a $100 more than the 3700X so that isn't going to happen. I just hope that staying with the 3700X is a good decision, you know, especially that this is going to be used as a rendering machine.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk


For rendering, you got to go 3700X.


----------



## LancerVI

rdr09 said:


> For rendering, you got to go 3700X.


Agreed.


----------



## killeraxemannic

For those of you with WHEA errors did you check what the device ID is that's causing them? I have them too and mine are caused by NVIDIA high definition audio.... I don't use it so I just disabled it in device manager. Probably a driver issue with nvidia GPUs that will be resolved fairly soon.


----------



## kevindd992002

rdr09 said:


> For rendering, you got to go 3700X.





LancerVI said:


> Agreed.


Alright, that's good to know! Thanks.

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk


----------



## Digitalwolf

kevindd992002 said:


> Dammit, I just bought a 3700x. So do you guys recommend sending it back and just going with Intel?


To me the answer to that question depends on random universe events and you. In other words you could have an issue and sometimes if you think you might not be happy with something... you won't be.

I have a 3600X on a CH7 and I bought the CH7 as a refurb from B&H for about $200. I'm using an old set of G. Skill 2x8GB Memory that I've had a few years and certainly isn't one of the Ryzen sets.

The only "issue" I had was the base clock was showing as 99.8 and it dropped my clocks a little. Oh and I forgot to disable the Asus Crate crap in Bios (I really find that thing annoying). For me the crate thing I cancelled when it asked me if I wanted to install blah blah after I got into Windows 10 and then I would find endless messages in event viewer about how Asus Update didn't respond to something and I went into bios and disabled it and those went away.

I don't have any WHEA errors etc 

I manually set my memory to it's rated 3600 in Bios and just put in the basic timings from the XMP profile and set the ram boot voltage to 1.35 and the standard memory voltage to 1.35. Beyond that most of my bios settings are on Auto or default.

The base clock solution was in another thread around here and might not be something you run into.

Anyway... the short version is I'm not seeing any of the issues some others have had. That doesn't mean *you* won't...

Oh and the last thing... I haven't had any issues with Aura.


----------



## Dibiase

rdr09 said:


> If you have not owned an amd system for awhile, i suggest you wait a little while longer or just build an intel system. Ryzen 3000 is a new node. It is still in its infancy. New to AMD combine with being an early adopter will surely make things difficult for you. It is not for the faint of heart i may say so.


This is my first AMD build since anthon 64. Finally replacing my Intel 3770K I built about 8 years ago. Went with the X570 Aorus Master and the 3900k. Bought it the week of launch and it went just as smooth as any intel build I have done. No issues at all for me. Perfectly stable and fast. Running 4 8GB sticks of Gskill 3200, Cosair MP600 PCIe Gen 4 SSd, 1080ti. I'm sure some people are having issues with certain combinations of HW but you have that with intel too. The fast majority of new ryzen builds are probably issue free.


----------



## SpeedyIV

I have held off buying a Ryzen 3000 CPU, waiting for the platform to settle a bit. What I don't get is why when I go to Reddit /AMD, the top post is from AMD_Robert addressing many people who are reporting high idle VCore - stuck around 1.45VDC pretty much all the time unless they shut down most all utilities that poll the CPU, and many different gaming and general programs. The CPUs are reported to boost VCore to high levels when light loads are present. Idle temps are high and jumping all over the place, so fans that are tracking CPU temps are constantly ramping up and down. Some reports say just moving the mouse around causes VCore to jump to and stay at ~1.45VDC with 10C+ temp increases. AMD has blamed this on monitoring tools that keep waking the cores ("observer effect"), said to 

•	Update Windows to 1903
•	Update chipset driver to 1.01.07
•	Update BIOS to one that has AGESA 1.0.0.3ab, 
•	Don't run anything but CPU-Z or Ryzen Master
•	Set CPU Voltage to Normal in BIOS (if present)
•	Use the Ryzen power plan that appears when you install latest chipset drivers and allows 1ms clock selection vs 15ms in Windows power plans
•	Then changed to use Windows Balanced power plan set to 85% min, 100% max
•	Then updated to Stand By - we are working on it.

Post after post about this problem for going on 3 weeks, with people starting to report that they are giving up and returning their new hardware. Then there were reports of WHEA errors caused by some NVME and GPU drivers, Linux deployment issues, and an inability to run the game Destiny 2 due to RDRAND instruction issues. Then there are the people who are asking why their CPU never seems to hit 4.6GHz, like it says on the box. 

Now I know its Reddit, and there is no shortage of beginners, gaming kiddies, unfounded rumors, and generally bad info. I understand it’s a whole new platform, that is different from Intel architecture. It is reasonable to expect frequent AGESA updates and buggy BIOS's for a while after release. What I don't understand is why I do not hear anything about these high VCore, high temps, and apparently over-sensitive boost algorithms, on this forum, or from major reviewers. Even You Tube seems to be silent on these issues. Are all of these people just doing something wrong, or are these issues not that widespread and everyone experiencing them is posting on Reddit while those with systems that are working fine are not posting on Reddit?


----------



## killeraxemannic

Can also confirm not really having any issues with my build either. I did have the WHEA errors but they were caused by Nvidia drivers and don't seem to be impacting anything. No stability issues, all drivers and software installed fine. I'm sure that if you looked at intel threads during launch you would see similar posts. Just the nature of building a PC really. I don't think there are more issues with Zen 2 than anything else around launch.


----------



## rdr09

SpeedyIV said:


> Are all of these people just doing something wrong, or are these issues not that widespread and everyone experiencing them is posting on Reddit while those with systems that are working fine are not posting on Reddit?


Those whose systems are fine have not time for Reddit. They are rendering, gaming, and benching(justifying their purchase) here in ocn.


----------



## LancerVI

I will add that it is an extremely good idea to lower voltages manually in BIOS. Asus CHVIII had my voltages in the 1.45 range at Stock!! Completely insane. I lowered CPU to 1.30 for stock and it's running like a champ and dropped a good 10c off my temps. At defaults, my cpu was idling at 40c. Dropping volts to 1.30 did the trick.

I have to say, why on earth would Asus BIOS have volts that high? Anyone else with a different manufacturers board run into this?


----------



## schoolofmonkey

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Usually starting with using Rig Builder and listing all your hardware adding it to your signature would be a good idea.
> Otherwise don't bother
> WHEA is power issues whether that is coming pulling out the wall ...... feeding the cpu is anyone's guess.


Why would I add it now that I no longer have it.
Yep power issues, if this Corsair HX850i can drive x299, it can drive Ryzen.
It's now driving the 9900k/Apex/RTX 2080ti.

Seriously if I can swap my boot drive to a Intel system and have none of the mentioned problems it's not my power supply, it's not anything I've done, it's the Ryzen system.
This whole it's NVIDIA problem with the WHEA that's non existent on Intel is a cop out.

Look I gave AMD a chance, more than a lot of others did before running it down, I spent a week trying to iron out the problems, either way I was able to setup the Intel machine boot stock settings from the Ryzen Windows 10 install and it just worked, no WHEA errors, no "the lighting Service has stopped", it just working.
My question is why, the only answer is the immature BIOS or drivers on the Ryzen system.

I've never said not to buy it, I said to hold off until things get sorted.



killeraxemannic said:


> For those of you with WHEA errors did you check what the device ID is that's causing them? I have them too and mine are caused by NVIDIA high definition audio.... I don't use it so I just disabled it in device manager. Probably a driver issue with nvidia GPUs that will be resolved fairly soon.


Mine was with the on board Intel Wireless, so I had to disable that in BIOS, multiple ones for the NVMe drive (Samsung 970 Evo), 1 for the nvidia driver exiting a game.
I'd get them just opening hwinfo64 or rebooting.

People can't just say "I only get WHEA" errors, it's not normal, it's not happening at all now.

For the undervolters, watch the idle stability:








killeraxemannic said:


> Can also confirm not really having any issues with my build either. I did have the WHEA errors but they were caused by Nvidia drivers and don't seem to be impacting anything. No stability issues, all drivers and software installed fine. I'm sure that if you looked at intel threads during launch you would see similar posts. Just the nature of building a PC really. I don't think there are more issues with Zen 2 than anything else around launch.


I've bought a lot of Intel platforms on launch, x99, x299, z270, z370, I have never encountered anything like what I did with x570/Ryzen 3000.

I'm not a novice PC builder, with 20+ years (even used to build Umax Mac Clones), I swore by AMD back in the day, they really do need better QC testing before release, or at least not gag reviewers until release day, even they had pre-release BIOS's.

It's sad really I was rooting for them, I have been since the first Ryzen release, they just need to get the whole package together BEFORE release.


----------



## Nizzen

rdr09 said:


> kevindd992002 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I thought 9700K was the counterpart. 9900K is like a $100 more than the 3700X so that isn't going to happen. I just hope that staying with the 3700X is a good decision, you know, especially that this is going to be used as a rendering machine.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk
> 
> 
> 
> For rendering, you got to go 3700X.
Click to expand...

Someone likes to play cinebench 24/7 too 😛


----------



## rdr09

Nizzen said:


> Someone likes to play cinebench 24/7 too 😛


Intel doesn't recommend playing Cinebench. Userbench, yes.


----------



## rdr09

Dibiase said:


> This is my first AMD build since anthon 64. Finally replacing my Intel 3770K I built about 8 years ago. Went with the X570 Aorus Master and the 3900k. Bought it the week of launch and it went just as smooth as any intel build I have done. No issues at all for me. Perfectly stable and fast. Running 4 8GB sticks of Gskill 3200, Cosair MP600 PCIe Gen 4 SSd, 1080ti. I'm sure some people are having issues with certain combinations of HW but you have that with intel too. The fast majority of new ryzen builds are probably issue free.


You can always play it safe. If a new agesa comes out, let some brave soul try it first.


----------



## Maracus

SpeedyIV said:


> I have held off buying a Ryzen 3000 CPU, waiting for the platform to settle a bit. What I don't get is why when I go to Reddit /AMD, the top post is from AMD_Robert addressing many people who are reporting high idle VCore - stuck around 1.45VDC pretty much all the time unless they shut down most all utilities that poll the CPU, and many different gaming and general programs. The CPUs are reported to boost VCore to high levels when light loads are present. Idle temps are high and jumping all over the place, so fans that are tracking CPU temps are constantly ramping up and down. Some reports say just moving the mouse around causes VCore to jump to and stay at ~1.45VDC with 10C+ temp increases. AMD has blamed this on monitoring tools that keep waking the cores ("observer effect"), said to
> 
> •	Update Windows to 1903
> •	Update chipset driver to 1.01.07
> •	Update BIOS to one that has AGESA 1.0.0.3ab,
> •	Don't run anything but CPU-Z or Ryzen Master
> •	Set CPU Voltage to Normal in BIOS (if present)
> •	Use the Ryzen power plan that appears when you install latest chipset drivers and allows 1ms clock selection vs 15ms in Windows power plans
> •	Then changed to use Windows Balanced power plan set to 85% min, 100% max
> •	Then updated to Stand By - we are working on it.
> 
> Post after post about this problem for going on 3 weeks, with people starting to report that they are giving up and returning their new hardware. Then there were reports of WHEA errors caused by some NVME and GPU drivers, Linux deployment issues, and an inability to run the game Destiny 2 due to RDRAND instruction issues. Then there are the people who are asking why their CPU never seems to hit 4.6GHz, like it says on the box.
> 
> Now I know its Reddit, and there is no shortage of beginners, gaming kiddies, unfounded rumors, and generally bad info. I understand it’s a whole new platform, that is different from Intel architecture. It is reasonable to expect frequent AGESA updates and buggy BIOS's for a while after release. What I don't understand is why I do not hear anything about these high VCore, high temps, and apparently over-sensitive boost algorithms, on this forum, or from major reviewers. Even You Tube seems to be silent on these issues. Are all of these people just doing something wrong, or are these issues not that widespread and everyone experiencing them is posting on Reddit while those with systems that are working fine are not posting on Reddit?


The problem is AGESA 1.0.0.3ab boost behavior is broken leading to high idle clocks and temps. People with access to AGESA 1.0.0.2 (This can be a problem for some on new x570 boards) can go back and test it for themselves.

AGESA

1.0.0.2 Down clocking/voltage was normal (similar to my 2700x) and I saw higher boost clocks up to 4.5-4.65ghz on cores 0-5, but on cores 6-11 only 4.3-4.35ghz (CPU binning) lower CPU temps, numerous programs open and core clocks and voltages would still down clock normally.

1.0.0.3 ab Down clocking was rarely happening and I saw lower boost clocks to 4.5-4.55ghz on cores 0-5, but roughly same clocks on cores 6-11 4.3-4.35ghz. Memory was a lot easier to tune. Higher CPU temps.


----------



## majestynl

schoolofmonkey said:


> Why would I add it now that I no longer have it.
> Yep power issues, if this Corsair HX850i can drive x299, it can drive Ryzen.
> It's now driving the 9900k/Apex/RTX 2080ti.
> 
> Seriously if I can swap my boot drive to a Intel system and have none of the mentioned problems it's not my power supply, it's not anything I've done, it's the Ryzen system.
> This whole it's NVIDIA problem with the WHEA that's non existent on Intel is a cop out.
> 
> Look I gave AMD a chance, more than a lot of others did before running it down, I spent a week trying to iron out the problems, either way I was able to setup the Intel machine boot stock settings from the Ryzen Windows 10 install and it just worked, no WHEA errors, no "the lighting Service has stopped", it just working.
> My question is why, the only answer is the immature BIOS or drivers on the Ryzen system.
> 
> I've never said not to buy it, I said to hold off until things get sorted.
> 
> 
> 
> Mine was with the on board Intel Wireless, so I had to disable that in BIOS, multiple ones for the NVMe drive (Samsung 970 Evo), 1 for the nvidia driver exiting a game.
> I'd get them just opening hwinfo64 or rebooting.
> 
> People can't just say "I only get WHEA" errors, it's not normal, it's not happening at all now.
> 
> For the undervolters, watch the idle stability:
> https://youtu.be/JscRwIH3OAY
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've bought a lot of Intel platforms on launch, x99, x299, z270, z370, I have never encountered anything like what I did with x570/Ryzen 3000.
> 
> I'm not a novice PC builder, with 20+ years (even used to build Umax Mac Clones), I swore by AMD back in the day, they really do need better QC testing before release, or at least not gag reviewers until release day, even they had pre-release BIOS's.
> 
> It's sad really I was rooting for them, I have been since the first Ryzen release, they just need to get the whole package together BEFORE release.


First off all its sad you have encountered problems! You are frustrated i can see.. But you can't say its all and only AMD's Fault. We don't know what you have tried to solve or if you even have the right exp. dealing with the Ryzen/AM4 Platform.
You are constantly saying, Intel RUNS fine, no issues at all etc etc. But i can give you a list of issues we have on the Intel Platforms.

If you have 20+ years of experience, the first thing you need to know is: Their is no bug/issue free release ! That has never been the case. And definitely also not be in the Future!
x99, x299, z270, z370 and all had their issues at release. I can give you a list. Sometimes is just a coin-flip, your coin felt on the right side with Intel. And this time on AMD maybe not!

Their are plenty of people with almost zero issues with Ryzen! Including me! You are saying; you have tried a week to iron out the issues. But a week for someone could be a day for the other one  

Maybe its just better for you to stay with Intel. Eventually you had the luck having zero issues with them. Right?

Good luck!


----------



## schoolofmonkey

majestynl said:


> Maybe its just better for you to stay with Intel. Eventually you had the luck having zero issues with them. Right?
> 
> Good luck!


Tad touchy about telling the truth about my experience revisiting AMD, you couldn't be anymore condescending if you tried.
The fact I even gave AMD another try with all the bad raps from the Intel fanboi's should speak for itself.

My out of the box STOCK experience, was bad, and as you see others have had the EXACT same issues I did, but are ready to overlook it in the hope AMD will fix the issues with BIOS's and driver updates, which I'm sure they will.

Heaven forbid someone tells of their out of the box experience to some that ask opinions.

Man the refresh of x99 was horrible, I had 2 6900k CPU's killed by 2 ROG Strix x99 boards, I walked away from that platform too.
I'm not hating on AMD, but you seem to have taken it personally, even after witnessing and replying to my problems since I've had the system.

I still don't hate AMD, much respect for what they have done, I'd just wish they'd learn from their past launch day mistakes.


----------



## Maverick_X

Yawn! Seriously, this is a teething problem with new hardware. It will take time for board OEMs and AMD to get all the bugs worked out and see maturity. The Ryzen Zen core is a completely redesigned architecture, that will take time. Also on the board side, there are a lot of changes, with PCI-E 4.0 and the in house built X570 chipset being the biggest updates. They are working quickly to address and validate the updates and fixes, but when Ryzen 3rd Gen launched some Motherboard vendors had no choice but to rush their BIOS updates out with the usual validation process they would take. 

Intel was the same way when they first began to introduce their Core architecture, and were slowly integrating the Northbridge and graphics into the CPU. Intel is on their 9th Gen revision of that architecture and at the core, still using a refined Skylake design that has been matured on the same process. But hey no one remembers that Intel had the same if not worse headaches when they began their Core architecture path. Don't get me started on the initial transition to the LGA sockets. Board DOA with bent pins anyone? 

What I am saying, is this is the nature of the beast when new hardware arrives. In this case AMD made some major updates all around with their 3rd Gen (2nd Gen Zen Core (Zen2)) hardware, launching a new CPU Core on a new 7nm fab, chiplet design, new X570 chipset built in house, and PCI-E 4.0 throughout, which alone required major revamps to motherboards.

I don't see a problem with this path, as it is the norm for new launches. With time, it will be to where it needs to be and as the tech continues to mature, it will improve all around.


----------



## Streetdragon

Maracus said:


> The problem is AGESA 1.0.0.3ab boost behavior is broken leading to high idle clocks and temps. People with access to AGESA 1.0.0.2 (This can be a problem for some on new x570 boards) can go back and test it for themselves.
> 
> AGESA
> 
> 1.0.0.2 Down clocking/voltage was normal (similar to my 2700x) and I saw higher boost clocks up to 4.5-4.65ghz on cores 0-5, but on cores 6-11 only 4.3-4.35ghz (CPU binning) lower CPU temps, numerous programs open and core clocks and voltages would still down clock normally.
> 
> 1.0.0.3 ab Down clocking was rarely happening and I saw lower boost clocks to 4.5-4.55ghz on cores 0-5, but roughly same clocks on cores 6-11 4.3-4.35ghz. Memory was a lot easier to tune. Higher CPU temps.


i think i will try 1.0.0.2 on my master this weekend. If its working i will stay with this version. This high voltages/temps while i do nothing is just not right


----------



## KenjiS

Eh, cant say I've had an entirely smooth time with my 3900X but as stated, no such thing as a smooth release no matter who we're talking about..You just gotta be willing to toy around and experiment a bit to find what works best and acknowledge something might need a bios fix.. Its FAR from unusable 

I'll sum up a few issues I've had for everyone to see/chime in on...

- Really bad issue with my Sound Blaster G5 external sound card, Basically a bunch of audio glitches and crashing, Unplugging it made it all go away, plugging it back in made it all come back, Absolutely NO idea why as it worked fine on my old system, Redoing the drivers and etc didnt help. Just isnt working with my system. Might be a simple driver issue (I saw someone else having issues with sound blaster + Ryzen 3000, so its possible) but I decided now was a good time to finally buy a Vali 2 

- the WHEA Logger Errors, These are pretty major and cause BSOD and system instability, Its related to..well anything on the PCI-E connections but usually its triggered by heavy GPU workload, both nVidia and AMD, nVidia is aware and is working on patching drivers for the problem, AMD likely knows as well. So this will be fixed soon and its kinda out of peoples hands

- PBO Doesnt work in my case, at all, Enabling it causes instant crashes the minute you stress the CPU even a little. No idea on this, just left it off for now

- Boost clocks are weird, I had to revert to the original bios for my Aorus Master to get them slightly more correct, With the F5g (latest) bios my CPU would essentially just get "stuck" at 4.275 at all times and never idle, On the original Bios (F4) I can get 4.575 on single threaded tasks and it would downclock and idle properly. F5g also felt less stable but I was still working through my stability problems when I reverted

- Had to pump ram voltage up to 1.38v to get it stable on all 4 sticks at 3600 C16

For the record my temps are pretty good, Under 70c on load, idle is higher but that just seems to be a quirk of Ryzen 3000... I will mess with undervolting or maybe an all core OC when I am confident the system has gotten stable, I know on the first motherboard I had I managed an all core 4.4ghz OC pretty simply 

Again, quite happy with my 3900X, the teething issues dont detract from how insanely fast it is, and once i get everything tweaked and tuned its going to just get better


*edit* And its nice seeing im not alone, I've felt pretty dumb during the last week until I saw the likes of Gamers Nexus and others here noting some of the issues/problems/behaviors I noted...


----------



## killeraxemannic

KenjiS said:


> For the record my temps are pretty good, Under 70c on load, idle is higher but that just seems to be a quirk of Ryzen 3000... I will mess with undervolting or maybe an all core OC when I am confident the system has gotten stable, I know on the first motherboard I had I managed an all core 4.4ghz OC pretty simply


Can you give a more detailed description of your cooling solution and do a OCCT small data set stress test for 10 min either at stock clocks or with PBO on and report the temps? I'm trying to gather a list of what coolers work best for the 3900x. It seems like some work way better than others.


----------



## EDSin87

KenjiS said:


> Eh, cant say I've had an entirely smooth time with my 3900X but as stated, no such thing as a smooth release no matter who we're talking about..You just gotta be willing to toy around and experiment a bit to find what works best and acknowledge something might need a bios fix.. Its FAR from unusable
> 
> I'll sum up a few issues I've had for everyone to see/chime in on...
> 
> - Really bad issue with my Sound Blaster G5 external sound card, Basically a bunch of audio glitches and crashing, Unplugging it made it all go away, plugging it back in made it all come back, Absolutely NO idea why as it worked fine on my old system, Redoing the drivers and etc didnt help. Just isnt working with my system. Might be a simple driver issue (I saw someone else having issues with sound blaster + Ryzen 3000, so its possible) but I decided now was a good time to finally buy a Vali 2
> 
> - the WHEA Logger Errors, These are pretty major and cause BSOD and system instability, Its related to..well anything on the PCI-E connections but usually its triggered by heavy GPU workload, both nVidia and AMD, nVidia is aware and is working on patching drivers for the problem, AMD likely knows as well. So this will be fixed soon and its kinda out of peoples hands
> 
> - PBO Doesnt work in my case, at all, Enabling it causes instant crashes the minute you stress the CPU even a little. No idea on this, just left it off for now
> 
> - Boost clocks are weird, I had to revert to the original bios for my Aorus Master to get them slightly more correct, With the F5g (latest) bios my CPU would essentially just get "stuck" at 4.275 at all times and never idle, On the original Bios (F4) I can get 4.575 on single threaded tasks and it would downclock and idle properly. F5g also felt less stable but I was still working through my stability problems when I reverted
> 
> - Had to pump ram voltage up to 1.38v to get it stable on all 4 sticks at 3600 C16
> 
> For the record my temps are pretty good, Under 70c on load, idle is higher but that just seems to be a quirk of Ryzen 3000... I will mess with undervolting or maybe an all core OC when I am confident the system has gotten stable, I know on the first motherboard I had I managed an all core 4.4ghz OC pretty simply
> 
> Again, quite happy with my 3900X, the teething issues dont detract from how insanely fast it is, and once i get everything tweaked and tuned its going to just get better
> 
> 
> *edit* And its nice seeing im not alone, I've felt pretty dumb during the last week until I saw the likes of Gamers Nexus and others here noting some of the issues/problems/behaviors I noted...


First off, I am in no way shape or form a master overclocker. I love doing it, and I rely on knowledge and tips from these forums. My experience with Ryzen so far is a love/hate type of thing. 

I think I have given Ryzen Cpus a lot of chances in that I have had all 3 generations of chips offered (1700x, 1800x, 2700, 2700x, 3700, 3800x). The first 2 generations, I ended up going back to Intel after about 2 weeks. I just didn't like the idea of the chips not having OC headroom. Hell even these 3000 chips don't have any oc headroom. Intel has an edge on high fps in games, with more OC headroom to work with. 

Like many others, I too am not liking the idea of these high voltages at "stock". 1.45-1.5v, while I understand that PBO/Auto OC are enabled to boost the chips and AMD has insisted that voltages that high are normal, I will never be alright with that voltage range. Asking the typical user who notices high voltages to go into Bios and shave some of that off or disable PBO to make it stable seems a bit over the top. Most just want to pop in their cpu and just let it run. 

Some games, most notably, ESO could not run on my Intel system (8700k, 4.9ghz oc, 1.29v, 70c, completely stable, with a 1080ti also oc,). I don't know what it was, but each time I opened the launcher and it tried to update, it would crash. I found no solution to this anywhere, so I ended up not playing ESO for almost a year. I had the occasional BSOD with a couple of different error codes as well. 

When I got the 3700x, I got that with the x570 ROG Strix-F board. I BSOD consistently due to uncorrectable hardware. I nearly gave up on Ryzen right then and there. But I went and swapped to a Gigabyte x570 Aorous Gaming Pro board. I never had good experiences with Gigabyte before but as soon as I booted up, I had no BSOD issues. It was like Asus and Gigabyte swapped places to where I no longer trust Asus products (the Strix board, their routers, etc). I disabled PBO soon after because I didn't like the voltage as stated earlier. The 3700x ran all core at 4.2ghz with 1.29v. Then I got my hands on the 3800x (higher base clock). I have that running all core 4.3ghz at a 1.3125v. Been stable this past week. I attempted to install ESO again and this time, the game launcher updated and I can now run the game with no issues. This is with the same components I used with the Intel system. 

Unlike the first 2 gen Ryzen cpus, where I just didn't want to wait, I am sticking with Ryzen (for now) for a few reasons:

Though I will miss my 4.9ghz OC 8700k chip with high fps in some games I play, the 4.3ghz all core 3800x is serviceable.

The amount of benchmarks for productivity that I have seen from various sources were impressive to me. Video rendering/editing, recording, streaming, all good results. 

Ubisoft titles have that annoying DRM in them, which drives the cpu usage on my Intel based system damn near 100%. AC Origins and WatchDogs 2 were the top culprits, with R6 Siege and EA's Battlefield V not far behind. With the Ryzen system, the cpu usage is leveraged nicely, shaving off about 35-40% of cpu usage on Siege and other games. Sadly, I still can't run WD 2 or AC Origins without high cpu usage. Metal Gear V TPP uses no more than 17% cpu usage. On my Intel system, it was using 35-40% cpu usage. I get that there are 50% less cores on 8700k, but it should have leveraged the games a bit better. 

I like the upgrade path where I can easily upgrade Ryzen cpus if necessary. I just don't like that these chips can't get past 4.4 to 4.5ghz all core for overclocking. I don't think Ryzen 4000s will be any different. 

No issues with the WHEA errors other people are experiencing. 

Intel would have to cut prices on their cpus significantly and/or have a similar upgrade path if I was to ever go back. So like many others, I am waiting for these Bios updates to fix existing voltage issues. Sorry for the long post!


----------



## KenjiS

killeraxemannic said:


> Can you give a more detailed description of your cooling solution and do a OCCT small data set stress test for 10 min either at stock clocks or with PBO on and report the temps? I'm trying to gather a list of what coolers work best for the 3900x. It seems like some work way better than others.


Will do this later tonight, I'm running an H115i Platinum RGB in a Corsair 680X Crystal case, I have 3x 120mm LL front intake, 2x LL140 bottom intake, 2x LL140 on the rad and 1x LL140 in rear exhaust.

Not sure if i can give you anything with PBO. If I turn PBO on at all it pretty much crashes the moment I throw a load on it. I have PBO disabled in my BIOS.


----------



## kevindd992002

For anyone who got a 3700x from Amazon, why weren't there any bundle/coupon game codes that came with the purchase? B&H have those.


----------



## kot0005

3900x stock atm. Waiting for bios so my settings wont reset everytime i update them. 32gb b die ram running at 3466 cl16 and 1.28v , strix 2080ti. The strix is insane. Boosts to 2190 at 1.068v. Has sammy meme too.


----------



## KenjiS

killeraxemannic said:


> Can you give a more detailed description of your cooling solution and do a OCCT small data set stress test for 10 min either at stock clocks or with PBO on and report the temps? I'm trying to gather a list of what coolers work best for the 3900x. It seems like some work way better than others.


Alright, Well running OCCT gave me a good reliable way of making my system buckle and break repeatedly. So I spent the last several hours tweaking and tweaking.. My RAM was apparently not stable, I think I've got everything nailed down now though 

Settled on a DDR4-3400 C16 1.35v right now. 3600 wasnt stable out to 1.45v and I wasnt comfortable pushing harder. 3533 wouldnt load into windows, even at 1.37v

Regardless, my cooling setup:

Corsair H115i Platinum RGB, Pump set to Balanced, All Fans are controlled by my motherboard, Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut thermal compound

Case is 680X Crystal, 3x front intake LL120, 2x bottom intake LL140, 2x LL140 on the H115i, 1x LL140 exhaust at the rear of the case

Idle temp according to OCCT before starting was 43c, Max temp was 79.5c, 1.27v and CPU at 3974-4025, These figures were consistent across every run I did (And I did a LOT) I only got it to give me the option to make a report once, No idea why


----------



## VeritronX

I've had no WHEA errors or stability problems with PBO on my X370 and B450 boards running agesa 1.0.0.2 with ryzen 3000 so far. Stock these chips while boosting have a low load / current vcore in the 1.45v+ range and at high load / current vcore of around 1.325v to keep the life of the cpu while also clocking as high as they can depending on the workload. The recommended highest all core manual clocked voltage is 1.325v


----------



## killeraxemannic

KenjiS said:


> Alright, Well running OCCT gave me a good reliable way of making my system buckle and break repeatedly. So I spent the last several hours tweaking and tweaking.. My RAM was apparently not stable, I think I've got everything nailed down now though
> 
> Settled on a DDR4-3400 C16 1.35v right now. 3600 wasnt stable out to 1.45v and I wasnt comfortable pushing harder. 3533 wouldnt load into windows, even at 1.37v
> 
> Regardless, my cooling setup:
> 
> Corsair H115i Platinum RGB, Pump set to Balanced, All Fans are controlled by my motherboard, Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut thermal compound
> 
> Case is 680X Crystal, 3x front intake LL120, 2x bottom intake LL140, 2x LL140 on the H115i, 1x LL140 exhaust at the rear of the case
> 
> Idle temp according to OCCT before starting was 43c, Max temp was 79.5c, 1.27v and CPU at 3974-4025, These figures were consistent across every run I did (And I did a LOT) I only got it to give me the option to make a report once, No idea why


That's a pretty good result actually. OCCT will make my air cooler go up to 90C pretty quickly. 3400 is probably pretty good for ram speed if you are running 4 sticks. Are you doing intake or exhaust for your H115i?


----------



## miklkit

KenjiS said:


> Eh, cant say I've had an entirely smooth time with my 3900X but as stated, no such thing as a smooth release no matter who we're talking about..You just gotta be willing to toy around and experiment a bit to find what works best and acknowledge something might need a bios fix.. Its FAR from unusable
> 
> I'll sum up a few issues I've had for everyone to see/chime in on...
> 
> - Really bad issue with my Sound Blaster G5 external sound card, Basically a bunch of audio glitches and crashing, Unplugging it made it all go away, plugging it back in made it all come back, Absolutely NO idea why as it worked fine on my old system, Redoing the drivers and etc didnt help. Just isnt working with my system. Might be a simple driver issue (I saw someone else having issues with sound blaster + Ryzen 3000, so its possible) but I decided now was a good time to finally buy a Vali 2



I'm still on Ryzen gen1 but have been running Creative Sound Blasters for decades and with Ryzen I also had bad sound problems. They were traced down to driver conflicts causing latency issues. And it was Macroshaft doing it by forcing their drivers instead of using the Creative drivers. The only solution I found was to start by clicking on that little speaker icon in the task bar and then following the links until i got to the actual hardware used. There all sound devices and drivers got disabled except the SB. That is the only solution that works for me.


----------



## sblantipodi

killeraxemannic said:


> For those of you with WHEA errors did you check what the device ID is that's causing them? I have them too and mine are caused by NVIDIA high definition audio.... I don't use it so I just disabled it in device manager. Probably a driver issue with nvidia GPUs that will be resolved fairly soon.


since the last windows 10 1903 patch I got a lot of WHEA on my Intel 5930K too...
It was audio drivers, uninstalling realtek drivers solved my problems with WHEA.


----------



## KenjiS

killeraxemannic said:


> That's a pretty good result actually. OCCT will make my air cooler go up to 90C pretty quickly. 3400 is probably pretty good for ram speed if you are running 4 sticks. Are you doing intake or exhaust for your H115i?


H115i is set to Exhaust with fans in push.

Yeah I'm only disappointed since the ram was quite pricey and I feel I could have gotten away with much cheaper 3200C16 or grabbed C14 instead. I will also say my Cinebench scores now pop out significantly more consistently 



sblantipodi said:


> since the last windows 10 1903 patch I got a lot of WHEA on my Intel 5930K too...
> It was audio drivers, uninstalling realtek drivers solved my problems with WHEA.


Huh, interesting. I know I've had a myriad of audio issues on this rig, NOT limited to the sound blaster. For example I can no longer set 7.1 PCM on my HDMI output on my 1080 Ti which makes ZERO sense given I could do so on my old rig with the same GPU. I have to use Atmos for multichannel now, which is fine and works but its still weird. I've also had oddball output level issues over HDMI (IE the audio being a good 20db quieter than it should be)


----------



## os2wiz

Just tweaked my tRFC from 392 down to 372 and I got an improved cinebench score. I am posting it. I have a 3900X running at 4.2 GHZ on all cores and an MSI X570 MEG Ace motherboard and 32GB of G.Skill DDR4 4000 dual rank memory running at 3600mhz CL16-16-17-17 gear down.


----------



## sblantipodi

KenjiS said:


> H115i is set to Exhaust with fans in push.
> 
> Yeah I'm only disappointed since the ram was quite pricey and I feel I could have gotten away with much cheaper 3200C16 or grabbed C14 instead. I will also say my Cinebench scores now pop out significantly more consistently
> 
> 
> 
> Huh, interesting. I know I've had a myriad of audio issues on this rig, NOT limited to the sound blaster. For example I can no longer set 7.1 PCM on my HDMI output on my 1080 Ti which makes ZERO sense given I could do so on my old rig with the same GPU. I have to use Atmos for multichannel now, which is fine and works but its still weird. I've also had oddball output level issues over HDMI (IE the audio being a good 20db quieter than it should be)


I had WHEA issues before on my 5930K and uninstalling realtek drivers solved the problems.
Windows 1904 installs realtek by default so you have to manually revert to Microsoft Audio Driver if you want, this solved my WHEA on the intel platform.


----------



## Hwgeek

https://www.planet3dnow.de/cms/4898...zen-5-3500-und-weitere-ryzen-pro-prozessoren/
more models coming and looks like there will be cheaper 3950 model
AMD used the 3950 non x for the OCing WR's while the top binned 3950X is 100-000000051
This looks interesting since we now know that 3900X is limited in OCing because of the 1 "bad" chiplet that cannot go above ~4.3~4.4 and this is exactly the max OC shown on the 100-000000033.
and we also know that the 2nd better chiplet in 3900X can OC to 4.6~4.7Ghz, so if the binned 3950X can be OCed ~4.5~4.6Ghz all core that will be nice!


----------



## Nighthog

Did a try off Cinebench R15 a little quick. 

Stock & 4500Mhz run to see what it gains with more speed.


----------



## rdr09

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


----------



## knightriot

my new 3900x beat my old 2950x with only [email protected] lol


----------



## MrPhilo

Anyone running more than 1.325v voltage for there OC? Curious on long term effect that's all, most people I've seen, seems to be sticking to 1.325v or stock with some pbo adjustment.


----------



## Nighthog

MrPhilo said:


> Anyone running more than 1.325v voltage for there OC? Curious on long term effect that's all, most people I've seen, seems to be sticking to 1.325v or stock with some pbo adjustment.


Most don't because of heat, you can't really run any AVX loads with that or higher voltages. Will overheat instantly. There is risk you break them as well. Stock these CPU:s seem to stay at 1.300V or below for AVX and not hit power or temperature limits for it unless small-fft like Prime95.


----------



## Delta9k

Nighthog said:


> Did a try off Cinebench R15 a little quick.
> 
> Stock & 4500Mhz run to see what it gains with more speed.



NICE!
Here's my stock baseline CB R15 run with a 3800x -


----------



## Hwgeek

Community Update #5: Let’s Talk Clocks, Voltages, and Destiny 2
https://community.amd.com/community...te-5-let-s-talk-clocks-voltages-and-destiny-2


> A more comprehensive solution in the upcoming AGESA 1003ABB is still required for other affected software affected by the same underlying issue. AGESA 1003ABB will appear in production BIOSes when your manufacturer has completed QA testing to ensure stability and reliability. This process typically takes a few weeks.
> 
> Finally, AGESA 1003ABB-based BIOSes will also resolve the “Event 17, WHEA-Logger” warnings appearing in the Windows Event Log.


----------



## Hwgeek

*Did AMD officially mentioned if Zen2 is made on N7 or N7P?*


----------



## Nighthog

Delta9k said:


> NICE!
> Here's my stock baseline CB R15 run with a 3800x -


Seems you get better boosting there @ stock PB.

4500Mhz isn't a daily driver setup, just a bench thus far, the voltage required makes it so you can't really run too heavy loads or AVX unless you want some toasted chips. Could not run R20 successfully like that yet @ 4500Mhz.

I've seen 4400Mhz can be possible for a manual OC if you have the cooling and not too crappy silicon so you can keep the voltage low. Still uncertain what voltages are safe for heavy loads in the long run and what's a safe temp for that as well. These start to eat voltage in gulps above around 4.3-4.4.

Will wait a bit more before trying more voltage for daily clocks but I'm sitting @ 4400Mhz for the moment to see if it works out with ~1.350V. adjustments still may be needed.


----------



## ubbernewb

what does the 3700x do on all cores? for instance the 2700x does 4.0 or 4.1 also is the asus crosshair vii hero good enough? or do i realy need a 570 board?


----------



## Bart

ubbernewb said:


> what does the 3700x do on all cores? for instance the 2700x does 4.0 or 4.1 also is the asus crosshair vii hero good enough? or do i realy need a 570 board?


You'll be fine with that board for sure, no need for X570 unless you want a new toy, or want PCIE4. That's still a great board, although Asus has really been sucking with this X570 release, and it's affecting X470 too. Loads of complaints about Asus BIOS updates lately. So you might have to be patient on the BIOS front, just like all of us early X570 adopters.


----------



## bigjdubb

ubbernewb said:


> what does the 3700x do on all cores? for instance the 2700x does 4.0 or 4.1 also is the asus crosshair vii hero good enough? or do i realy need a 570 board?


From what I can tell, it will do 4.3 if you got a good one. I don't think there is any need to get an x570 board if you have a good x470 board unless you want something that x470 can't provide. I wanted more nvme slots so I made the jump, but I also wanted to keep using my 2700x rig and that made it easier to justify buying another board.


----------



## Pandora's Box

Installed the new beta chipset drivers and the new ryzen master software update.



https://community.amd.com/community...te-5-let-s-talk-clocks-voltages-and-destiny-2 



Idling at 28C now


----------



## By-Tor

Using an Asus Crosshair VII MB, would going from my 1700X to a 3700X be worth the purchase in mostly gaming, lightroom and photoshop? 

Thanks


----------



## schoolofmonkey

By-Tor said:


> Using an Asus Crosshair VII MB, would going from my 1700X to a 3700X be worth the purchase in mostly gaming, lightroom and photoshop?
> 
> Thanks


Yes, most defiantly :thumb:


----------



## KenjiS

sblantipodi said:


> I had WHEA issues before on my 5930K and uninstalling realtek drivers solved the problems.
> Windows 1904 installs realtek by default so you have to manually revert to Microsoft Audio Driver if you want, this solved my WHEA on the intel platform.


Knock on wood but my system is fully stable and operational now. Really happy with it on top of it 

Need to make my conclusion video now.. lol


----------



## Hwgeek

*Can we expect for new Stepping in future that will use TSMC's N7P?*
like Venice on Athlon 64 or G0 on Q6600? so new stepping models will use less power and maybe OC better?


----------



## drmrlordx

Nighthog said:


> Seems you get better boosting there @ stock PB.
> 
> 4500Mhz isn't a daily driver setup, just a bench thus far, the voltage required makes it so you can't really run too heavy loads or AVX unless you want some toasted chips. Could not run R20 successfully like that yet @ 4500Mhz.
> 
> I've seen 4400Mhz can be possible for a manual OC if you have the cooling and not too crappy silicon so you can keep the voltage low. Still uncertain what voltages are safe for heavy loads in the long run and what's a safe temp for that as well. These start to eat voltage in gulps above around 4.3-4.4.
> 
> Will wait a bit more before trying more voltage for daily clocks but I'm sitting @ 4400Mhz for the moment to see if it works out with ~1.350V. adjustments still may be needed.


I'm kind of in the same boat as you. My 3900x on water (Heatkiller IV + MO-RA3) can do 4400 MHz in CBR20. I had to go into the UEFI to set medium LLC (this chip on my Aorus Master droops like a sonofagun) and then set voltage in Ryzen Master to 1.3375v to get it to run. Actual voltage sits at around 1.332v according to CPU-z during CBR20 MT. Haven't even messed with RAM yet. 4375 MHz was stable @ 1.325v vcore with LLC off. I may back off to that setting since there is concern about cooked chips beyond a certain voltage point. W/out LLC, running 1.325v in CBR20 caused droop all the way down to 1.28v or so. Pretty silly.

Using defaults and the shipping UEFI on this x570 Aorus Master, I can't get anything to boost higher than 4.5 GHz in ST mode so I'm not sure that default (or PBO) are worth using right now. Dunno if the latest x570 Master UEFI is worth using or not.

Kinda hoping I can dial in a higher clockspeed for games (where SIMD is not prevalent) but I am not 100% certain that will work out for me.


----------



## dagget3450

By-Tor said:


> Using an Asus Crosshair VII MB, would going from my 1700X to a 3700X be worth the purchase in mostly gaming, lightroom and photoshop?
> 
> Thanks


I went from a 1700 to a 3600 as a holdover and the 3600 = 1700 in Mt work mostly, and is miles ahead on ST workloads also. I would say Yes, huge difference also i see in your sig you have 144hz monitor which is all the more reason 3xxx is going to be a great step up for you.


----------



## Nighthog

drmrlordx said:


> I'm kind of in the same boat as you. My 3900x on water (Heatkiller IV + MO-RA3) can do 4400 MHz in CBR20. I had to go into the UEFI to set medium LLC (this chip on my Aorus Master droops like a sonofagun) and then set voltage in Ryzen Master to 1.3375v to get it to run. Actual voltage sits at around 1.332v according to CPU-z during CBR20 MT. Haven't even messed with RAM yet. 4375 MHz was stable @ 1.325v vcore with LLC off. I may back off to that setting since there is concern about cooked chips beyond a certain voltage point. W/out LLC, running 1.325v in CBR20 caused droop all the way down to 1.28v or so. Pretty silly.
> 
> Using defaults and the shipping UEFI on this x570 Aorus Master, I can't get anything to boost higher than 4.5 GHz in ST mode so I'm not sure that default (or PBO) are worth using right now. Dunno if the latest x570 Master UEFI is worth using or not.
> 
> Kinda hoping I can dial in a higher clockspeed for games (where SIMD is not prevalent) but I am not 100% certain that will work out for me.


I've noted the same thing about droop. It's Extreme! I have to use [LCC]->[ULTRA EXTREME]! to have it not droop at all to get stable voltage with manual voltage >_>;
(though... how much that overvolts or spikes I have no idea so I backed down less extreme llc settings)

With latest Bios F3H for Aorus Xtreme with AGESA 1.0.0.3ABB I got stock PB to boost 4.475Ghz single core in both Cinebench R15 & R20 and multicore went to similar boost around ~4.225-4.250Ghz all-core clock.
At idle doing really nothing it can peak 4.525 (worked similar in F3g as well)

So if you can OC these chips 4.400Ghz and above you will overall usually get better performance but the most single-threaded loads now. 

I've not played around with PBO too much because it was borked in earlier BIOS before the F3G one(it was limited to max 4400Mhz in F3E). Not tested it in F3H yet.
Would be ideal to get PBO+XFR/autoOC to all-core boost 4400Mhz and still keep the better single core boosts to ~4500 range but had no luck yet.


----------



## bigjdubb

By-Tor said:


> Using an Asus Crosshair VII MB, would going from my 1700X to a 3700X be worth the purchase in mostly gaming, lightroom and photoshop?
> 
> Thanks


You will see gains across the board, how much will depend on a few things. The gaming benefits will depend on the resolution you play at (higher the res, the less you will benefit) but Adobe will benefit a decent amount unless you do an all core OC that ditches the factory boost for a few cores, Adobe likes mhz and doesn't care much about core count.


----------



## By-Tor

Thanks everyone... But I noticed that the price on Newegg fluctuates from $329 to $384 a lot.. Strange...


----------



## dlbsyst

By-Tor said:


> Thanks everyone... But I noticed that the price on Newegg fluctuates from $329 to $384 a lot.. Strange...


It's $329 when Newegg has it for sale and $384 when they run out and a third party is selling it. Newegg is out of stock a lot.


----------



## Gettz8488

What’s temps are you guys seeing on your 3900X on Cinebench r20 and Prime 95 Small ? At stock settings I’m seeing 69 on cinebench and 72 on prime. I have an NH-D15 wondering if I messed up my thermal paste but I haven’t had anything to compare it too 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## mickeykool

Gettz8488 said:


> What’s temps are you guys seeing on your 3900X on Cinebench r20 and Prime 95 Small ? At stock settings I’m seeing 69 on cinebench and 72 on prime. I have an NH-D15 wondering if I messed up my thermal paste but I haven’t had anything to compare it too
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


I have exact same cooler and cpu; I'm seeing 75 on Cinebench r20. Yours is better than mine but again i can't remember if i did the one pea method or a few.


----------



## KenjiS

Gettz8488 said:


> What’s temps are you guys seeing on your 3900X on Cinebench r20 and Prime 95 Small ? At stock settings I’m seeing 69 on cinebench and 72 on prime. I have an NH-D15 wondering if I messed up my thermal paste but I haven’t had anything to compare it too
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


69 here with an H115i on Cinebench R20, 69 sounds "average" for a 3900X on most decent cooling setups

Given my 6700k would be in the high 70s-80s despite a massive ton of cooling on it.. I'll take it

Not big on Prime95


----------



## LiquidHaus

I'm getting 66c average at 4.325ghz all core at 1.25v and I'm watercooled quite heavily. (3900x)

Honestly wasn't expecting these to run that hot but apparently so. Hotter than first gen Threadripper that's for sure.


----------



## Gettz8488

LiquidHaus said:


> I'm getting 66c average at 4.325ghz all core at 1.25v and I'm watercooled quite heavily. (3900x)
> 
> Honestly wasn't expecting these to run that hot but apparently so. Hotter than first gen Threadripper that's for sure.


Mine won't even do 4.2 at 1.325 i'm sure if i change the LLC and stuff i can get it but otherwise cinebench just crashes


----------



## KenjiS

LiquidHaus said:


> I'm getting 66c average at 4.325ghz all core at 1.25v and I'm watercooled quite heavily. (3900x)
> 
> Honestly wasn't expecting these to run that hot but apparently so. Hotter than first gen Threadripper that's for sure.


I believe its due to the sheer -density- on these chips that make them run very hot.. You're cramming 12 7nm cores under there in a very tight area... Threadripper had a bigger substrate and more CCXs iirc (Isnt Threadripper a 4 CCX-capable design?) Threadripper likes specially sized coolers from my research on top of it

FWIW my feeling is that the 3900X and especially the 3950X need some good thermal paste under there and are perhaps sensitive to application. I predict the 3950X will run best under a full water loop...or at the very least a very good CLC with good fans attached


----------



## Gettz8488

mickeykool said:


> I have exact same cooler and cpu; I'm seeing 75 on Cinebench r20. Yours is better than mine but again i can't remember if i did the one pea method or a few.


I forgot that i had an offset Voltage on. i'm getting around 75C now on Cinebench i think i did 2 Blobs one in center and one where i though the chiplet was. What temp do u max on blender/aida if you don't mind me asking?


----------



## Gettz8488

LiquidHaus said:


> I'm getting 66c average at 4.325ghz all core at 1.25v and I'm watercooled quite heavily. (3900x)
> 
> Honestly wasn't expecting these to run that hot but apparently so. Hotter than first gen Threadripper that's for sure.


What application where you benching on?


----------



## oreonutz

Gettz8488 said:


> What’s temps are you guys seeing on your 3900X on Cinebench r20 and Prime 95 Small ? At stock settings I’m seeing 69 on cinebench and 72 on prime. I have an NH-D15 wondering if I messed up my thermal paste but I haven’t had anything to compare it too


I am on a EKWB Phoenix 360 Water Cooling Loop with the Pump Maxed, and with Corsair ML120 Fans at 1200 to 1600 RPM, I Per CCX OC, CCX 1 @ 4.4Ghz, CCX 2 @ 4.4, CCX 3 @ 4.2 and CCX 4 @ 4.3Ghz, while Under a Manual Vcore of 1.275v, and Under CB R20 with an Ambient Room Temp of 29c (I Live in Las Vegas, NV and its Summer Time) I see Temperatures @ 82c, Prime 95 Hits Temps of 93c, when I max out the Fans I can drop that by about 3c. 

So I would say you are doing pretty good with Temps.

I am planning on adding a D5 and 280 Rad to my System next week to Try to tame Temps a little More. Also going to investigate some reports that state turning block Orientation on some EKWB CPU Blocks helps cool temps by up to 10c, to see if that helps in my case as well.


----------



## Gettz8488

oreonutz said:


> I am on a EKWB Phoenix 360 Water Cooling Loop with the Pump Maxed, and with Corsair ML120 Fans at 1200 to 1600 RPM, I Per CCX OC, CCX 1 @ 4.4Ghz, CCX 2 @ 4.4, CCX 3 @ 4.2 and CCX 4 @ 4.3Ghz, while Under a Manual Vcore of 1.275v, and Under CB R20 with an Ambient Room Temp of 29c (I Live in Las Vegas, NV and its Summer Time) I see Temperatures @ 82c, Prime 95 Hits Temps of 93c, when I max out the Fans I can drop that by about 3c.
> 
> 
> 
> So I would say you are doing pretty good with Temps.
> 
> 
> 
> I am planning on adding a D5 and 280 Rad to my System next week to Try to tame Temps a little More. Also going to investigate some reports that state turning block Orientation on some EKWB CPU Blocks helps cool temps by up to 10c, to see if that helps in my case as well.




Wow those seem pretty high to me for such a good cooler. I’m sure you’ve tried refitting the block?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## oreonutz

Gettz8488 said:


> Wow those seem pretty high to me for such a good cooler. I’m sure you’ve tried refitting the block?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


Yeah, but I also have to run a higher than normal SOCv due to my 4x8GB Kit of Ram so I think that adds to the heat, I also have pretty high ambient temp which also contributes to it. I am going to manually spread the paste like I used to do when I rotate the block 90 degrees, hoping that plus the new pump and RAD will help Tame things a bit better, but she defintiely is a hot chip. I know my case just happens to be a hot one though because my 2700x also ran hotter than people with similar cooling, I am hoping this new PUMP really helps.

I wouldn't worry about your temps though, compared to mine and others I have seen you are doing just fine!


----------



## knightriot

ryzen 3rd may be hot a bit, mine [email protected] got ~75*c with ibt, my ambient temp~29~30*c , may be ok


----------



## sblantipodi

Guys *** is X590 chipset now?


----------



## Midian

sblantipodi said:


> Guys *** is X590 chipset now?


There is just no way there is a X590 chipset for AM4 coming, this has been debunked before and the most likely reason it has resurfaced again is someone saw old documents.


----------



## Gettz8488

oreonutz said:


> Yeah, but I also have to run a higher than normal SOCv due to my 4x8GB Kit of Ram so I think that adds to the heat, I also have pretty high ambient temp which also contributes to it. I am going to manually spread the paste like I used to do when I rotate the block 90 degrees, hoping that plus the new pump and RAD will help Tame things a bit better, but she defintiely is a hot chip. I know my case just happens to be a hot one though because my 2700x also ran hotter than people with similar cooling, I am hoping this new PUMP really helps.
> 
> 
> 
> I wouldn't worry about your temps though, compared to mine and others I have seen you are doing just fine!




Thanks a bunch makes me feel better I’ll probably reseat just to be 100% confident but I expect no change 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## FlanK3r

sblantipodi said:


> Guys *** is X590 chipset now?


its is possible, x590 is not AM4, but refresh of X399 chipset. But it is my theory.


----------



## oreonutz

FlanK3r said:


> its is possible, x590 is not AM4, but refresh of X399 chipset. But it is my theory.


I have heard that speculation, but its not likely simply because of Branding. I have it on good authority that we will be seeing the "x599" Chipset launch with Threadripper 3000, as always things are subject to change, but according to my contacts switching the chipset number scheme to match Intel's Mainstream Platform is HIGHLY Unlikely. But we shall see, I could very well eat my words!


----------



## KenjiS

oreonutz said:


> I have heard that speculation, but its not likely simply because of Branding. I have it on good authority that we will be seeing the "x599" Chipset launch with Threadripper 3000, as always things are subject to change, but according to my contacts switching the chipset number scheme to match Intel's Mainstream Platform is HIGHLY Unlikely. But we shall see, I could very well eat my words!


I'd think it would be X599 then... Unless its an interim before an actual proper X599... but that wouldnt make sense

I dont think X590 is AM4.. Even if it is what does it offer than X570 doesnt? Unless its a workstation variant with ECC or something


----------



## drmrlordx

Nighthog said:


> I've noted the same thing about droop. It's Extreme! I have to use [LCC]->[ULTRA EXTREME]! to have it not droop at all to get stable voltage with manual voltage >_>;
> (though... how much that overvolts or spikes I have no idea so I backed down less extreme llc settings)


Careful with the LLC. Also, what are you using to monitor vcore? I find that CPU-z provides voltage readings that are sane, while HWiNFO64 does not. 



> So if you can OC these chips 4.400Ghz and above you will overall usually get better performance but the most single-threaded loads now.


That's what I'm thinking. It's just a matter of finding out what are safe voltages.



Gettz8488 said:


> What’s temps are you guys seeing on your 3900X on Cinebench r20 and Prime 95 Small ? At stock settings I’m seeing 69 on cinebench and 72 on prime. I have an NH-D15 wondering if I messed up my thermal paste but I haven’t had anything to compare it too


Stock temps are a little high since my current boost situation adds too much vcore. I'm getting 60C in CBR20 MT. Prime95 wants to be lame @ stock and downclock/undervolt so my temps are only 57C. If I set MT clocks to 4050 MHz (same clocks as CBR20 using default settings) @ 1.2v then I get 66C. Could probably get it to run cooler on less voltage but I didn't take the time to tune to that speed.


----------



## thegr8anand

How are you guys overclocking your 3900x?


----------



## Gettz8488

drmrlordx said:


> Careful with the LLC. Also, what are you using to monitor vcore? I find that CPU-z provides voltage readings that are sane, while HWiNFO64 does not.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's what I'm thinking. It's just a matter of finding out what are safe voltages.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Stock temps are a little high since my current boost situation adds too much vcore. I'm getting 60C in CBR20 MT. Prime95 wants to be lame @ stock and downclock/undervolt so my temps are only 57C. If I set MT clocks to 4050 MHz (same clocks as CBR20 using default settings) @ 1.2v then I get 66C. Could probably get it to run cooler on less voltage but I didn't take the time to tune to that speed.




What cooking solution are you using? 60C under full load is extremely cold.. I get 75C with a NH-d15


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## oreonutz

Gettz8488 said:


> What COOKING solution are you using? 60C under full load is extremely cold.. I get 75C with a NH-d15
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


LOL! That Typo Could be EXTREMELY FUNNY if he was in fact burning up his CPU instead of getting incredibly LOW numbers.


----------



## Jackalito

I just got a mobo with X570 chipset, so I'm gonna be really pissed off it that X590 is for AM4 with, for example, something like a passively cooled chipset instead of a fan. And the thing is real, alright, because if you take a look at the changelog of the latest HWiNFO version, 6.10, you get it there:




> Changes:
> 
> 
> Enhanced sensor monitoring on ASUS CROSSHAIR VIII series.
> Added monitoring of AMD X570 chipset temperature.
> Enhanced sensor monitoring on ASUS PRIME X570 and TUF X570 series.
> Enhanced sensor monitoring on ASUS Pro WS X570-ACE.
> Added NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER, 2070 SUPER and 2080 SUPER.
> Added monitoring of Infineon XDPE10281 on GPU (Galax RTX 2080 Ti HOF).
> Enhanced sensor monitoring on ASRock X570 series.
> Enhanced sensor monitoring on ASUS ROG STRIX B365-F and STRIX B365-G.
> Added reporting of Favored Cores List for Intel CPUs.
> Several minor improvements and bugfixes.
> *Preliminary sensor monitoring enhancements for ASUS ROG ZENITH II and X590 series*.
> Added ability to show custom sensors.


EDIT: Now that I think about it, the fact that the ZENITH II and X590 series are in the same line... Is it possible that the new chipset for Threadripper gets renamed from X599 to X590? :thinking:


----------



## drmrlordx

Gettz8488 said:


> What cooking solution are you using? 60C under full load is extremely cold.. I get 75C with a NH-d15


Watercool Heatkiller IV pure copper waterblock, MO-RA3 420 rad, and two d5 Vario pumps.


----------



## chas1723

drmrlordx said:


> Watercool Heatkiller IV pure copper waterblock, MO-RA3 420 rad, and two d5 Vario pumps.


I am wanting this setup. What fans are you using for your MO-RA3? Why did you go with 2 d5 pumps?

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Bart

drmrlordx said:


> Watercool Heatkiller IV pure copper waterblock, MO-RA3 420 rad, and two d5 Vario pumps.


Awesome, you're like my brother from another mother, overkill style.


----------



## Hwgeek

Jackalito said:


> I just got a mobo with X570 chipset, so I'm gonna be really pissed off it that X590 is for AM4 with, for example, something like a passively cooled chipset instead of a fan. And the thing is real, alright, because if you take a look at the changelog of the latest HWiNFO version, 6.10, you get it there:
> 
> 
> 
> EDIT: Now that I think about it, the fact that the ZENITH II and X590 series are in the same line... Is it possible that the new chipset for Threadripper gets renamed from X599 to X590? :thinking:


I think they will replace the X399 with X590 - same 4ch memory+ PCIE Gen4 support, but also will introduce higher tier X599 Chipset with 8ch memory, better VRM for 64C OCing and more PCIE lanes and such for maximize the 48C/64C CPU's, something like ROG Dominus Extreme level.
*Just imaging running 64C TR @ 4.2Ghz all core!*


----------



## Pandora's Box

Some more fiddling this morning. Decided to try setting LLC to "Auto" instead of Level 3. I tried levels 1-5, all lost performance over auto...

Auto had all cores locked at 4100Mhz, with an occasional boost to 4150Mhz while running cinebench R20

I find it slightly amusing that the best performance on this 3900X is to leave everything in bios on Auto, set FCLK to 1800Mhz, and overclock your ram. Gone are the days of tweaking other settings imo.


----------



## Jackalito

Hwgeek said:


> I think they will replace the X399 with X590 - same 4ch memory+ PCIE Gen4 support, but also will introduce higher tier X599 Chipset with 8ch memory, better VRM for 64C OCing and more PCIE lanes and such for maximize the 48C/64C CPU's, something like ROG Dominus Extreme level.
> *Just imaging running 64C TR @ 4.2Ghz all core!*



Wow, that would indeed be absolutely awesome stuff! :specool:


----------



## RossiOCUK

KenjiS said:


> 69 here with an H115i on Cinebench R20, 69 sounds "average" for a 3900X on most decent cooling setups
> 
> Given my 6700k would be in the high 70s-80s despite a massive ton of cooling on it.. I'll take it
> 
> Not big on Prime95


H110i here. Stock I get 78c in CB20 lol. I'll be looking to upgrade that soon.


----------



## Gettz8488

I lost the lottery hard on my 3900X boys it can’t even do 4ghz at 1.2 which is the lowest silicon lottery bin 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## HiCZoK

Here are my temps and results for 3700x:
Cinebench r20 stock cooler multicore - 4740 score, 3930mhz, 76c degrees
CPU-Z stress test stock cooler multicore - 5475 score, 4044mhz, 81c degrees
Both run 1,35v for multicore and a bit more for single core. it's fine.

I would like to get a better cooler though. As I've said in the other topic (but got no answer), I've got Macho Rev.B but I've noticed it's convex a bit and apparently Ryzens have flat IHS... so should I try and use it or just get something else? Is there a flat ryzen cooler or would everything be just as that macho ?


----------



## Forceman

HiCZoK said:


> Here are my temps and results for 3700x:
> Cinebench r20 stock cooler multicore - 4740 score, 3930mhz, 76c degrees
> CPU-Z stress test stock cooler multicore - 5475 score, 4044mhz, 81c degrees
> Both run 1,35v for multicore and a bit more for single core. it's fine.
> 
> I would like to get a better cooler though. As I've said in the other topic (but got no answer), I've got Macho Rev.B but I've noticed it's convex a bit and apparently Ryzens have flat IHS... so should I try and use it or just get something else? Is there a flat ryzen cooler or would everything be just as that macho ?


What are your settings - seems like a low clock speed.


----------



## VPII

thegr8anand said:


> How are you guys overclocking your 3900x?


Well I do not use pbo or any other normal settings to clock my Ryzen 9 3900x. I prefer manual overclocking. For bench runs only I use 1.35vcore set in bios with processor just over 4.3ghz at 100.8bclk x 43.75. This works perfectly with load temps in cb20 being a little over 80c sometimes below..... it is winter here in South Africe so smbient cooler than normal.

For my everyday use I run the processor at 4.25 to 4.28ghz using 1.275vcore set in bios with actual vcore being 1.25v. That is with llc5 set in bios as the vdroop to big on auto. I measured the vcore with a multimeter so I go by that when stating actual vcore.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk


----------



## mobocracyminded

I'm having a similar issue with a Ryzen 5 3600. Lots of WHEA logger events -and I'm having some BSOD. Tracked it down to PCI express upstream switch port, but the DEV 43B3 doesn't seem to show up in any searches.


----------



## Gettz8488

Okay after further testing my CPU is not that bad. I had extreme Vdroop so 4ghz was not running at 1.1 VCore it runs great at 1.89 this is full load of course and 4.2ghz runs at 1.25Vcore under full load so apparently I have one the best 3900X u can get as per silicon lottery I ran full AVX 4.2 GHz at 1.25 VCore high LLC due to needing it to stay at 1.25 under load. 

I’m having a hard time manual overclocking on Auros pro X570 so I’ve been doing all testing on Ryzen master. Hardest part is getting the right llc as I need no vdroop


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Grin

Hwgeek said:


> I think they will replace the X399 with X590 - same 4ch memory+ PCIE Gen4 support, but also will introduce higher tier X599 Chipset with 8ch memory, better VRM for 64C OCing and more PCIE lanes and such for maximize the 48C/64C CPU's, something like ROG Dominus Extreme level.
> *Just imaging running 64C TR @ 4.2Ghz all core!*


I just imagine how 64c running @ 4.2 GHz and 900W  and start thinking about 900W coolers...


----------



## Schnitter

How bad is the idea of 3900X on a B450-I Strix mobo on a 11L case if I don't plan to Overclock?


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Schnitter said:


> How bad is the idea of 3900X on a B450-I Strix mobo on a 11L case if I don't plan to Overclock?


Maybe wait for the 3900 non x... :thumb:


----------



## chungsteroonie

I'm doing a build to test some Chinese watercooling parts and am needing a bit of a sanity check in regards to the temps I'm getting on Ryzen 3900X. Is this in the "ballpark" of decent open loop cooling?

Stock auto everything Cinebench R15:
- 3138-3160 score
- 4017.5mhz-4042.5mhz clock speed
- 61.6 C temp
- 145.263 watts power draw

Stock auto everything Prime95 small fft:
- 3718mhz-3742mhz clock speed
- 58.1 C temp
- 132.190 watts power draw


4.3Ghz @1.3V manual OC Cinebench R15
- 3328-3349 score
- 67.6 C temp
- 161.340 watts power draw

4.3Ghz @1.3V manual Prime95 small fft:
- 93 degrees C temp
- 245.083 watts power draw


I'm trying to determine if this is consistent with what other people are seeing on open loop cooling or if I have a thermal bottleneck at this particular CPU block significantly holding me back. Everything seemed to be going really well at stock settings but then that 4.3Ghz prime95 thermal figure going right up to 93C is concerning especially because the water isn't even warm, and it has two 360 rads just on the CPU. I do have another water block coming in the mail for testing and I will likely try to rotate the block 90 degrees to see if any difference appears, but I thought I'd reach out to see if anyone else has data I can compare with.


----------



## majestynl

chungsteroonie said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> I'm doing a build to test some Chinese watercooling parts and am needing a bit of a sanity check in regards to the temps I'm getting on Ryzen 3900X. Is this in the "ballpark" of decent open loop cooling?
> 
> Stock auto everything Cinebench R15:
> - 3138-3160 score
> - 4017.5mhz-4042.5mhz clock speed
> - 61.6 C temp
> - 145.263 watts power draw
> 
> Stock auto everything Prime95 small fft:
> - 3718mhz-3742mhz clock speed
> - 58.1 C temp
> - 132.190 watts power draw
> 
> 
> 4.3Ghz @1.3V manual OC Cinebench R15
> - 3328-3349 score
> - 67.6 C temp
> - 161.340 watts power draw
> 
> 4.3Ghz @1.3V manual Prime95 small fft:
> - 93 degrees C temp
> - 245.083 watts power draw
> 
> 
> I'm trying to determine if this is consistent with what other people are seeing on open loop cooling or if I have a thermal bottleneck at this particular CPU block significantly holding me back. Everything seemed to be going really well at stock settings but then that 4.3Ghz prime95 thermal figure going right up to 93C is concerning especially because the water isn't even warm, and it has two 260 rads just on the CPU. I do have another water block coming in the mail for testing and I will likely try to rotate the block 90 degrees to see if any difference appears, but I thought I'd reach out to see if anyone else has data I can compare with.


93degrees is to high if you ask me. I know the 3900x runs hot but with 93c ?! The official TJMax for these CPUs is 95°C
And afaik Boost limits are enforced at 80°C

Somethings else: Are you sure your Air flow is optimal. You are throwing hot air in the case from front intake. And the upper rad is pulling that air. Personally i would try it different.!


----------



## HiCZoK

Just xmp enabled in bios and csm disabled. All voltages on auto. no oc or anything. newest bios and chipset drivers.
On single core it's 4250-4300.
What coolers are people using on those things? I've sent macho revB since it's convex... maybe be quiet or something now?


----------



## Spectre73

majestynl said:


> 93degrees is to high if you ask me. I know the 3900x runs hot but with 93c ?! The official TJMax for these CPUs is 95°C
> And afaik Boost limits are enforced at 80°C
> 
> Somethings else: Are you sure your Air flow is optimal. You are throwing hot air in the case from front intake. And the upper rad is pulling that air. Personally i would try it different.!


How would you do it?


----------



## majestynl

Spectre73 said:


> How would you do it?


With your setup i would try: 

1) Swap front so its taking air from the inside of the case ;You can just flip the front fans (pull) or move front rad so the fans are behind them!(push)

2) Then you only need to flip the fan on the backside of the case so that its pushing fresh air into the case!

Its a simple job, probably 5-10min work. You can compare the results 

ps: with your current setup you are also warming up your reservoir!


----------



## upgraditus

chungsteroonie said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> I'm doing a build to test some Chinese watercooling parts and am needing a bit of a sanity check in regards to the temps I'm getting on Ryzen 3900X. Is this in the "ballpark" of decent open loop cooling?
> 
> Stock auto everything Cinebench R15:
> - 3138-3160 score
> - 4017.5mhz-4042.5mhz clock speed
> - 61.6 C temp
> - 145.263 watts power draw
> 
> Stock auto everything Prime95 small fft:
> - 3718mhz-3742mhz clock speed
> - 58.1 C temp
> - 132.190 watts power draw
> 
> 
> 4.3Ghz @1.3V manual OC Cinebench R15
> - 3328-3349 score
> - 67.6 C temp
> - 161.340 watts power draw
> 
> 4.3Ghz @1.3V manual Prime95 small fft:
> - 93 degrees C temp
> - 245.083 watts power draw
> 
> 
> I'm trying to determine if this is consistent with what other people are seeing on open loop cooling or if I have a thermal bottleneck at this particular CPU block significantly holding me back. Everything seemed to be going really well at stock settings but then that 4.3Ghz prime95 thermal figure going right up to 93C is concerning especially because the water isn't even warm, and it has two 260 rads just on the CPU. I do have another water block coming in the mail for testing and I will likely try to rotate the block 90 degrees to see if any difference appears, but I thought I'd reach out to see if anyone else has data I can compare with.


Careful with manual 1.3v and high clocks in avx prime95 on your 3900X, as you can see under stock operation it would heavily downclock and lower voltage to stay in a realistic (for size of package) power target. Your other temps are fine but I'd still follow majestynl's advice of flipping exhaust and front rad fans.


----------



## By-Tor

Prior to replacing my 1700X I flashed my Asus CH7 Hero with the latest BIOS on Asus's site (2501). After installing my new 3700X I'm having a heck of a time OCing it and my G.Skill 3200mhz Ripjaw, B-Die ram is running at 2133.

2501 has the AMD Agesa 1.0.0.2 that I have read about.

Is there another BIOS I should try?

TY


----------



## upgraditus

By-Tor said:


> Prior to replacing my 1700X I flashed my Asus CH7 Hero with the latest BIOS on Asus's site (2501). After installing my new 3700X I'm having a heck of a time OCing it and my G.Skill 3200mhz Ripjaw, B-Die ram is running at 2133.
> 
> 2501 has the AMD Agesa 1.0.0.2 that I have read about.
> 
> Is there another BIOS I should try?
> 
> TY


That looks like the latest for your board. RAM you need to make sure DRAM boot voltage is set, if it still doesn't boot docp with that set then you may need to slowly increase clocks one or two steps at a time. What are you trying in terms of CPU OC?


----------



## By-Tor

upgraditus said:


> That looks like the latest for your board. RAM you need to make sure DRAM boot voltage is set, if it still doesn't boot docp with that set then you may need to slowly increase clocks one or two steps at a time. What are you trying in terms of CPU OC?


Just 4.0 on 1.35v. Using Ryzen Master I have it running in desk top at 4.2 on 1.35v.


----------



## upgraditus

By-Tor said:


> Just 4.0 on 1.35v. Using Ryzen Master I have it running in desk top at 4.2 on 1.35v.


It should do 4GHz <1.2v. It seems most will do ~4.3 ~1.33v, currently @ 4.35 1.33725v with a touch of LLC (3) to reduce vdroop a bit. A word of caution with RM, it reports VID changes but for me doesn't actually change Vcore despite it saying settings applied successfully.


----------



## By-Tor

upgraditus said:


> That looks like the latest for your board. RAM you need to make sure DRAM boot voltage is set, if it still doesn't boot docp with that set then you may need to slowly increase clocks one or two steps at a time. What are you trying in terms of CPU OC?


Just 4.0 on 1.35v. Using Ryzen Master I have it running in desk top at 4.2 on 1.35v.


----------



## chungsteroonie

majestynl said:


> 93degrees is to high if you ask me. I know the 3900x runs hot but with 93c ?! The official TJMax for these CPUs is 95°C
> And afaik Boost limits are enforced at 80°C
> 
> Somethings else: Are you sure your Air flow is optimal. You are throwing hot air in the case from front intake. And the upper rad is pulling that air. Personally i would try it different.!


Thanks for the feedback. . . 93C does seem hot to me, but it does seem a previous post with an EK 360 loop kit is getting around 93C as well at around 4.3Ghz prime95? Once I see temps above 80C, I'm not running the test for extended periods. Just enough to "grab" a relatively stabilized temp.

I have not yet put the front panel or side panels on the machine. This is just initial testing, so it is essentially running like an open bench. The water literally does not even get warm with the dual 360 rads. My fingers can't feel a temp difference on the radiator tank from ambient which is unlike my other loops. I'm thinking the CPU block may be getting overwhelmed and bottlenecking the thermal performance. This is the strongest/hottest chip I've tried. On 6 core X58, this block never approached these temps. Maybe $14 was a little too optimistically frugal with the CPU block? HA ha ha. I have another one coming in the mail with deeper microfins and a larger fin area. All the way up to the 4.3Ghz setting, I was impressed and hopeful.


----------



## By-Tor

With the 1700X on this MB I set it to D.O.C.P. Standard and then set the CPU multi to 40 and the RAM freq, to 3466 and it ran like that until I installed the 3700X.. If I select DOCP now it won't post and gives me a Q Code of "C5". I set the RAM freq to 3200 and it boots in, but the timing are 22.22.22.53 and they were 14.14.14.32.


----------



## upgraditus

By-Tor said:


> With the 1700X on this MB I set it to D.O.C.P. Standard and then set the CPU multi to 40 and the RAM freq, to 3466 and it ran like that until I installed the 3700X.. If I select DOCP now it won't post and gives me a Q Code of "C5". I set the RAM freq to 3200 and it boots in, but the timing are 22.22.22.53 and they were 14.14.14.32.


Did you try this: set DOCP but also set DRAM boot voltage (to I presume 1.35v?)

If no then try that first.

If yes and it still gives that error then you'll need to enter all your timings and voltages manually but boot with a low clock (say 2400) and work your way up reboot, freq up reboot, freq up reboot.



chungsteroonie said:


> All the way up to the 4.3Ghz setting, I was impressed and hopeful.


I'd suspect the weak link is die->ihs transfer not ihs->block (and thus loop) especially at such high power, the chiplets are tiny. The 4.3GHz setting will be fine, just not in Prime95


----------



## By-Tor

upgraditus said:


> Did you try this: set DOCP but also set DRAM boot voltage (to I presume 1.35v?)
> 
> If no then try that first.
> 
> If yes and it still gives that error then you'll need to enter all your timings and voltages manually but boot with a low clock (say 2400) and work your way up reboot, freq up reboot, freq up reboot.


I'll give it a go. TY


----------



## By-Tor

Set it to 2400mhz on 1.35v with the timings at 14.14.14.32, but when I check it with CPU-Z it shows the timings at 14.14.27.40.


----------



## upgraditus

By-Tor said:


> Set it to 2400mhz on 1.35v with the timings at 14.14.14.32, but when I check it with CPU-Z it shows the timings at 14.14.27.40.


Strange, same in Ryzen Master? I don't know too much in depth about timings, there may be another setting causing this.


----------



## By-Tor

I was able to set the CPU to 41 on 1.28v in BIOS and able to boot. I did set the CPU LLC to level 1.


----------



## Schnitter

My brother and I both want 3900X. I plan to overclock while he doesn't, so he doesn't mind letting me choose which chip I want...

If I plug each and test them both (Cinebench and Prime95) at stock, would the better binned always show better results at stock speeds, or do I have to overclock both to find out? I rather save time if it's possible by just leaving stock and testing and overclocking later with better cooling solutions and time.


----------



## upgraditus

By-Tor said:


> I was able to set the CPU to 41 on 1.28v in BIOS and able to boot. I did set the CPU LLC to level 1.


Not trying to palm you off here, but the guys in the CH7 thread might be able to help you better than I since they have experience with that board/bios combo. https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...og-crosshair-vii-overclocking-thread-811.html



Schnitter said:


> My brother and I both want 3900X. I plan to overclock while he doesn't, so he doesn't mind letting me choose which chip I want...
> 
> If I plug each and test them both (Cinebench and Prime95) at stock, would the better binned always show better results at stock speeds, or do I have to overclock both to find out? I rather save time if it's possible by just leaving stock and testing and overclocking later with better cooling solutions and time.


In theory yes the better CPU would run better on auto by holding higher boost clocks and/or same clocks at lower voltages. In reality I doubt there's much in it but it will be interesting to see your findings.


----------



## By-Tor

Understand. Thank you for your time...


----------



## oreonutz

chungsteroonie said:


> I'm doing a build to test some Chinese watercooling parts and am needing a bit of a sanity check in regards to the temps I'm getting on Ryzen 3900X. Is this in the "ballpark" of decent open loop cooling?
> 
> Stock auto everything Cinebench R15:
> - 3138-3160 score
> - 4017.5mhz-4042.5mhz clock speed
> - 61.6 C temp
> - 145.263 watts power draw
> 
> Stock auto everything Prime95 small fft:
> - 3718mhz-3742mhz clock speed
> - 58.1 C temp
> - 132.190 watts power draw
> 
> 
> 4.3Ghz @1.3V manual OC Cinebench R15
> - 3328-3349 score
> - 67.6 C temp
> - 161.340 watts power draw
> 
> 4.3Ghz @1.3V manual Prime95 small fft:
> - 93 degrees C temp
> - 245.083 watts power draw
> 
> 
> I'm trying to determine if this is consistent with what other people are seeing on open loop cooling or if I have a thermal bottleneck at this particular CPU block significantly holding me back. Everything seemed to be going really well at stock settings but then that 4.3Ghz prime95 thermal figure going right up to 93C is concerning especially because the water isn't even warm, and it has two 360 rads just on the CPU. I do have another water block coming in the mail for testing and I will likely try to rotate the block 90 degrees to see if any difference appears, but I thought I'd reach out to see if anyone else has data I can compare with.


Hey so you know, I am running a 360 EKWB Kit, and When using 1.3v Running Prime 95 Small FFTs I also hit 93 degrees within about 5 minutes or so. I still haven't pulled apart my block and tried rotating and remounting it as others have suggested because in every other high load situation for me temps are fine and I just haven't had time. I can Blender Render with AVX Instructions for 10 hours straight and not go above 80c, but something about Prime 95 Small FFTs just thrashes my CPU at around 1.3v.

I also have seen quite a few people report that. Also word of caution, I have the Crosshair VII hero, and right now the damn UEFI has a bug where it will just randomly cut off power to the damn fan headers which is where my pump used to be plugged in, for whatever reason, this board will allow the Temperature to get up to 110c Before it finally shuts down the system. I have seen it happen to my system twice now, which I am sure is really awesome for the systems life span. So anyway, if you have that board wanted to warn you to look out for that, maybe power your pump off SATA or Molex, and to let you know that even though our TJmax is supposed to be 95c, it will go to 110c before it protects itself.


----------



## oreonutz

Schnitter said:


> My brother and I both want 3900X. I plan to overclock while he doesn't, so he doesn't mind letting me choose which chip I want...
> 
> If I plug each and test them both (Cinebench and Prime95) at stock, would the better binned always show better results at stock speeds, or do I have to overclock both to find out? I rather save time if it's possible by just leaving stock and testing and overclocking later with better cooling solutions and time.


In My opinion you would DEFINITELY want to Manually Overclock each with adequate cooling, maybe on an open air test bed (or a non metallic motherboard box) with the best cooler available to you, and then manually Overclock to see which chip can clock the highest and at the lowest voltage. Right now the average cut off point seems to be about 4.3Ghz at around 1.3v, but some report able to get much higher at much lower voltages. I have seen all Cores reported up to 4.45 at as low as 1.25v. If one of your chips can do that and not crash during a Blender 1 hour Render, or just get as high as possible with the lowest voltage as possible and still able to pass a blender render of 1 hour or so, then I would say for most tasks you are going to be pretty damn stable.

If you need it to be even more stable then that, a quick test that is completely unrealistic of most loads you will ever throw at your CPU, but if you pass it then you know you are going to pretty much handle whatever, and it only takes about 45 seconds, is the FP64 Ray Tracing Benchmark in Aida64. That thing THRASHES my 3900x, I have seen temps get as high as 105c in the 20 seconds that test runs in, so be careful with it, but if you need a quick stress test to see if your overclock is stable, then thats the one, however keep in mind that you most likely will never have a realistic load hit your CPU that hard, which is why Blender is a more realistic test, but you have to give it at least 30 Minutes to know your stable.

Hope that helps.

(P.S The best way to do it, takes a lot more time, and that is to either hit it with every stress tester that you have, Aida64, Blender, Cinebench, Prime95, ETC.. And then once you pass all of those, do real work on it, whatever you are going to use the CPU for that will push your CPU the hardest is Ideal for stress testing your CPU. At the end of the day only you know what kind of load you are going to put on your CPU so testing it with the most rigourous version of that load ensures that whenever you are doing that work it won't crash.)


----------



## Hwgeek

Grin said:


> I just imagine how 64c running @ 4.2 GHz and 900W  and start thinking about 900W coolers...


*"with big power comes big responsibility"* ;-)


----------



## oreonutz

By-Tor said:


> Understand. Thank you for your time...


FYI, I also run the Crosshair VII hero, I just read that this is the same board you are using. On our board, Level 1 LLC is the lowest level, meaning you will get the most VDroop, Level 5 LLC is the highest LLC, meaning you won't get Any Vdroop at all (but this also means you will get Voltage spikes much Higher then normal.) I run LLC 4 which only has a tiny bit of Vdroop and won't have spikes quite as high.

There are a bunch of us over in the C7H Thread that @upgraditus linked to, so if you need any further help, feel free to drop a question over there!


----------



## Schnitter

oreonutz said:


> In My opinion you would DEFINITELY want to Manually Overclock each with adequate cooling...


Thank you for your detailed response. The problem is that my brother won't be that patient to let me test both chips for a long time. He'll probably let me test for 2 hours tops before he makes me give him one of the CPU's. I won't have time to test limit of both. That is why I was wondering if testing both at stock and keeping the one that boosted highest was a valid way to "select the better binned chip" and later focus on that one chip to overclock and test in the ways you've described. Or is there some fast way to just know which got binned better, keep that one, and then take my sweet time overclocking it? Perhaps undervolting both both and looking which boosts higher on its own or which have closer CCD speeds?

Basically, if you had 2 hours to choose between two CPU's and you weren't that great at overclocking... how would you decide which CPU to keep?

(Thanks again, tried to give REP, but after forum overhaul it no longer works?)


----------



## upgraditus

Schnitter said:


> Thank you for your detailed response. The problem is that my brother won't be that patient to let me test both chips for a long time. He'll probably let me test for 2 hours tops before he makes me give him one of the CPU's. I won't have time to test limit of both. That is why I was wondering if testing both at stock and keeping the one that boosted highest was a valid way to "select the better binned chip" and later focus on that one chip to overclock and test in the ways you've described. Or is there some fast way to just know which got binned better, keep that one, and then take my sweet time overclocking it? Perhaps undervolting both both and looking which boosts higher on its own or which have closer CCD speeds?
> 
> Basically, if you had 2 hours to choose between two CPU's and you weren't that great at overclocking... how would you decide which CPU to keep?
> 
> (Thanks again, tried to give REP, but after forum overhaul it no longer works?)


You could easily find the limit of each chips CCXs (best method for OC 3900X) in a few minutes per CPU (not including build time), 2hrs is plenty.


----------



## oreonutz

Schnitter said:


> Thank you for your detailed response. The problem is that my brother won't be that patient to let me test both chips for a long time. He'll probably let me test for 2 hours tops before he makes me give him one of the CPU's. I won't have time to test limit of both. That is why I was wondering if testing both at stock and keeping the one that boosted highest was a valid way to "select the better binned chip" and later focus on that one chip to overclock and test in the ways you've described. Or is there some fast way to just know which got binned better, keep that one, and then take my sweet time overclocking it? Perhaps undervolting both both and looking which boosts higher on its own or which have closer CCD speeds?
> 
> Basically, if you had 2 hours to choose between two CPU's and you weren't that great at overclocking... how would you decide which CPU to keep?
> 
> (Thanks again, tried to give REP, but after forum overhaul it no longer works?)


I don't know about the Rep thing. I tried to give someone rep the other day and it wouldn't let me in that thread, so I clicked on his user, found another thread he posted in, then it let me give him rep there. So I don't know if I just don't understand how it works or what. 

But if you had 2 hours, I am still reasonably certain thats enough time to figure out which is better binned. What is going to take up most of your time is switching out the chips, cleaning off thermal paste, then remounting your cooling solution. Unless you do that everyday, depending on the cooler that could take up to 30 minutes right there, so that leaves you with an hour and a half and probably only One go at each.

Because of the way AMD pushes each chip, it varies the voltage of each, meaning you could have one that clocks higher at auto, but that might be because it gave it more voltage then it felt it wanted to give the other chip. I had this same thing happen to me with the 2700x, and the boost algorithm works differently now, so I don't know if this problem would be better or worse.

But what I would do is simply set a manual voltage of 1.3v as soon as you got the chip in there. Also set your XMP Profile of whatever Ram you intend to run (because the overclock you get can be hampered by your ram speed, so it makes sense to test at the ram speed you intend to run at in the long run, it would suck to do the testing then find out even though the chip can clock higher than the other, it can't do it at the Ram speed you wanted to run at.) 

Then keep bringing the chip up by 50Mhz at a time. I would start at 4.2Ghz because I am almost certain even the bad chips will do 4.2Ghz at 1.3v. Just download Cinebench R20 and do 2 Runs in a Row. Probably keep an high on Temps in HWinfo to make sure you aren't burning up the chip. If it passes that run, up the Ratio by .5 at a time, so then the next run will be at 4250Mhz, see if you pass that, then next run will be at 4300Mhz, keep doing it until you fail, it will only take a few boots, about 10 minutes or so per boot before you finally reach instability. Once you have reached instability take note of the last stable clock. Pull out the chip, quickly reseat the next, being careful to apply the thermal paste the exact same way you did before, using the same mounting pressure you did before (Ideally both should be as tight as possible), and then start at 4200Mhz at 1.3v with your Ram XMP setup, and start your cinebench testing again. Most likely one of your chips is going to give out before the other, and I would keep the chip that gets the higher clock.

In the end if you plan on running the chip at full auto, then the way you want to do it probably makes sense, as one of the 2 will probably boost higher at auto, but these tests need to be done with the exact same motherboard, same cooler, and same settings. And if you do plan to do any overclocking, just because one boosts higher on auto doesn't mean it is the better binned, it may be the better chip at auto, but if you push it manually you still may be able to get a higher overclock at a lower voltage with the other chip so I would only test on auto if you intend to run your chip at auto.

If you plan to Overclock in the end, then I would go that route, because ideally what you are looking for is the chip that can scale the highest with the lowest voltage, because most air and water coolers are going to be at their limit at around 1.3v with the 3900x, it makes sense to start your testing there and see which can get higher, because in the end if you manually overclock that is probably around the voltage you are going to target to push your clocks from. And its likely which ever chip gets higher at that clock will also hold at or near that higher clock with lower voltage to bring temps down.

I am fairly confident if you have a pen and pad next to you, and you are quick with mounting, you can get get this done fairly quick. There are a million other things to do to make sure its stable, but CB R20 is a fairly heavy load, so its a good quick test to see which clocks higher.

Good Luck!


----------



## oreonutz

upgraditus said:


> You could easily find the limit of each chips CCXs (best method for OC 3900X) in a few minutes per CPU (not including build time), 2hrs is plenty.


I agree with that, I prefer to CCX Overclock as well. For that all you need is Ryzen master and some time. The method is somewhat the same, but slightly different, and if done properly might take you up to that 2 hour limit, but its also possible.

It all depends on how you intend on running the chip in the end, 2 hours really isn't all that much time to really test each chip. If it were me I would demand at least a night with both.


----------



## Gettz8488

Does anyone know if the HWinfo guys are gonna update the Tdie temps to match ryzen master?


----------



## deepor

Gettz8488 said:


> Does anyone know if the HWinfo guys are gonna update the Tdie temps to match ryzen master?



The author is here on overclock.net. Here's his HWINFO thread:

https://www.overclock.net/forum/21-...ion/1235672-official-hwinfo-32-64-thread.html

He follows that thread and will answer if you ask something there.


----------



## oreonutz

Gettz8488 said:


> Does anyone know if the HWinfo guys are gonna update the Tdie temps to match ryzen master?


 @Mumak does follow that thread and indeed this forum like a hawk. But just FYI, about a week ago now or so, I remember him commenting that he was going on Vacation, I don't know if he said for how long, but I do know that he said something along the lines of "I don't even want to look at a computer" while he was gone. I have no idea how long of a vacation he planned on taking, but if he doesn't get back to you for a little while, that is probably why. He deserves it though, he puts in a lot of work into that tool. I would be willing to bet once he gets back and catches up to the latest news, he will probably make a post addressing how he plans to incorporate the new method of Temperature Reporting that AMD Introduced (AMD Robert said they planned on Getting the developers of Reporting Tools like HWinfo the information necessary to incorporate the new method into their respective reporting tools, so developers will eventually have the means if AMD delivers on this promise), or explain his reasoning for deciding not to (if he decides not to), so I would look forward to that sometime in the near future. Hopefully he gets a restful vacation first though!


----------



## Mumak

oreonutz said:


> @Mumak does follow that thread and indeed this forum like a hawk. But just FYI, about a week ago now or so, I remember him commenting that he was going on Vacation, I don't know if he said for how long, but I do know that he said something along the lines of "I don't even want to look at a computer" while he was gone. I have no idea how long of a vacation he planned on taking, but if he doesn't get back to you for a little while, that is probably why. He deserves it though, he puts in a lot of work into that tool. I would be willing to bet once he gets back and catches up to the latest news, he will probably make a post addressing how he plans to incorporate the new method of Temperature Reporting that AMD Introduced (AMD Robert said they planned on Getting the developers of Reporting Tools like HWinfo the information necessary to incorporate the new method into their respective reporting tools, so developers will eventually have the means if AMD delivers on this promise), or explain his reasoning for deciding not to (if he decides not to), so I would look forward to that sometime in the near future. Hopefully he gets a restful vacation first though!


It was a short vacation, I'm back for quite some time 
I have to admit that I have no idea how "the new method of Temperature Reporting that AMD Introduced" works nor what exactly that odd term means.
Tools like HWiNFO are reporting temperature read straight from the CPU. What RM does is unknown to the outside world, but I assume it does some averaging of recently sampled temperature values to hide occasional spikes in low/high values. But this is just my assumption...

Saying that they work with us closely is sadly not true, at least for the past months. I wasn't talking much about our cooperation with AMD, but I'm getting really sick of how they treat us (and other developers) recently. Our cooperation was great ahead of and shortly after Zen1 launch, but after that it ceased from their side. They don't provide us with sufficient information, almost all our questions remain in /dev/null or end up with just empty promises. They gave us NULL information about the idle-gate published on reddit, we asked them how to correctly poll CPU threads in order not to wake them up, how to detect sleeping cores, etc, etc.. NOTHING have we got back! Despite many promises, we didn't even get final Zen2 systems ! Almost any reviewer/"influencer" is supplied with all latest hardware, but we (engineers) are being pissed off. So well, yeah... I'm really disappointed with such attitude and it makes me sick when they say that they are cooperating with us.

And BTW.. I have code ready to read all (dozens of) the temperature sensors spread across the entire package of the Zen CPU. I implemented this a few months ago. Bit I haven't released it because I thought that providing such details could cause confusion. Well maybe this might be useful....


----------



## os2wiz

I have a 24/7 4.2 GHZ stable overclock. I probably could do better in September once it cools down. My computer is in a sun room where even with 24000 BTU air conditioning the mid afternoon temperature is about 91 degrees Farenheit. In mid September I will be able to properly test my stable overclock limits. But after doing so, I will still run at 4.2 GHZ. A little less excessiveness will add long life to my cpu. Here is my cinebench 20 run at 4.225 GHZ and my Aida64 cache and memory benchmark.


----------



## Gettz8488

Mumak said:


> It was a short vacation, I'm back for quite some time
> 
> I have to admit that I have no idea how "the new method of Temperature Reporting that AMD Introduced" works nor what exactly that odd term means.
> 
> Tools like HWiNFO are reporting temperature read straight from the CPU. What RM does is unknown to the outside world, but I assume it does some averaging of recently sampled temperature values to hide occasional spikes in low/high values. But this is just my assumption...
> 
> 
> 
> Saying that they work with us closely is sadly not true, at least for the past months. I wasn't talking much about our cooperation with AMD, but I'm getting really sick of how they treat us (and other developers) recently. Our cooperation was great ahead of and shortly after Zen1 launch, but after that it ceased from their side. They don't provide us with sufficient information, almost all our questions remain in /dev/null or end up with just empty promises. They gave us NULL information about the idle-gate published on reddit, we asked them how to correctly poll CPU threads in order not to wake them up, how to detect sleeping cores, etc, etc.. NOTHING have we got back! Despite many promises, we didn't even get final Zen2 systems ! Almost any reviewer/"influencer" is supplied with all latest hardware, but we (engineers) are being pissed off. So well, yeah... I'm really disappointed with such attitude and it makes me sick when they say that they are cooperating with us.
> 
> 
> 
> And BTW.. I have code ready to read all (dozens of) the temperature sensors spread across the entire package of the Zen CPU. I implemented this a few months ago. Bit I haven't released it because I thought that providing such details could cause confusion. Well maybe this might be useful....




Thanks for the reply Mumak ignore the post I made on the other thread I’m sad to hear how they’re treating you guys as engineers. Hopefully with enough community pushback they give you guys the information you need 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## oreonutz

Mumak said:


> It was a short vacation, I'm back for quite some time
> I have to admit that I have no idea how "the new method of Temperature Reporting that AMD Introduced" works nor what exactly that odd term means.
> Tools like HWiNFO are reporting temperature read straight from the CPU. What RM does is unknown to the outside world, but I assume it does some averaging of recently sampled temperature values to hide occasional spikes in low/high values. But this is just my assumption...
> 
> Saying that they work with us closely is sadly not true, at least for the past months. I wasn't talking much about our cooperation with AMD, but I'm getting really sick of how they treat us (and other developers) recently. Our cooperation was great ahead of and shortly after Zen1 launch, but after that it ceased from their side. They don't provide us with sufficient information, almost all our questions remain in /dev/null or end up with just empty promises. They gave us NULL information about the idle-gate published on reddit, we asked them how to correctly poll CPU threads in order not to wake them up, how to detect sleeping cores, etc, etc.. NOTHING have we got back! Despite many promises, we didn't even get final Zen2 systems ! Almost any reviewer/"influencer" is supplied with all latest hardware, but we (engineers) are being pissed off. So well, yeah... I'm really disappointed with such attitude and it makes me sick when they say that they are cooperating with us.


 @Mumak - That honestly pisses me off. I had no idea they were treating you guys like that. Earlier when I said they would be providing information to developers like "HWinfo" I know they specifically didn't mention you by name, but you were definitely who they were referring to. Give me a minute I am going to dig up the link where I read this, and post it here. It definitely came from one of AMD Roberts Reddit updates.

EDIT: OK I found where I found this information from. It came from a Reddit thread which linked to the following page ( https://community.amd.com/community...te-5-let-s-talk-clocks-voltages-and-destiny-2 ), which then linked to a pdf document. This document, if you scroll almost all the way down to the bottom, JUST ABOVE The Section about "Destiny 2", It says the Following Paragraph (although if you read the entire section you will see what he is talking about with this new Method of Calculating the temperatures, it is indeed just an average):

"ADDITIONALLY: We also intend to release new developer documentation that enables third-party tools
to take the same measurements, so you can continue to rely on your favorite third-party apps after
they’re updated. We will be contacting utility vendors directly with more details when the
documentation is ready."

You can find the PDF Links at the bottom of this page: https://community.amd.com/community...te-5-let-s-talk-clocks-voltages-and-destiny-2

The PDF is Called "Community_Update5_Detailed_Brief.pdf"

If You Prefer to just download the PDF Directly, here is the link: https://community.amd.com/servlet/J...2-124770/Community_Update5_Detailed_Brief.pdf



Mumak said:


> And BTW.. I have code ready to read all (dozens of) the temperature sensors spread across the entire package of the Zen CPU. I implemented this a few months ago. Bit I haven't released it because I thought that providing such details could cause confusion. Well maybe this might be useful....



I know I would not be the only one Who Would Be Happy to have more sensors in HWinfo!


----------



## Mumak

oreonutz said:


> @Mumak - That honestly pisses me off. I had no idea they were treating you guys like that. Earlier when I said they would be providing information to developers like "HWinfo" I know they specifically didn't mention you by name, but you were definitely who they were referring to. Give me a minute I am going to dig up the link where I read this, and post it here. It definitely came from one of AMD Roberts Reddit updates.


I can say that it's not just HWiNFO being ignored, but many others (including CPU-Z and AIDA64) as well.
Their last statement was not to use other tools, only Ryzen Master. Since this tool is their own product, they can do what they want there and no one can really verify if the information it provides is real, or just an attempt to hide bugs.


----------



## oreonutz

Mumak said:


> I can say that it's not just HWiNFO being ignored, but many others (including CPU-Z and AIDA64) as well.
> Their last statement was not to use other tools, only Ryzen Master. Since this tool is their own product, they can do what they want there and no one can really verify if the information it provides is real, or just an attempt to hide bugs.


Yeah, and obviously most of us won't fly with that. We are set in our ways, love and trust our tools. And honestly the whole post stunk of "Well you guys 'Think' there is bad behavior, so instead of changing the behavior, we are going to change how the tools report to you."

I would be interested to learn if they actually do provide this "Documentation" to you guys some time in the near future.

Although I am sure if you just watched the behavior of Ryzen Master, being that you have seemed to gain access to the sensors inside the CPU, you could probably figure out the method they used to arrive at this new "Average" number, and let us know whether there is any validity at all to this method.

Obviously you probably have better things to do, but I bet if you felt like it, you could figure it out.


----------



## Mumak

oreonutz said:


> Yeah, and obviously most of us won't fly with that. We are set in our ways, love and trust our tools. And honestly the whole post stunk of "Well you guys 'Think' there is bad behavior, so instead of changing the behavior, we are going to change how the tools report to you."
> 
> I would be interested to learn if they actually do provide this "Documentation" to you guys some time in the near future.
> 
> Although I am sure if you just watched the behavior of Ryzen Master, being that you have seemed to gain access to the sensors inside the CPU, you could probably figure out the method they used to arrive at this new "Average" number, and let us know whether there is any validity at all to this method.
> 
> Obviously you probably have better things to do, but I bet if you felt like it, you could figure it out.


It's not as simple as it might appear.
Today's CPUs are very complicated systems consisting of several IP blocks, each of them responsible for a certain function. Besides the fixed-function blocks in silicon there are multiple controllers running a special firmware (i.e. the System Management Unit) that control several crucial aspects. While we do have a lot documentation (much more than what's available to public), this still doesn't cover several areas that are sort of black-boxes kept strictly secret. Or even if documentation exists for a certain piece of the puzzle, it often doesn't reflect all the even smaller pieces or is not consistent with what we see in reality (i.e. we expect a certain register to deliver a certain value, but in reality something else is happening). So while we see and know a lot, we're still missing certain details that are often known only to a handful of engineers dealing directly with a certain feature/block inside the big company. Working with such things is often a forensic work...


----------



## oreonutz

Mumak said:


> It's not as simple as it might appear.
> Today's CPUs are very complicated systems consisting of several IP blocks, each of them responsible for a certain function. Besides the fixed-function blocks in silicon there are multiple controllers running a special firmware (i.e. the System Management Unit) that control several crucial aspects. While we do have a lot documentation (much more than what's available to public), this still doesn't cover several areas that are sort of black-boxes kept strictly secret. Or even if documentation exists for a certain piece of the puzzle, it often doesn't reflect all the even smaller pieces or is not consistent with what we see in reality (i.e. we expect a certain register to deliver a certain value, but in reality something else is happening). So while we see and know a lot, we're still missing certain details that are often known only to a handful of engineers dealing directly with a certain feature/block inside the big company. Working with such things is often a forensic work...


Sounds intense. Sorry didn't mean to imply it would be easy, just that I bet you could figure out what average metric they were using, but you have made me aware to the different factors involved, I see how even that could be a monumental task.

Do you think there is a valid argument for AMD Showing this "average" temperature instead of their previous method of always reporting the sensor with the highest value?


----------



## Mumak

oreonutz said:


> Sounds intense. Sorry didn't mean to imply it would be easy, just that I bet you could figure out what average metric they were using, but you have made me aware to the different factors involved, I see how even that could be a monumental task.
> 
> Do you think there is a valid argument for AMD Showing this "average" temperature instead of their previous method of always reporting the sensor with the highest value?


Yes, if they believe that short spikes of temperature are OK, they would apply averaging of the last x-samples to flatten the output. But this is just my assumption, until we get (if we do) the required info from AMD.
Intel is going a similar way - they claim that short spikes of high temperatures are OK and within the spec and should not be considered as a critical warning.

BTW, HWiNFO already allows you to apply averaging of values. You can also specify how many last samples should be averaged. Just have a look in sensor settings.


----------



## oreonutz

Mumak said:


> Yes, if they believe that short spikes of temperature are OK, they would apply averaging of the last x-samples to flatten the output. But this is just my assumption, until we get (if we do) the required info from AMD.
> Intel is going a similar way - they claim that short spikes of high temperatures are OK and within the spec and should not be considered as a critical warning.
> 
> BTW, HWiNFO already allows you to apply averaging of values. You can also specify how many last samples should be averaged. Just have a look in sensor settings.


Good to know. Well I hope you get the "Documentation" that that PDF said 3rd party developers of Monitoring tools would be getting shortly.

As far as HWinfo allowing you to apply averages, I think its awesome you give us that ability. I like mine to be set for every 15 samples, giving me the average temperature of the last 30 Seconds of Load (assuming you leave your polling interval at the default 2000 Samples.)

You really have built an amazing tool here, I have personally switched a countless number of enthusiasts off of HWMonitor and on to this tool, simply because its more accurate, more reliable, is more customizable, allows you to organize your sensors in a way that makes sense to you, and has the ability to interface with different 3rd party tools quite easily. I LOVE THIS TOOL, and if you had a paid version I would be one of your first customers, just to support you.

I also use this tool at Work. I am a Founding Partner in an IT Firm here in Las Vegas, we service Mid to Small Size businesses and handle a businesses increasing Technology needs. We do everything from Designing, Building, and Maintaining Servers, Networks, Workstations, Camera's, Phones, Security, ETC... My Part in this is Mainly The Server, Networking, and Workstation end. And one of the most important tools in my Custom Program Toolkit is HWinfo. I use it on all of our Servers to get an accurate reading of the Temperatures while working within the OS, I implement the DOS Version in my boot up disks, and All of my Workstations run it in the background, so I can quickly remote in and check sensors or readouts when necessary. I am currently petitioning my Remote Monitoring Management Provider (Solarwinds) to incorporate Sensors from both BMC's on Servers, and HWinfo in the Case of Workstations, so we can at a glance look at our dashboard and see any Workstation or Server who many be in an Overheating Situation. Because we are based in Las Vegas, this is even more important here, and even though we can already set Most of our Servers to Text us after they have been in an Overheating situation for a set amount of time, and have the capability to do the same from HWinfo when interfaced with other software, because we are talking over 400PC's and 90 Servers, it would be best if this information was piped into the RMM Dashboard and then have the software send alerts based on the variables we have configured. To say they have been dragging their feet on this suggestion would be an understatement, but they have implemented suggestions from us in the past, so I am sure this kind of thing takes time.

Anyway, I just mean to say that you have some amazing software on your hands, it is a vital part of a Technicians Toolkit, and I really appreciate you taking the time to introduce it to the community and maintain it. I know you have so many other important things to work on, but I personally can't wait for the day where you implement Remote Monitoring within HWinfo itself, so we could just install the program on 2 separate PC's, configure the network settings on both programs and have them report temperatures to each other (I know its as simple as installing the add-on right now, so not a big deal, but not everyone knows this, it would be awesome to just have that functionality built in, but again, not a priority, as we can already do it.) Something far more useful, that you have probably already addressed, and probably have your reasons for not supporting, would be Linux/Unix support. A decent number of my clients Servers run on Linux, Unix, or OSXi, and its not a huge deal because we can usually get the temperature and sensor information we need from the server's BMC, but having the ability to use HWinfo on a Linux system would just be amazing! Anyways, this wasn't meant to be a "Hey you should work your ass off to make this tool even more awesome for me!" comment, so I will shut up now, AWESOME SOFTWARE!


----------



## Mumak

oreonutz said:


> Good to know. Well I hope you get the "Documentation" that that PDF said 3rd party developers of Monitoring tools would be getting shortly.
> 
> As far as HWinfo allowing you to apply averages, I think its awesome you give us that ability. I like mine to be set for every 15 samples, giving me the average temperature of the last 30 Seconds of Load (assuming you leave your polling interval at the default 2000 Samples.)
> 
> You really have built an amazing tool here, I have personally switched a countless number of enthusiasts off of HWMonitor and on to this tool, simply because its more accurate, more reliable, is more customizable, allows you to organize your sensors in a way that makes sense to you, and has the ability to interface with different 3rd party tools quite easily. I LOVE THIS TOOL, and if you had a paid version I would be one of your first customers, just to support you.
> 
> I also use this tool at Work. I am a Founding Partner in an IT Firm here in Las Vegas, we service Mid to Small Size businesses and handle a businesses increasing Technology needs. We do everything from Designing, Building, and Maintaining Servers, Networks, Workstations, Camera's, Phones, Security, ETC... My Part in this is Mainly The Server, Networking, and Workstation end. And one of the most important tools in my Custom Program Toolkit is HWinfo. I use it on all of our Servers to get an accurate reading of the Temperatures while working within the OS, I implement the DOS Version in my boot up disks, and All of my Workstations run it in the background, so I can quickly remote in and check sensors or readouts when necessary. I am currently petitioning my Remote Monitoring Management Provider (Solarwinds) to incorporate Sensors from both BMC's on Servers, and HWinfo in the Case of Workstations, so we can at a glance look at our dashboard and see any Workstation or Server who many be in an Overheating Situation. Because we are based in Las Vegas, this is even more important here, and even though we can already set Most of our Servers to Text us after they have been in an Overheating situation for a set amount of time, and have the capability to do the same from HWinfo when interfaced with other software, because we are talking over 400PC's and 90 Servers, it would be best if this information was piped into the RMM Dashboard and then have the software send alerts based on the variables we have configured. To say they have been dragging their feet on this suggestion would be an understatement, but they have implemented suggestions from us in the past, so I am sure this kind of thing takes time.
> 
> Anyway, I just mean to say that you have some amazing software on your hands, it is a vital part of a Technicians Toolkit, and I really appreciate you taking the time to introduce it to the community and maintain it. I know you have so many other important things to work on, but I personally can't wait for the day where you implement Remote Monitoring within HWinfo itself, so we could just install the program on 2 separate PC's, configure the network settings on both programs and have them report temperatures to each other (I know its as simple as installing the add-on right now, so not a big deal, but not everyone knows this, it would be awesome to just have that functionality built in, but again, not a priority, as we can already do it.) Something far more useful, that you have probably already addressed, and probably have your reasons for not supporting, would be Linux/Unix support. A decent number of my clients Servers run on Linux, Unix, or OSXi, and its not a huge deal because we can usually get the temperature and sensor information we need from the server's BMC, but having the ability to use HWinfo on a Linux system would just be amazing! Anyways, this wasn't meant to be a "Hey you should work your ass off to make this tool even more awesome for me!" comment, so I will shut up now, AWESOME SOFTWARE!


Thank you for your appreciation 
Remote sensor monitoring has been implemented in HWiNFO for quite some time  Just click the network icon on bottom of the sensors window..
A Linux version is something that I've been thinking about for a long time. Unfortunately the effort to port HWiNFO to Linux would be an enormous task, also because of so many different flavors and GUIs...


----------



## deepor

@Mumak:

About a Linux version, I'm worried about how it would be received by people because usually everything used on Linux (besides Steam) is open-source. A tool like HWINFO would also need to run with root rights to be able to access the hardware. People won't like that kind of thing as closed source.

Anyway...

How about only doing a terminal version of HWINFO for Linux instead of GUI version?

Maybe the type of people that are interested in getting access to interesting sensor readings don't need a GUI. A simple command line tool that prints lines of text to the terminal would be fine. People will then use that as input for their own scripts. Customizable status bars seem to be popular, and there's a popular tool that can paint graphs and text onto the desktop background. People using those would need a command line version of HWINFO anyway so that they can use its output for their custom status bar and for the desktop background.

If you just do a program that prints stuff to a terminal, you don't have to battle with the differences between the different Linux distros. A command line program released as a statically compiled binary should keep working over many years without having to be recompiled.

The big problems about a mismatch of library versions only seems to show up when desktop stuff is involved. There's changes all the time and programs have to be recompiled all the time. There have to be different binaries for different distros and different distro versions. You can't really do this alone. With open source the different distros will deal with that problem.

There's "flatpak" and "snap" to bundle a GUI program with the environment it needs so that it can run on many different distros, but I don't know if that's good for HWINFO because flatpak/snap creates a container and sandbox that limits access to the host.

Now that I think about it, if you just provide a terminal version of HWINFO, that could then be run as a daemon and provide access through a Unix socket or network socket. The GUI could then be a separate program that connects to the daemon. Maybe the smartest thing to do would then be, instead of investing time on doing a GUI for Linux desktops, what about doing an Android app so that people can check sensors from their phone? That app would also be useful for Windows users. This could then be a much better investment of your time than a Linux GUI.


----------



## oreonutz

Mumak said:


> Thank you for your appreciation
> Remote sensor monitoring has been implemented in HWiNFO for quite some time  Just click the network icon on bottom of the sensors window..
> A Linux version is something that I've been thinking about for a long time. Unfortunately the effort to port HWiNFO to Linux would be an enormous task, also because of so many different flavors and GUIs...


LOL! Holy *hit I never bothered to click on that before. LOL! Thank You man!

And I understand about the different flavors. I suspect as long as you picked a distro to support that has spinoffs, something like Ubuntu or Gentoo, the rest of the Linux community would spring into action to make it work on the other flavors. But I understand why your hesitant there. Anyways, I will try to leave you alone now, appreciate your openess! Let me know if you ever need a tester for anything, always glad to help!


----------



## oreonutz

deepor said:


> @Mumak:
> 
> About a Linux version, I'm worried about how it would be received by people because usually everything used on Linux (besides Steam) is open-source. A tool like HWINFO would also need to run with root rights to be able to access the hardware. People won't like that kind of thing as closed source.
> 
> Anyway...
> 
> How about only doing a terminal version of HWINFO for Linux instead of GUI version?
> 
> Maybe the type of people that are interested in getting access to interesting sensor readings don't need a GUI. A simple command line tool that prints lines of text to the terminal would be fine. People will then use that as input for their own scripts. Customizable status bars seem to be popular, and there's a popular tool that can paint graphs and text onto the desktop background. People using those would need a command line version of HWINFO anyway so that they can use its output for their custom status bar and for the desktop background.
> 
> If you just do a program that prints stuff to a terminal, you don't have to battle with the differences between the different Linux distros. A command line program released as a statically compiled binary should keep working over many years without having to be recompiled.
> 
> The big problems about a mismatch of library versions only seems to show up when desktop stuff is involved. There's changes all the time and programs have to be recompiled all the time. There have to be different binaries for different distros and different distro versions. You can't really do this alone. With open source the different distros will deal with that problem.
> 
> There's "flatpak" and "snap" to bundle a GUI program with the environment it needs so that it can run on many different distros, but I don't know if that's good for HWINFO because flatpak/snap creates a container and sandbox that limits access to the host.
> 
> Now that I think about it, if you just provide a terminal version of HWINFO, that could then be run as a daemon and provide access through a Unix socket or network socket. The GUI could then be a separate program that connects to the daemon. Maybe the smartest thing to do would then be, instead of investing time on doing a GUI for Linux desktops, what about doing an Android app so that people can check sensors from their phone? That app would also be useful for Windows users. This could then be a much better investment of your time than a Linux GUI.


I realize that what you are asking is MUCH bigger and better then what I am about to say, and I think it would be awesome as well, a CMI would be all I would need as well. Also having a Proper @Mumak developed official Android App would be amazing. But that being said...

There is an unofficial app available, its what I have been using to monitor my systems while away from the house. Its called HwR. Its made by someone not affiliated with @Mumak, at least I don't think he is. It also needs a Windows Portable exe that the developer provides to run on your system instead of just using the official plugin. But it works pretty well, and if you just forward the port, you can use the app to access HWinfo sensors on your phone from anywhere. I honestly think the app could use a LOT of work, but its barebones, and it works. Obviously will not help Linux users at all, but figured I would let you know that it exists if you cared.


----------



## Jackalito

Mumak said:


> It was a short vacation, I'm back for quite some time
> I have to admit that I have no idea how "the new method of Temperature Reporting that AMD Introduced" works nor what exactly that odd term means.
> Tools like HWiNFO are reporting temperature read straight from the CPU. What RM does is unknown to the outside world, but I assume it does some averaging of recently sampled temperature values to hide occasional spikes in low/high values. But this is just my assumption...
> 
> Saying that they work with us closely is sadly not true, at least for the past months. I wasn't talking much about our cooperation with AMD, but I'm getting really sick of how they treat us (and other developers) recently. Our cooperation was great ahead of and shortly after Zen1 launch, but after that it ceased from their side. They don't provide us with sufficient information, almost all our questions remain in /dev/null or end up with just empty promises. They gave us NULL information about the idle-gate published on reddit, we asked them how to correctly poll CPU threads in order not to wake them up, how to detect sleeping cores, etc, etc.. NOTHING have we got back! Despite many promises, we didn't even get final Zen2 systems ! Almost any reviewer/"influencer" is supplied with all latest hardware, but we (engineers) are being pissed off. So well, yeah... I'm really disappointed with such attitude and it makes me sick when they say that they are cooperating with us.
> 
> And BTW.. I have code ready to read all (dozens of) the temperature sensors spread across the entire package of the Zen CPU. I implemented this a few months ago. Bit I haven't released it because I thought that providing such details could cause confusion. Well maybe this might be useful....





Mumak said:


> It's not as simple as it might appear.
> Today's CPUs are very complicated systems consisting of several IP blocks, each of them responsible for a certain function. Besides the fixed-function blocks in silicon there are multiple controllers running a special firmware (i.e. the System Management Unit) that control several crucial aspects. While we do have a lot documentation (much more than what's available to public), this still doesn't cover several areas that are sort of black-boxes kept strictly secret. Or even if documentation exists for a certain piece of the puzzle, it often doesn't reflect all the even smaller pieces or is not consistent with what we see in reality (i.e. we expect a certain register to deliver a certain value, but in reality something else is happening). So while we see and know a lot, we're still missing certain details that are often known only to a handful of engineers dealing directly with a certain feature/block inside the big company. Working with such things is often a forensic work...


 @*Mumak* , I really appreciate all the effort you've been putting into HWiNFO for years now. I was so gutted about reading this yesterday that I tweeted Robert Hallock about it (I'm not a Reddit man), and this is what I got from him:











I don't wanna be naive, though. I just hope this turns out to be true. Just tried to do my part here.


Cheers!


----------



## CaptnJones

Anyone else experiencing weird temp spikes? On windows startup my fan goes crazy every time and the temp spikes at 72°C and then goes down to 50s. Open Firefox browser another temp spike this time to 62°C and then back down again - open a new tab and load a page boom another temp spike. What the hell is going on? I've disabled PBO in bios and it still boosts like crazy. Im on Ryzen balanced power plan - power saving helps since it doesn't boost past 2,2ghz


I really hope there's a fix for this because even with a proper fan curve it's still spikes to really high temps at times despite only doing normal windows tasks.


----------



## HiCZoK

Upgraded stock cooler on 3700x to Be Quiet Dark Rock Pro 4 and the results are:
-stock fan, default bios settings: 76c, 3930mhz, 4700 score 
-DRP4, default bios settings: 63c, 4070mhz, 4850 score
-On cpu-Z stress test, temps went from 80 to 70c and usage from 4040mhz to 4144mhz.
So lower temps and higher clocks. nice.
If I enable PBo and auto oc +200mhz... the results are worse. Higher temps and lower clocks.


----------



## upgraditus

CaptnJones said:


> Anyone else experiencing weird temp spikes? On windows startup my fan goes crazy every time and the temp spikes at 72°C and then goes down to 50s. Open Firefox browser another temp spike this time to 62°C and then back down again - open a new tab and load a page boom another temp spike. What the hell is going on? I've disabled PBO in bios and it still boosts like crazy. Im on Ryzen balanced power plan - power saving helps since it doesn't boost past 2,2ghz
> 
> 
> I really hope there's a fix for this because even with a proper fan curve it's still spikes to really high temps at times despite only doing normal windows tasks.


Here's a snapshot of mine whilst watching a vlc stream @ 1080p and a few tabs in firefox open, it's bouncing between low 40s to 50s constantly with the odd blip into the 60s with fan between just ~300 & 500RPM, the 77°C max was running a multi thread bench earlier. Manual OC 4350MHz @ 1.337v with True Spirit 140 BW cooler. On auto it would be hotter as voltage would be higher doing the same tasks (up to 1.5v).


----------



## CaptnJones

upgraditus said:


> Here's a snapshot of mine whilst watching a vlc stream @ 1080p and a few tabs in firefox open, it's bouncing between low 40s to 50s constantly with the odd blip into the 60s with fan between just ~300 & 500RPM, the 77°C max was running a multi thread bench earlier. Manual OC 4350MHz @ 1.337v with True Spirit 140 BW cooler. On auto it would be hotter as voltage would be higher doing the same tasks (up to 1.5v).


 So it'd be better if i just oc it it manually? But then i'd be losing the single core speed ?
This is mine after web browsing for 5min








Room temp 28°C

Running Cinebench the temp stops at 78.9° on a Hyper Evo Turbo - 4692 score. Doing handbrake 5min encode and the temp goes all the way to 80°C
Would the temps be lower if i just oc it to 4.3 all core?


----------



## oreonutz

CaptnJones said:


> So it'd be better if i just oc it it manually? But then i'd be losing the single core speed ?
> This is mine after web browsing for 5min
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Room temp 28°C
> 
> Running Cinebench the temp stops at 78.9° on a Hyper Evo Turbo - 4692 score. Doing handbrake 5min encode and the temp goes all the way to 80°C
> Would the temps be lower if i just oc it to 4.3 all core?


Unfortunately this is just boost in action. You disabled PBO (AKA "Precision Boost Overdrive"), but all PBO is, is essentially Overclocking Precision Boost (Precision Boost is not PBO, they are 2 Separate things). Precision Boost is the Boost behavior of your CPU at Stock Speeds. It seems like your cooler is having a hard time taming your temps during normal tasks, because the CPU is boosting pretty high during those tasks, which shoves more voltage through the CPU, which naturally heats it up. This is all by Design and perfectly safe (according to AMD), it sounds like you actually have yourself a pretty well binned chip, its just that the Hyper 212 Is not taming it so well under these moderate workloads.

Although it is taming it pretty well during a handbrake encode, so you are probably fine in terms of cooling, it just spikes pretty high during lightly threaded workloads. As I see it you have 3 (and a half) options.

1) You can go into your UEFI, and set your Fan Speeds to not ramp up until 74 Degrees. On an Asus board you unfortunately don't have a choice, it will boost your speeds up to 100 Percent the second it hits 76c. But you can find the highest Speed you can set with the fans still being inaudible. For instance with my fans, that would be 50%, once I hit 51% I can hear my fans above the Room Noise, but at 50% they are completely inaudible, I can not hear it above Room Noise. So I set my Fans to exactly 50% until I want the fans to start ramping higher, for me thats once my Processor hits 70c, I want it to start Cooling more at that point despite the noise, so exactly at 70c my Fans are set to Ramp to 75 Percent, and then once My Temps it 76c I have no choice, Asus automatically ramps them to 100%.

In your case you would want that trigger point to be a little higher. So say the highest RPM you can set your fans before you start to hear them is 45%. So You set your Low Temperature to say 40c, Your Mid Temperature to 74c and your High Temperature to 75c. Now you set your Low Temperature percent to 44%, Your Mid Temperature Percent to 45% and Your High Temperature to 75%. Now your fans will stay Quiet, even while launching and watching a video in Firefox, assuming your temperature spikes stay at 73c and below, but when hitting it with a more intense load like Cinebench, you will still see your Fan speed Spike up to give you that cooling you need. You can play with this to get what works for you, and if you have a Mobo other than Asus, You might have more options in terms of the Speed you can set above 76c, but even with the Asus Limitations (if you have an Asus Board), this will help your PC not get so Noisy until its needed.

2) This is the more dangerous option, but it will probably work. If your Mobo has a setting for Sense MI Skew, in ASUS mobo's this setting is in the UEFI on the Extreme Tweaker Page, inside the Tweaker's Paradise Sub Menu. If You enable this Setting, and leave the value at the default 272, the Motherboard will now think your Temperature is 5c lower than it actually is, which might be just enough to keep your fans from kicking in so quickly when opening Firefox. This also might allow you to boost higher. But Obviously this comes with its own risks, because now your temperature protections won't kick in until 5c hotter than they were supposed to, and in some cases this could introduce instability.

3) Your Third option is setting your CPUv Manually at 1.3v, and setting your Multiplier Manually starting at 42.5. This will Give you an allcore Overclock of 4225Mhz, and after you validate that your system is stable there, you can keep pushing up your all core Overclock until you reach instability, and then dial it back 25Mhz from that point. You may even use a bit more voltage like @upgraditus, and use 1.35v if you choose, to get a bit higher of an Overclock, but the sweet spot for most Zen 2 owners, seems to be at around 1.3v, give or take 50mV. This will give you MUCH Lower Temps ESPECIALLY while under lightly threaded loads, and you will no longer have that ramp up due to the Voltage spikes, because the Voltage Remains Static, and the only thing that will cause the fans to Spin up, is heavier loads being put on the system, and Firefox and videos playing just don't use that much power.

3b) If you decide to go the Manual Overclock, and say you hit instability around 4300Mhz, and now your disappointed because your chip seemed to go higher at Stock, you still have per CCX overclocking available to you. Most likely One of your CCX's are the reason your All Core is getting held back, you simply Find Which CCX can go higher and clock that one Higher, and now you will have Some Cores closer to what you were seeing on Auto, and then the weaker Cores back at the lower Clocks, which will give you the best of both worlds; stable static Voltage, but still higher clocks for those lightly threaded workloads. 

Anyways, I hope this helps...


----------



## gupsterg

Mumak said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> It was a short vacation, I'm back for quite some time
> I have to admit that I have no idea how "the new method of Temperature Reporting that AMD Introduced" works nor what exactly that odd term means.
> Tools like HWiNFO are reporting temperature read straight from the CPU. What RM does is unknown to the outside world, but I assume it does some averaging of recently sampled temperature values to hide occasional spikes in low/high values. But this is just my assumption...
> 
> Saying that they work with us closely is sadly not true, at least for the past months. I wasn't talking much about our cooperation with AMD, but I'm getting really sick of how they treat us (and other developers) recently. Our cooperation was great ahead of and shortly after Zen1 launch, but after that it ceased from their side. They don't provide us with sufficient information, almost all our questions remain in /dev/null or end up with just empty promises. They gave us NULL information about the idle-gate published on reddit, we asked them how to correctly poll CPU threads in order not to wake them up, how to detect sleeping cores, etc, etc.. NOTHING have we got back! Despite many promises, we didn't even get final Zen2 systems ! Almost any reviewer/"influencer" is supplied with all latest hardware, but we (engineers) are being pissed off. So well, yeah... I'm really disappointed with such attitude and it makes me sick when they say that they are cooperating with us.
> 
> And BTW.. I have code ready to read all (dozens of) the temperature sensors spread across the entire package of the Zen CPU. I implemented this a few months ago. Bit I haven't released it because I thought that providing such details could cause confusion. Well maybe this might be useful....


+rep and thank you Martin for all efforts :thumb: .



Jackalito said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> @*Mumak* , I really appreciate all the effort you've been putting into HWiNFO for years now. I was so gutted about reading this yesterday that I tweeted Robert Hallock about it (I'm not a Reddit man), and this is what I got from him:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't wanna be naive, though. I just hope this turns out to be true. Just tried to do my part here.
> 
> 
> Cheers!


+rep this is the kind of thing we need to do  . I was planning on linking Mumak's post on /r/AMD and tagging Robert to highlight this. I once did such a thing in regard to how AGESA affect Ryzen Timings Checker not be able to accurately pull RAM info.


----------



## oreonutz

Jackalito said:


> @*Mumak* , I really appreciate all the effort you've been putting into HWiNFO for years now. I was so gutted about reading this yesterday that I tweeted Robert Hallock about it (I'm not a Reddit man), and this is what I got from him:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't wanna be naive, though. I just hope this turns out to be true. Just tried to do my part here.
> 
> 
> Cheers!





gupsterg said:


> +rep this is the kind of thing we need to do  . I was planning on linking Mumak's post on /r/AMD and tagging Robert to highlight this. I once did such a thing in regard to how AGESA affect Ryzen Timings Checker not be able to accurately pull RAM info.


Hell yeah @Jackalito! This was amazing! Glad our interactions (hopefully) amounted to something, and hopefully Robert Sticks to his word on this. I hope to be hearing something positive from @Mumak in this regard soon.

So awesome for you to take the time to tweet Robert @Jackalito! +REP


----------



## upgraditus

CaptnJones said:


> So it'd be better if i just oc it it manually? But then i'd be losing the single core speed ?
> This is mine after web browsing for 5min
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Room temp 28°C
> 
> Running Cinebench the temp stops at 78.9° on a Hyper Evo Turbo - 4692 score. Doing handbrake 5min encode and the temp goes all the way to 80°C
> Would the temps be lower if i just oc it to 4.3 all core?


Depends on how high you can manually clock vs your stock boost speed. In my case 4350 fixed is consistently faster than stock "boost" to 4400 by a small amount in single thread and a large amount in multi.


----------



## Jackalito

gupsterg said:


> +rep and thank you Martin for all efforts :thumb: .
> 
> 
> +rep this is the kind of thing we need to do  . I was planning on linking Mumak's post on /r/AMD and tagging Robert to highlight this. I once did such a thing in regard to how AGESA affect Ryzen Timings Checker not be able to accurately pull RAM info.



Thanks, gups! And hell yeah, please share Mumak's post on AMD's reddit if you can; I've never spent too much time there, and I'm an utter noob over there. That way, so many more people could see that, and with any luck put some extra pressure on AMD to stick to their word.




oreonutz said:


> Hell yeah @*Jackalito* ! This was amazing! Glad our interactions (hopefully) amounted to something, and hopefully Robert Sticks to his word on this. I hope to be hearing something positive from @*Mumak* in this regard soon.
> 
> So awesome for you to take the time to tweet Robert @*Jackalito* ! +REP



Thank you, man! Just my 2 cents, I guess


----------



## Mumak

Thanks guys for pushing this !

In the latest Beta (v6.11-3890) I have added reporting 2 new information that might be of interest:
- Automatic Overclocking Offset for AMD Matisse family
- High Temperature Clock Limit for AMD Zen2 family. Note that the value reported in build 3890 will need to be adjusted by adding the Automatic Overclocking Offset to it. This will be resolved in the next build.

That version also supports monitoring of dozens of temperature sensors across the die, but this option is hidden and not activated by default. Note that for Zen1 families this should cover sensors in CPU cores and rest of die, but for Zen2 this seems to cover IOD sensors only (I haven't found a way how to report per-core sensors on Zen2).
Not sure if this would be of interest to you


----------



## Duvar

Guys what will be faster Ryzen 3600 @ 3.4GHz with 3800CL16 RAM (not max tuned, can go 3800CL14) or Ryzen 3600 @ 4.2GHz with 3200CL16-18-18-18-36 (Auto subtimings)?


----------



## Jackalito

Mumak said:


> Thanks guys for pushing this !
> 
> In the latest Beta (v6.11-3890) I have added reporting 2 new information that might be of interest:
> - Automatic Overclocking Offset for AMD Matisse family
> - High Temperature Clock Limit for AMD Zen2 family. Note that the value reported in build 3890 will need to be adjusted by adding the Automatic Overclocking Offset to it. This will be resolved in the next build.
> 
> That version also supports monitoring of dozens of temperature sensors across the die, but this option is hidden and not activated by default. Note that for Zen1 families this should cover sensors in CPU cores and rest of die, but for Zen2 this seems to cover IOD sensors only (I haven't found a way how to report per-core sensors on Zen2).
> Not sure if this would be of interest to you



Thank *YOU*, @Mumak, always!
Looking forward to future builds of HWiNFO


----------



## oreonutz

Mumak said:


> Thanks guys for pushing this !
> 
> In the latest Beta (v6.11-3890) I have added reporting 2 new information that might be of interest:
> - Automatic Overclocking Offset for AMD Matisse family
> - High Temperature Clock Limit for AMD Zen2 family. Note that the value reported in build 3890 will need to be adjusted by adding the Automatic Overclocking Offset to it. This will be resolved in the next build.
> 
> That version also supports monitoring of dozens of temperature sensors across the die, but this option is hidden and not activated by default. Note that for Zen1 families this should cover sensors in CPU cores and rest of die, but for Zen2 this seems to cover IOD sensors only (I haven't found a way how to report per-core sensors on Zen2).
> Not sure if this would be of interest to you


Thank You @Mumak! About to download and play with it now!


----------



## sblantipodi

Do you think that Zen 3 will bring the same performance jump we have seen from ryzen 2xxx to ryzen 3xxx?


----------



## oreonutz

sblantipodi said:


> Do you think that Zen 3 will bring the same performance jump we have seen from ryzen 2xxx to ryzen 3xxx?


Thats an interesting question. I am still unclear if the Upcoming 7nm Refresh is going to be called Zen 3, and if it will have more architectural changes, or if its essentially just going to be a refresh on the 7nm+ Node. 

If there are no big changes and we are essentially just getting the new TSMC node, that alone will probably give us a pretty decent boost in clock speeds, it could be decent but doubt it will be that same kind of Jump.

If this does end up being Zen 3, and their is restructuring to the pipe as well, then we could see a sizable jump again. But I need to look into what exactly we are supposed to be getting this upcoming year.


----------



## sblantipodi

Pretty sad to still see ddr4 on Zen 2 
Really hoped.to see ddr5 on those platforms


----------



## jamexman

sblantipodi said:


> Pretty sad to still see ddr4 on Zen 2
> Really hoped.to see ddr5 on those platforms




Your comment makes no sense... DDR5 won’t be out at the earliest by the end of year. There is no ddr5 out there for anyone.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## AvengedRobix

Run on Timespy.. My Daily use for gaming.. 3900X 4.4 and 2080Ti 2145/7800


----------



## majestynl

AvengedRobix said:


> Run on Timespy.. My Daily use for gaming.. 3900X 4.4 and 2080Ti 2145/7800


You are running a XOC bios on your 2080ti right? And 27c-33c is great. Only 6c difference on load!
Im getting same score with standard bios and a 3800x @ 4.4ghz manual!

Will try a xoc bios for the 2080ti. Need more voltage!


----------



## VPII

majestynl said:


> You are running a XOC bios on your 2080ti right? And 27c-33c is great. Only 6c difference on load!
> 
> Im getting same score with standard bios and a 3800x @ 4.4ghz manual!
> 
> 
> 
> Will try a xoc bios for the 2080ti. Need more voltage!


This is my result with the 3900X at 4.39ghz.

https://www.3dmark.com/spy/8132121

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk


----------



## majestynl

VPII said:


> This is my result with the 3900X at 4.39ghz.
> 
> https://www.3dmark.com/spy/8132121
> 
> Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk


Great score!  But some more details pls. What PCB / vBIOS / Cooling / OC?

and what did you use LN2 or Chiller?


----------



## VPII

majestynl said:


> Great score!  But some more details pls. What PCB / vBIOS / Cooling / OC?
> 
> 
> 
> and what did you use LN2 or Chiller?


XOC bios and AIO cooler. Idle temps 22c and I try to keep it below 40 as from 41c I lose 15mhz core. The card itself is a Palit Rtx 2080 ti Gamingpro OC.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk


----------



## AvengedRobix

majestynl said:


> You are running a XOC bios on your 2080ti right? And 27c-33c is great. Only 6c difference on load!
> Im getting same score with standard bios and a 3800x @ 4.4ghz manual!
> 
> Will try a xoc bios for the 2080ti. Need more voltage!


The image was on my daily setting... This is my best... for now... https://www.3dmark.com/spy/8134737


----------



## AvengedRobix

PS... Using a XOC bios for OCLab... The voltage read on hwmonitor was incorrect.. for 2145Mhz stay at 0.850V but voltage regulator of the hof can't read by other software


----------



## majestynl

AvengedRobix said:


> The image was on my daily setting... This is my best... for now... https://www.3dmark.com/spy/8134737





AvengedRobix said:


> PS... Using a XOC bios for OCLab... The voltage read on hwmonitor was incorrect.. for 2145Mhz stay at 0.850V but voltage regulator of the hof can't read by other software


Really Nice and sick voltages (0.850v for 2145)! Golden  
Can you share me the bios? It isn't available at 2080ti owners thread's first page!


----------



## AvengedRobix

majestynl said:


> Really Nice and sick voltages (0.850v for 2145)! Golden
> Can you share me the bios? It isn't available at 2080ti owners thread's first page!


XOC Bios for OCLab work only on OCLab card or brick other card.... If you want the bios contact OCLab team on FB with a photo and a proof of purchase


----------



## oreonutz

AvengedRobix said:


> XOC Bios for OCLab work only on OCLab card or brick other card.... If you want the bios contact OCLab team on FB with a photo and a proof of purchase


Wow. Bios Gating Are we? LOL! 

Don't mind me, not hating, just couldn't help myself...

Remember, Sharing is Caring


----------



## majestynl

AvengedRobix said:


> XOC Bios for OCLab work only on OCLab card or brick other card.... If you want the bios contact OCLab team on FB with a photo and a proof of purchase


First of all it doesn't brick. Saw many people running it on a ref pcb. And secondly , many many thanks for being so generous! LOL never mind boy! Keep your bios ...!



oreonutz said:


> Wow. Bios Gating Are we? LOL!
> 
> Don't mind me, not hating, just couldn't help myself...
> 
> Remember, Sharing is Caring


LOL! Never mind... dont know what such people searching on OC communities anyways.


----------



## AvengedRobix

oreonutz said:


> Wow. Bios Gating Are we? LOL!
> 
> Don't mind me, not hating, just couldn't help myself...
> 
> Remember, Sharing is Caring


mine is not a public bios.. sorry


----------



## majestynl

AvengedRobix said:


> mine is not a public bios.. sorry


then dont try to shine in public pls!


----------



## AvengedRobix

majestynl said:


> then dont try to shine in public pls!


whats you're problem? write to oclab or to mad Tse if you want you're bios.. that's not my problem... And close the discussion.. is not the tread to speak of this..


----------



## oreonutz

AvengedRobix said:


> whats you're problem? write to oclab or to mad Tse if you want you're bios.. that's not my problem... And close the discussion.. is not the tread to speak of this..


I just find this funny, because this is a community of sharing things. @majestynl in particular takes his time collecting data and shares it with everyone here. We all share Firmware and UEFI's with each other. Whether its public or not, if someone has something that benefits someone else in terms of BIOS' or Firmware, Or settings, or anything, we all share it with each other. If its something we think we would get in trouble posting in the open, then we usually either don't talk about it, or if you think it will benifit someone, especially if they asked for it, then you send them a DM so no one else can see and either explain why you don't feel you can take the risk, or just send it privately. But to Boast about it on here, and then, particularly in this sharing environment say sorry, can't do, you have to own the card, is quite callous, especially considering if the shoes were flipped he would send it to you in a heart beat.

Anyways, thats just my take, I really am not trying to start beef, I just thought it was kind of cold given the type of community we have here. But I guess we can't all be the sharing type. @majestynl I am pretty good at finding things that aren't supposed to be public, give me a little bit I will see if I can dig it up for you.


----------



## oreonutz

@majestynl This isn't his special BIOS, but it is an XOC BIOS For RTX 2080 ti's. This one specifically appears to be for the Asus Strix cards, but from the little research I did it appears to work on all 2080ti's. It basically removes the power limit from what I have read so far. I am providing a direct link to download the BIOS, plus the link to where I found it posted for you.

Direct Download Link: https://www.techpowerup.com/vgabios/208990/208990.rom

Page its On: https://www.techpowerup.com/vgabios/208990/208990

Forum I found it in: https://forums.guru3d.com/threads/xoc-bios-support-for-2080-ti.425618/

Still hunting for you.


----------



## AvengedRobix

oreonutz said:


> AvengedRobix said:
> 
> 
> 
> whats you're problem? write to oclab or to mad Tse if you want you're bios.. that's not my problem... And close the discussion.. is not the tread to speak of this..
> 
> 
> 
> I just find this funny, because this is a community of sharing things. @majestynl in particular takes his time collecting data and shares it with everyone here. We all share Firmware and UEFI's with each other. Whether its public or not, if someone has something that benefits someone else in terms of BIOS' or Firmware, Or settings, or anything, we all share it with each other. If its something we think we would get in trouble posting in the open, then we usually either don't talk about it, or if you think it will benifit someone, especially if they asked for it, then you send them a DM so no one else can see and either explain why you don't feel you can take the risk, or just send it privately. But to Boast about it on here, and then, particularly in this sharing environment say sorry, can't do, you have to own the card, is quite callous, especially considering if the shoes were flipped he would send it to you in a heart beat.
> 
> Anyways, thats just my take, I really am not trying to start beef, I just thought it was kind of cold given the type of community we have here. But I guess we can't all be the sharing type. @majestynl I am pretty good at finding things that aren't supposed to be public, give me a little bit I will see if I can dig it up for you.
Click to expand...

I can't.. you know what Is NDA? i'm a correct Person and respect contract.. i don't click "i agree" Just for fun


----------



## majestynl

oreonutz said:


> I just find this funny, because this is a community of sharing things. @majestynl in particular takes his time collecting data and shares it with everyone here. We all share Firmware and UEFI's with each other. Whether its public or not, if someone has something that benefits someone else in terms of BIOS' or Firmware, Or settings, or anything, we all share it with each other. If its something we think we would get in trouble posting in the open, then we usually either don't talk about it, or if you think it will benifit someone, especially if they asked for it, then you send them a DM so no one else can see and either explain why you don't feel you can take the risk, or just send it privately. But to Boast about it on here, and then, particularly in this sharing environment say sorry, can't do, you have to own the card, is quite callous, especially considering if the shoes were flipped he would send it to you in a heart beat.
> 
> Anyways, thats just my take, I really am not trying to start beef, I just thought it was kind of cold given the type of community we have here. But I guess we can't all be the sharing type. @majestynl I am pretty good at finding things that aren't supposed to be public, give me a little bit I will see if I can dig it up for you.






Spoiler






oreonutz said:


> @majestynl This isn't his special BIOS, but it is an XOC BIOS For RTX 2080 ti's. This one specifically appears to be for the Asus Strix cards, but from the little research I did it appears to work on all 2080ti's. It basically removes the power limit from what I have read so far. I am providing a direct link to download the BIOS, plus the link to where I found it posted for you.
> 
> Direct Download Link: https://www.techpowerup.com/vgabios/208990/208990.rom
> 
> Page its On: https://www.techpowerup.com/vgabios/208990/208990
> 
> Forum I found it in: https://forums.guru3d.com/threads/xoc-bios-support-for-2080-ti.425618/








oreonutz said:


> Still hunting for you.


Thanks mate!  

The ASUS version is also available at https://www.overclock.net/forum/69-nvidia/1706276-official-nvidia-rtx-2080-ti-owner-s-club.html
But the XOC Galax Hof not.. probably link is killed! 
Thanks again!


----------



## oreonutz

AvengedRobix said:


> I can't.. you know what Is NDA? i'm a correct Person and respect contract.. i don't click "i agree" Just for fun


Dude, if you actually signed an NDA for a BIOS, first thats messed up of a company to do, but second, Thats all you had to say... lol. Anyways, none of my business anyways, you seem to be a cool dude, not trying to get on your bad side, just found it a bit distasteful, but if there was an NDA involved everyone understands that, that would have been all you had to say to begin with. Regardless, my bad, I am butting out now...


----------



## oreonutz

majestynl said:


> Thanks mate!
> 
> The ASUS version is also available at https://www.overclock.net/forum/69-nvidia/1706276-official-nvidia-rtx-2080-ti-owner-s-club.html
> But the XOC Galax Hof not.. probably link is killed!
> Thanks again!


No Problem Brother. I appreciate all the help and work you do here. If you can't tell I have become quite addicted to the forums lately, lol. Anyways, real quick, what is your specific card?

EDIT: So its the XOC Galax Hof version you are after??


----------



## oreonutz

@majestynl Still Looking. Do you know what the Watt Limit is supposed to be on it? 

Also people seem to really like the Kingpin BIOS. I haven't found the 2000w one just yet, but I did find the original LN2 Bios for it. It only has a 520w Limit, but still you may like it. You might already have it. So if you do, then my bad. If you want I will focus on just looking for the XOC HOF BIOS.



Spoiler



Kingpin 2080ti 520w Bios
https://www.techpowerup.com/vgabios/210469/210469.rom



Scratch that, found Official Kingpin XOC Bios. NO POWER LIMIT. The website I got it on says it only works on Kingpin cards, but I have read different else where, so obviously do your research before flashing this. But here is the Link!

https://xdevs.com/doc/_PC_HW/EVGA/E200/bios/rtxbiosxoc.zip

Got it here:
https://xdevs.com/guide/2080ti_kpe/#cbios

Password to XOC Bios is: ipromisenottoRMAthiscard


----------



## AvengedRobix

Wrong section guy!


----------



## oreonutz

AvengedRobix said:


> Wrong section guy!


Well crap, I wish I would have known that. I got like 10 More Comin...


----------



## majestynl

@oreonutz lets talk in https://www.overclock.net/forum/69-nvidia/1706276-official-nvidia-rtx-2080-ti-owner-s-club.html


----------



## AlphaC

https://siliconlottery.com/pages/statistics
3700X 4.05GHz 1.237V 100% 
3700X 4.10GHz 1.250V Top 74% 
3700X 4.15GHz 1.262V Top 21%

3800X 4.20GHz 1.275V 100% 
3800X 4.25GHz 1.287V Top 53% 
3800X 4.30GHz 1.300V Top 20%

3900X 4.00GHz 1.200V 100% 
3900X 4.05GHz 1.212V Top 87%
3900X 4.10GHz 1.225V Top 68% 
3900X 4.15GHz 1.237V Top 35% 
3900X 4.20GHz 1.250V Top 6%


----------



## sblantipodi

Can't really understand why still no 3950X infos
Where are those CPUs? Why they aren't released yet?


----------



## majestynl

sblantipodi said:


> Can't really understand why still no 3950X infos
> Where are those CPUs? Why they aren't released yet?


I thought it was September!



AlphaC said:


> https://siliconlottery.com/pages/statistics
> 3700X 4.05GHz 1.237V 100%
> 3700X 4.10GHz 1.250V Top 74%
> 3700X 4.15GHz 1.262V Top 21%
> 
> 3800X 4.20GHz 1.275V 100%
> 3800X 4.25GHz 1.287V Top 53%
> 3800X 4.30GHz 1.300V Top 20%
> 
> 3900X 4.00GHz 1.200V 100%
> 3900X 4.05GHz 1.212V Top 87%
> 3900X 4.10GHz 1.225V Top 68%
> 3900X 4.15GHz 1.237V Top 35%
> 3900X 4.20GHz 1.250V Top 6%


Wel I won the lottery with the 3800x  Running 4.4Ghz @ 1.34v.
Can run 4.5 with 1.41v benchmarking + Real world usage. But no stability test done with that profile yet!


----------



## AlphaC

Siliconlottery tests for AVX2 stability. Can you do x265 at a minimum (not even including crazy things like Prime95 AVX2 as Ryzen doesn't have AVX2 offset)?


----------



## majestynl

AlphaC said:


> Siliconlottery tests for AVX2 stability. Can you do x265 at a minimum (not even including crazy things like Prime95 AVX2 as Ryzen doesn't have AVX2 offset)?


4.4ghz is stable enough for me.. 
- 6+Hr Aida
- Realbench x-hours
- Ycruncher 
- 48hr Full load gaming
- Encoding video formats (Handbrake)
- Several Days of Real-world application use e.g. Adobe-suit sw's
- Normal daily use...

Zero issues!

ps: never use prime anymore! 

Will try above with 4.5Ghz. Dont know if it survives same as the 4.4Ghz profile


----------



## Nizzen

How to get higher boost than 4524mhz on 3900x? Is it hardware lock on Autosettings?


----------



## majestynl

Nizzen said:


> How to get higher boost than 4524mhz on 3900x? Is it hardware lock on Autosettings?


Try, BIOS with latest Agesa!
Or play with PBO settings...


----------



## upgraditus

Nizzen said:


> How to get higher boost than 4524mhz on 3900x? Is it hardware lock on Autosettings?


Seems luck of the draw who can hit rated boost (sprinkled with randomizing factors such as motherboard used and BIOS used and chipset driver used and so on).


----------



## RossiOCUK

Nizzen said:


> How to get higher boost than 4524mhz on 3900x? Is it hardware lock on Autosettings?


Use a BIOS with AGESA 1.0.0.2


----------



## Nizzen

majestynl said:


> Try, BIOS with latest Agesa!
> Or play with PBO settings...


Using latest Asrock x570 Taichi bios with 1003 ABB. Will try to play with PBO.

How do you play with it? 

*I'm Noob on Ryzen 3k


----------



## majestynl

Nizzen said:


> Using latest Asrock x570 Taichi bios with 1003 ABB. Will try to play with PBO.
> 
> How do you play with it?
> 
> *I'm Noob on Ryzen 3k


You can do in bios or maybe easier for you in Ryzen Master.
Creator Mode / Precision Boost Overdrive Tab / Max out above numbers , you can hover and see max values

Save and apply.

In bios there are more values to tweak. So first check if RM works for you or not.


----------



## Nizzen

I found my max with CCX overclocking tool:


----------



## Nighthog

majestynl said:


> 4.4ghz is stable enough for me..
> - 6+Hr Aida
> - Realbench x-hours
> - Ycruncher
> - 48hr Full load gaming
> - Encoding video formats (Handbrake)
> - Several Days of Real-world application use e.g. Adobe-suit sw's
> - Normal daily use...
> 
> Zero issues!
> 
> ps: never use prime anymore!
> 
> Will try above with 4.5Ghz. Dont know if it survives same as the 4.4Ghz profile


I was thinking I had a bad-ok/mediocre 3800X until I did the testing for AVX2 as Silicon Lottery. I have like the worst 3800X possible. (I always had real bad luck in silicon quality, getting the worst bins possible every time)
Using Prime95 I was able identify the bad cores for different kind of loads faster and more accurate than any other software.
I knew there were instabilities running 4400+ for some loads but didn't know how and started using Prime95 again and wanted a comparison result to a larger assortment.

AVX2/AVX I have core 3 on my CPU hitting a hard limit @ 4250Mhz No voltage will help increase it. On the flip side for non-AVX that is one of the fastest cores boosting highest in stock. 
Also core 7 & 8 hit a limit @ 4350-4375 overall and need way more voltage than any other cores to be able to run Prime95 for any meaningful time (non-AVX). All other cores can do 50Mhz+ for same voltage stable much longer without issue.

Would be great if you could do a quick check if you qualify for the best tier they had. 
Because of core 3 I didn't even really qualify for their worst bin unless using [turbo] for [LLC] to get the voltage measured @ socket with DMM.


----------



## Streetdragon

So i think im done with tweaking for now.
3600/1800 cl 14 15 14 14
CCD0 4,300Mhz
CCD1 4,200Mhz
1.27V that drops down to 1.21V under load.
Faster cooler and use less power


----------



## VPII

Okay I think I'm settled now with the speed I get from my Ryzen 9 3900X. It took a bit of tweaking and unfortunately the Cinebench results is lower than where it should be if I compare it with the results I got when I was still running a C7H motherboard. Still I'm pretty happy with the cpu stable at 4.3Ghz using only 1.28vcore. and my memory pretty stable at 3800mhz with 1900IF speed.

The last screenshot was with the processor at 4.34ghz using 1.3125vcore which I still need to continue testing


----------



## abso

What is a safe Voltage for all core OC for everyday use? I own a 3700X and needs about 1.35V to get 4.35GHZ all core. I read somewhere that you should not go above 1.325V for heavy workloads.
CPU runs at about 79°C after a few runs of Cinebench R20 with my NH-D15 Cooler.


----------



## VPII

abso said:


> What is a safe Voltage for all core OC for everyday use? I own a 3700X and needs about 1.35V to get 4.35GHZ all core. I read somewhere that you should not go above 1.325V for heavy workloads.
> CPU runs at about 79°C after a few runs of Cinebench R20 with my NH-D15 Cooler.


I heard the same 1.325vcore, so I try to stay below it which is why I settled on 4.317ghz at 1.2875vcore. I can run 4.39ghz for bench runs but it requires 1.38vcore.


----------



## majestynl

Nighthog said:


> I was thinking I had a bad-ok/mediocre 3800X until I did the testing for AVX2 as Silicon Lottery. I have like the worst 3800X possible. (I always had real bad luck in silicon quality, getting the worst bins possible every time)
> Using Prime95 I was able identify the bad cores for different kind of loads faster and more accurate than any other software.
> I knew there were instabilities running 4400+ for some loads but didn't know how and started using Prime95 again and wanted a comparison result to a larger assortment.
> 
> AVX2/AVX I have core 3 on my CPU hitting a hard limit @ 4250Mhz No voltage will help increase it. On the flip side for non-AVX that is one of the fastest cores boosting highest in stock.
> Also core 7 & 8 hit a limit @ 4350-4375 overall and need way more voltage than any other cores to be able to run Prime95 for any meaningful time (non-AVX). All other cores can do 50Mhz+ for same voltage stable much longer without issue.
> 
> Would be great if you could do a quick check if you qualify for the best tier they had.
> Because of core 3 I didn't even really qualify for their worst bin unless using [turbo] for [LLC] to get the voltage measured @ socket with DMM.


sad to hear you have such bad luck with silicon! Personally i buy too much hardware so its mixed mostly between Mediocre/Good/Very Good. It happened really few times i have bad luck with silicon i even need to think witch one it was 
Anyways. To check difference in cores/ccx/ccd you can use many tools and methods. As said it my post i never use Prime95 anymore. For me its the most unrealistic test out there. Years ago i used it much but i also killed/degraded chips with it. (Not the particularly fault of the sw itself but how i was torturing stuff with it). Just sworn to never use it again.


----------



## neurotix

Yo guys

I should have by the end of next week:

3900X
Asus Crosshair VIII Hero
16GB G.skill Flare X (F4-3200C14D-16GFX) 3200MHz (heard they are Samsung B-Die and can be pushed up to 3600MHz on Ryzen?)
970 Evo 500GB

I also already have sitting here a 6TB WD Blue..

It'll all be going in my rig below- Big Red. Then I'm gonna try and sell my binned Silicon Lottery 4790k, Maximus VI Hero Z87 and G.skill DDR3 2600 10-12-12-31. (probably ebay it..)

I know I'm gonna have to move to Win10 as well but I don't game much anyway, and my box is a hybrid server running Linux, and Windows only gets used for gaming... no biggie

24 cores, 12TB+ storage, two SSDs and SLI 1080tis XD

Anyway I'm a total noob to Ryzen and late to the show, but now seemed like a good time. I have a question or two:

1) Is my board I'm getting any good? I did read complaints about QC and quality slipping on the Crosshair VIII. I had a great experience with my Maximus VI Hero and prior, a Crosshair V + FX-8350 I ran at 5GHz 24/7 around 2012. Should I be concerned?

2) General overclocking tips and advice for Ryzen. Not really overclocking in general but things about secondary voltages specific to Ryzen and so on. Remember, I'm upgrading from a Haswell platform so I'm well acquainted with stuff like "Eventual CPU Input Voltage" (VCCIN- total voltage to cpu, stabilizes high OCs), "CPU System Agent Voltage Offset Mode Sign", "CPU Analog I/O Voltage Offset Mode Sign", "CPU Digital I/O Offset Mode Sign" (All three = IMC voltages that stabilize RAM OCs), etc.

TLR; help an old man out with Ryzen secondary voltages to stabilize high overclocks and RAM speeds.... thanks!


----------



## VPII

majestynl said:


> sad to hear you have such bad luck with silicon! Personally i buy too much hardware so its mixed mostly between Mediocre/Good/Very Good. It happened really few times i have bad luck with silicon i even need to think witch one it was
> Anyways. To check difference in cores/ccx/ccd you can use many tools and methods. As said it my post i never use Prime95 anymore. For me its the most unrealistic test out there. Years ago i used it much but i also killed/degraded chips with it. (Not the particularly fault of the sw itself but how i was torturing stuff with it). Just sworn to never use it again.


 @majestynl thank you, I am so glad to hear what you say about Prime95.... I am with you on that. At present I basically just run IBT with linpack setting memory very high and if it pass then great. My 3900X is pretty happy at 4.317ghz with 1.2875vcore set in bios, LLC Auto and taken CPUz my core voltage stay put. I'm saying cpuz for when I was still using my C7H I measured on the probelt and found that the vcore stated in CPUz is the most accurate of all.


----------



## majestynl

VPII said:


> @majestynl thank you, I am so glad to hear what you say about Prime95.... I am with you on that. At present I basically just run IBT with linpack setting memory very high and if it pass then great. My 3900X is pretty happy at 4.317ghz with 1.2875vcore set in bios, LLC Auto and taken CPUz my core voltage stay put. I'm saying cpuz for when I was still using my C7H I measured on the probelt and found that the vcore stated in CPUz is the most accurate of all.


NP! Nice silicon you have there! Yeap the SVI2 TFN is the most accurate software reading!


----------



## Airmanator

Hi folks,

I recently upgraded from a 6600K @ 4.5 GHz to a 3700x, and I'm not seeing any major performance increases in gaming, if at all. Is there something I should be doing such as disabling SMT? I game @ 1440p w/ a RTX 2060, 32GB of DDR4 RAM at 3200 and I'm on an x570.


----------



## Grin

Because it’s limited by 2060 at 1440p, get a 2080ti and you will see the performance increase. High resolution performance is depending more from video, at 4k it will be no big difference between modern CPUs at all.


----------



## oreonutz

Airmanator said:


> Hi folks,
> 
> I recently upgraded from a 6600K @ 4.5 GHz to a 3700x, and I'm not seeing any major performance increases in gaming, if at all. Is there something I should be doing such as disabling SMT? I game @ 1440p w/ a RTX 2060, 32GB of DDR4 RAM at 3200 and I'm on an x570.


I am not sure what would have made you think you would have seen a performance increase by changing your CPU and not your GPU. Your CPU was not the limiting factor (at least in most titles) when paired with the 2060, you were actually pretty well balanced with that setup, and were at a point where just changing one without changing the other would not give you a performance increase. 

For example, You could have switched to a 9900k and still would have been seeing the EXACT same frame rates when using the RTX 2060. However, if you sold your RTX2060, and got yourself at least a 1080ti, RTX 2080 Super, Radeon VII, or RTX 2080ti, Then with a 3700x (or with a 9900k) you would have noticed the difference. With one of those GPU's I just mentioned, if you installed them into your 6600k build, You would have only noticed a very Mild bump in frame rate in most games even though you had at least 50% or more GPU Power, and that is because now your 6600k would no longer be fast enough to feed your new upgraded GPU with the amount of frames the GPU is requesting to draw. So in that scenario you would have been CPU limited, so at that point had you upgraded to the 3700x you would have better been able to keep up with the amount of frames being requested by the GPU, and then would now noticed the CPU upgrade. 

This is why people advocate for having balanced builds. Your RTX 2060 was a perfect match for the 6600k, because the 6600k was not really capable of delivering a higher frame rate then what the RTX2060 could draw, so it makes them a good Match. Had you gotten an RTX 2070 or higher, you would not have noticed an increase in frame rates because the 6600k could not keep up. However, if you kept same GPU, and instead upgraded the CPU, now you are mismatched the other way, because now you have a processor capable of dishing out more FPS, but a GPU that is not capable of Producing more FPS. I hope this makes sense. Its all about Balance, and making sure the GPU and CPU are evenly matched. Get yourself a used 1080ti for a good price, or an RTX 2080 Super, and now that you have a processor capable of driving a faster GPU, you will actually be able to benefit from having that faster CPU.

EDIT: However one thing you should notice, even without Upgrading your GPU, is having much more consistent frame times, which makes for a much smoother gameplay experience. So even though your Average and Max Frame rate hasn't really gone up, you should notice a pretty significant bump to your 1% and .1% lows, meaning you are keeping your frame rate at a much more steady pace, allowing the experience to be much smoother. This of course depends on the title you are playing, but on any title that adequately utilizes the CPU, you will notice a bump to those lower frame rates.


----------



## sblantipodi

Airmanator said:


> Hi folks,
> 
> I recently upgraded from a 6600K @ 4.5 GHz to a 3700x, and I'm not seeing any major performance increases in gaming, if at all. Is there something I should be doing such as disabling SMT? I game @ 1440p w/ a RTX 2060, 32GB of DDR4 RAM at 3200 and I'm on an x570.


this means that 2060 is the bottleneck on the games you play.


----------



## sblantipodi

guys I want a CPU that can be hard on multi threading because I use it for developing containers and C++ compiling but I would game on it also.

I want an excellent all rounder, a cpu that is capable of good multithreading performance and good gaming performance.

should I wait for the 3950X or the next threadripper?
I would like to wait for the next threadripper, but if it will start from 24cores it could be too weak in game performance due to low cores frequency, what do you think about this?


----------



## oreonutz

sblantipodi said:


> guys I want a CPU that can be hard on multi threading because I use it for developing containers and C++ compiling but I would game on it also.
> 
> I want an excellent all rounder, a cpu that is capable of good multithreading performance and good gaming performance.
> 
> should I wait for the 3950X or the next threadripper?
> I would like to wait for the next threadripper, but if it will start from 24cores it could be too weak in game performance due to low cores frequency, what do you think about this?


Unless you need the extra PCIE Lanes that comes with Threadripper, the upcoming 3950x sounds like its going to be the chip for you. I badly want Threadripper for the IO, but the 3950x looks to be like the perfect all rounder chip that is going to be too hard to pass up. I myself might end up getting both, just because I could use both in my workload, and because I have an addiction...


----------



## Schnitter

Finally managed to snag a 3900X from Newegg. Let's see how well it does on a B450-I strix ITX motherboard...


----------



## Grin

Schnitter said:


> Finally managed to snag a 3900X from Newegg. Let's see how well it does on a B450-I strix ITX motherboard...


Interesting idea to get a Mini and put a Corvette engine under the hood  please keep us posted how it will burn with or without flame


----------



## Schnitter

Grin said:


> Interesting idea to get a Mini and put a Corvette engine under the hood  please keep us posted how it will burn with or without flame


Why would it burn down? The VRM's on that board should be fine.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...TJFqqVxdCR9daIVNyMatydkpFA/edit#gid=639584818

According to that table, I could even overclock 3900X on that ITX board.

EDIT: even this guy managed fine with a B350


----------



## murrayd222

Schnitter said:


> Finally managed to snag a 3900X from Newegg. Let's see how well it does on a B450-I strix ITX motherboard...


I’m running a 3900x on a Strix X470-I, on the BIOS that was release 07/18. It’s for my Plex/Blue Iris/Minecraft Server (for my son), so all I did was turn on PBO. It boosts 3 to 4 cores to 4.6 and does 4.0 all cores at 100% with a vcore offset of -0.05. With a Noctua U12A on it, idles in upper 30s and Max is low 80s in a Fractal Node 304. It’s overkill, but I don’t plan on having to touch the server again for several years. Had to use an older CPU to update the BIOS though before I could install the 3900x.


----------



## gupsterg

Mumak said:


> Thanks guys for pushing this !
> 
> In the latest Beta (v6.11-3890) I have added reporting 2 new information that might be of interest:
> - Automatic Overclocking Offset for AMD Matisse family
> - High Temperature Clock Limit for AMD Zen2 family. Note that the value reported in build 3890 will need to be adjusted by adding the Automatic Overclocking Offset to it. This will be resolved in the next build.
> 
> That version also supports monitoring of dozens of temperature sensors across the die, but this option is hidden and not activated by default. Note that for Zen1 families this should cover sensors in CPU cores and rest of die, but for Zen2 this seems to cover IOD sensors only (I haven't found a way how to report per-core sensors on Zen2).
> Not sure if this would be of interest to you


+rep Martin :thumb: .

I have been using this and would like to activate monitoring of the multiple die temp sensors, how do I do that? thanks :thumb: .


----------



## Mumak

gupsterg said:


> +rep Martin :thumb: .
> 
> I have been using this and would like to activate monitoring of the multiple die temp sensors, how do I do that? thanks :thumb: .


You got a PM


----------



## gupsterg

Mumak said:


> You got a PM


Cheers :thumb: .

R5 3600 Batch BF 1922SUT
C7HWIFI, UEFI 2701, AGESA ComboPi-AM4 1.0.0.3ABB
W10P x64 all updates, AMD Chipset driver package v1.8.19.0915, AMD Ryzen Balanced power plan

All defaults.

Previous beta



Spoiler





















Current beta



Spoiler




























:h34r-smi monitoring is working  , will PM once done some more tests  .


----------



## Mumak

gupsterg said:


> Cheers :thumb: .
> 
> R5 3600 Batch BF 1922SUT
> C7HWIFI, UEFI 2701, AGESA ComboPi-AM4 1.0.0.3ABB
> W10P x64 all updates, AMD Chipset driver package v1.8.19.0915, AMD Ryzen Balanced power plan
> 
> All defaults.
> 
> Previous beta
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 290744
> 
> View attachment 290746
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Current beta
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 290748
> 
> View attachment 290750
> 
> View attachment 290752
> 
> 
> 
> 
> :h34r-smi monitoring is working  , will PM once done some more tests  .


Thanks, looks OK to me  I hope AMD will like it too


----------



## gupsterg

Mumak said:


> Thanks, looks OK to me  I hope AMD will like it too


Working well with Threadripper as well  ….

It's like Christmas over here LOOL!...

*** edit ***

Sent a donation, thank you for all your efforts & support Martin :thumb: .


----------



## Mumak

gupsterg said:


> Working well with Threadripper as well  ….
> 
> It's like Christmas over here LOOL!...
> 
> *** edit ***
> 
> Sent a donation, thank you for all your efforts & support Martin :thumb: .


Thanks!

BTW, hopefully some good news for those with ASUS x470 boards and new ComboPI BIOSes having issues with WMI monitoring (fan stops, etc.). ASUS is working on this and currently testing a fix in BIOS...


----------



## oreonutz

Mumak said:


> You got a PM


I don't suppose I could get one of those PM's as well? LOL!


----------



## oreonutz

Mumak said:


> Thanks!
> 
> BTW, hopefully some good news for those with ASUS x470 boards and new ComboPI BIOSes having issues with WMI monitoring (fan stops, etc.). ASUS is working on this and currently testing a fix in BIOS...


That is awesome to hear!


----------



## oreonutz

gupsterg said:


> Working well with Threadripper as well  ….
> 
> It's like Christmas over here LOOL!...
> 
> *** edit ***
> 
> Sent a donation, thank you for all your efforts & support Martin :thumb: .


I dropped you one too Martin! You deserve it brother!


----------



## Mumak

oreonutz said:


> I dropped you one too Martin! You deserve it brother!


Thanks !
Regarding monitoring of those additional temperatures, the code is not quite ready yet and needs some testing..


----------



## oreonutz

Mumak said:


> Thanks !
> Regarding monitoring of those additional temperatures, the code is not quite ready yet and needs some testing..


No Problem brother, I understand. If you want another tester, let me know, always happy to help!


----------



## mongoled

@*Mumak* 

Any idea why the 'Histogram' in Ryzen Master is not showing similar max boost clocks as to what your software shows us ?

Thanks


----------



## Mumak

mongoled said:


> @*Mumak*
> 
> Any idea why the 'Histogram' in Ryzen Master is not showing similar max boost clocks as to what your software shows us ?
> 
> Thanks


This is among the things we're currently working on with AMD.
I believe the reason for this is that RM does certain averaging of values read, while HWiNFO reports instant values. Similar for temperature and voltage.


----------



## mongoled

Mumak said:


> This is among the things we're currently working on with AMD.
> I believe the reason for this is that RM does certain averaging of values read, while HWiNFO reports instant values. Similar for temperature and voltage.


Thanks ever so much for your fast response!

Will continue testing then


----------



## Jackalito

Mumak said:


> This is among the things we're currently working on with AMD.
> I believe the reason for this is that RM does certain averaging of values read, while HWiNFO reports instant values. Similar for temperature and voltage.



I'll take that as people at AMD are finally working with you, Martin! +Rep for you and will donate as soon as I can! Keep up the awesome work, mate! :thumb:


----------



## Mumak

Jackalito said:


> I'll take that as people at AMD are finally working with you, Martin! +Rep for you and will donate as soon as I can! Keep up the awesome work, mate! :thumb:


It's too early to say that they are "working with". Something has been started (we discussed many things with important folks there), but nothing concrete done on their side yet. We'll see how that evolves...


----------



## Jackalito

Mumak said:


> It's too early to say that they are "working with". Something has been started (we discussed many things with important folks there), but nothing concrete done on their side yet. We'll see how that evolves...


Fingers crossed, then


----------



## sblantipodi

september is arrived, where is the 3950X?


----------



## Delta9k

sblantipodi said:


> september is arrived, where is the 3950X?


I'd guess that the earliest we may hear something is @ September 7. 
I am not all that versed in the calendar schemes but, as I recall September used to be the 7th month - it was changed after the death of Julius Caesar. The Romans added in some months in his honor, July/August. So, AMD could still play on that 7/7 theme or, since the 3950X is Ryzen 9 and 7nm - September 7 (9/7) also could play as well. 

My crystal ball is usually foggy - so this is just a WAG on my part


----------



## Synoxia

@theStilt Do the lower bins of ryzen 3k such as 3700x and lower have the 1st CCX being better than the second? Asking this because i want to get the maximum possible 1% low on a 4core processor bound game and i don't know if i shoul assign it to core 0-3 or 4-7. Thanks for answer


----------



## Grin

sblantipodi said:


> september is arrived, where is the 3950X?


My guess is on or after 10th together with the updated Agesa


----------



## sblantipodi

very important video for Ryzen 3 users.


----------



## TK421

Anyone gotten their 3900x yet? Been waiting for almost a month, ordered on August 2 from Bhphoto.


----------



## @purple

TK421 said:


> Anyone gotten their 3900x yet? Been waiting for almost a month, ordered on August 2 from Bhphoto.



I really wanted 3900x but the price on Amazon.de was and still is 760€ (crazy right?) so I had to choose a different one and got 3700x.


----------



## sblantipodi

@purple said:


> I really wanted 3900x but the price on Amazon.de was and still is 760€ (crazy right?) so I had to choose a different one and got 3700x.


760€ for a 3900X is stupid.
that price is ok for a 3950X not for a 3900X


----------



## @purple

sblantipodi said:


> 760€ for a 3900X is stupid.
> that price is ok for a 3950X not for a 3900X


Amazon doesn't have any in stock, so some private sellers are selling it for that crazy amount. No thanks, they can have it.


----------



## neurotix

*~whee*

Needs more testing, especially the memory.

The Cinebench and CPU-Z tests were done before this current RAM OC.

Using Shamino's Beta bios 0017 from ROG forums with per-CCX overclocking, 4400/4400/4200/4200 locked @ 1.36v

Really excited about this memory as well- it's G.skill Flare X (Samsung B-Die 20nm) advertised as "Ryzen Compatible", I'm guessing from around the Ryzen+ launch.

3200MHz CAS 14 and was $120 but is RGB less. lol I'm fine with that if I paid $120 for memory I'm now running at 3800MHz cas 16 with 1900 fclk


----------



## sblantipodi

Guys what about your system stability?
https://youtu.be/XdxyTWSeRx4

Di you have those problems? 
Going to buy my first AMD system since a long time and I'm pretty worried about those stability issues.

Is your system ok or not?


----------



## Synoxia

@The Stilt I have a question. If FIT says that max low current voltage for long term stability is 1.475, why without an offset voltage my cpu still boosts with 1.5v? Is this still safe? 3700x bios 2801 ABBA.


----------



## The Stilt

Synoxia said:


> @*the* Stilt Do the lower bins of ryzen 3k such as 3700x and lower have the 1st CCX being better than the second? Asking this because i want to get the maximum possible 1% low on a 4core processor bound game and i don't know if i shoul assign it to core 0-3 or 4-7. Thanks for answer


Everything besides the 3900X and 3950X are monolithic parts (single CCD).
The core to core or CCX to CCX variation exists on all parts, its matter of luck. Technically any combination is possible.



Synoxia said:


> @*The Stilt* I have a question. If FIT says that max low current voltage for long term stability is 1.475, why without an offset voltage my cpu still boosts with 1.5v? Is this still safe? 3700x bios 2801 ABBA.


FIT itself doesn't state any specific voltage limit.
There is a SKU specific ceiling value and the current operation parameters are compared against it.
You can see the voltage limitation it results in, in two ways: Increasing the PBO scalar will increase the FIT ceiling >> allows higher voltage, or adding a voltage offset >> at some point the VID request on which the offset is added to starts falling.
In order to hit the actual voltage limit, you obviously need to make sure that none of the other limiters are met first (PPT, TDC, EDC and thermal).

The figures I quoted were based on the average values I saw on my test samples, at stock.
The actual limits will vary depending on the SKU and the specimen (silicon characteristics), as stated before.

The new(er) SMU versions have implemented a voltage limit of 1.5000V, which is independent of the FIT, thou.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Any guides to OC 3700X (ALL Core OC) using ASUS MB?


----------



## Synoxia

The Stilt said:


> Everything besides the 3900X and 3950X are monolithic parts (single CCD).
> The core to core or CCX to CCX variation exists on all parts, its matter of luck. Technically any combination is possible.
> 
> 
> 
> FIT itself doesn't state any specific voltage limit.
> There is a SKU specific ceiling value and the current operation parameters are compared against it.
> You can see the voltage limitation it results in, in two ways: Increasing the PBO scalar will increase the FIT ceiling >> allows higher voltage, or adding a voltage offset >> at some point the VID request on which the offset is added to starts falling.
> In order to hit the actual voltage limit, you obviously need to make sure that none of the other limiters are met first (PPT, TDC, EDC and thermal).
> 
> The figures I quoted were based on the average values I saw on my test samples, at stock.
> The actual limits will vary depending on the SKU and the specimen (silicon characteristics), as stated before.
> 
> The new(er) SMU versions have implemented a voltage limit of 1.5000V, which is independent of the FIT, thou.


Well i've also enabled PBO 355 255 255 so the CPU obviously has no limit. Is 1.50v (low current, decided automatically by cpus) still safe for these 7nm cpu? What if i add a small BCLK on top of it?


----------



## dlbsyst

sblantipodi said:


> Guys what about your system stability?
> https://youtu.be/XdxyTWSeRx4
> 
> Di you have those problems?
> Going to buy my first AMD system since a long time and I'm pretty worried about those stability issues.
> 
> Is your system ok or not?


My system is totally stable. I'm running my 3900x on a Crosshair VIII Hero WiFi with 32GB Flair-X RAM running at 3600Mhz with tight timings and GDM disabled. I'm a big fan of Jay and his channel but he is off his game here. Aparantly he is running an early production board and changes were made to the final production boards. His comments are both unfair to MSI and especially AMD.


----------



## Bart

Jay is also a bit dumb, that's a factor.  He's done stupid things like this before. There's a reason why his videos should be viewed as entertainment only. He tends to miss lots of small things, especially when things aren't working well for him.


----------



## Delta9k

I have a 3800X & 3900X X570 Aorus Master and Crosshair VII hero - have had none of the issues that tech tuber has had. I am boosting as expected, voltages and temps are fine and have no worries when it comes to tweaking items in the bios. Both CPU's reaching 1900 on the fabric allowing for solid 3800 MTs at 1:1:1. Honestly, that tuber lost what little remaining cred he had with me personally after that tantrum. No real attention to troubleshooting or diagnostics other than pointing out items to favor his position (IMHO), and ultimately tarnishing others opinions and spreading fear biased by his personal frustration.


----------



## dlbsyst

Delta9k said:


> I have a 3800X & 3900X X570 Aorus Master and Crosshair VII hero - have had none of the issues that tech tuber has had. I am boosting as expected, voltages and temps are fine and have no worries when it comes to tweaking items in the bios. Both CPU's reaching 1900 on the fabric allowing for solid 3800 MTs at 1:1:1. Honestly, that tuber lost what little remaining cred he had with me personally after that tantrum. No real attention to troubleshooting or diagnostics other than pointing out items to favor his position (IMHO), and ultimately tarnishing others opinions and spreading fear biased by his personal frustration.


I agree. While watching that video it kind of felt like he was doing damage control for Intel. I hope I'm wrong because I won't watch his videos if that's the case. I will be watching his upcoming videos with one finger on the unsubscribe button.


----------



## Catscratch

https://community.amd.com/community...ios-updates-for-boost-and-idle-plus-a-new-sdk

"*Peak Core(s) Voltage (PCV):* Reports the Voltage Identification (VID) requested by the *CPU package* of the motherboard voltage regulators. This voltage is set to service the needs of the cores under active load but *isn't necessarily the final voltage experienced by all of the CPU cores.*"

So there's actually no way to know what voltage the cores actually use ?

And with ABBA, i no longer see 1.4v spikes. However, i no longer see voltage drops below 1.09 either. With AB, i would see ~0.3v. Another weird thing is hwinfo shows 3600 for all cores as current but ryzen master shows 200 300 400 500, all over the place.


----------



## MishelLngelo

ZealotKi11er said:


> Any guides to OC 3700X (ALL Core OC) using ASUS MB?


There's nothing special with 3700x when OC is considered, Set multiplier and appropriate voltage which doesn't go over 1.425 + LLC as needed. Unless you can make it go to 4.4GHz, better don't bother with OC if you value your single core performance. With newest BIOS and AGESA 1003ABBA, PBO boost should give you close to 4.4GHz on one or two busiest cores anyway. OC margin is very small and if you were for instance to OC to 4.3GHz to be full stable, your single core performance would be lower than on auto(PBO). 
Right now, my PBO makes one or two cores go to 4.391GHz with other cores at or above 4.25GHz. that's discernible only in benchmarks.


----------



## mcbaes72

dlbsyst said:


> My system is totally stable./forum/images/smilies/smile.gif I'm running my 3900x on a Crosshair VIII Hero WiFi with 32GB Flair-X RAM running at 3600Mhz with tight timings and GDM disabled. I'm a big fan of Jay and his channel but he is off his game here. Aparantly he is running an early production board and changes were made to the final production boards. His comments are both unfair to MSI and especially AMD.


Agreed! I saw his follow up video admitting his error. My impression: he was half apologizing for mistake and half upset towards angry posts from first video.


----------



## OCmember

So now that we know most Matassie chips OC the same, what's with the different tiers besides their thermal power 65w VS 95w? I'm wondering if the 95w chips have a better IF that OCs higher.


----------



## Dibiase

TK421 said:


> Anyone gotten their 3900x yet? Been waiting for almost a month, ordered on August 2 from Bhphoto.


Got in early and received mine on July 10th for $499. So glad I stayed up and ordered on launch night.


----------



## d0mini

OCmember said:


> So now that we know most Matassie chips OC the same, what's with the different tiers besides their thermal power 65w VS 95w? I'm wondering if the 95w chips have a better IF that OCs higher.


It comes down to their default boost behaviour/limits and as you say, their thermal power limits. E.g., a 3700x will boost to a slightly lower max clock at stock (literally 100mhz difference), and on average won't boost as high or for as long as a 3800x (again, probably a 100 mhz difference on average, or less than that).

If you raise the power limits and manually overclock them, you'd get very similar results between the two. Using PBO might also reduce the difference between them substantially, though I haven't tried messing with it much.


----------



## Reikoji

I'm happy with my 3900x overall, but I think AMD are still playing the stock-operation game WAY too safe. Particularly after effectively removing all PBO limits and letting the processor function to its hard-limited voltage based on your own cooling capacity. On my board, that hard limit is 1.4v, and 1.45v after enabling a performance enhancer in bios for general heavy loads, and I have the cooling capacity to never throttle with all limits gone at those voltages On general use loads. For normal people 'general use' loads, aka non-avx, they could be running these processors faster for these voltages being used

At 1.4v, they could easily be running CCD0 up to 4.4ghz and CCD1 up to 4.25ghz, and that is still playing it safe because I can realbench for hours at 25-50hz higher than that on both, yet they run all at a mere 4.15ghz.
At 1.45v, they could easily be running CCD0 up to 4.5ghz and CCD1 up to 4.325 ghz, and that too is still playing it safe because I Realbench 4.525 in ccd0 and 4.350 in ccd1 for hours. Yet, they only go up to 4.225ghz on all. Thats missing 275 whole MHZ from the 1st 6 cores. With the proper cooling there shouldn't be a single 3900x that cant do up to that much.

This obviously will be temperature based, and whether or not the load is avx or not, and based on everyone's own situation of ambient temperatures and cooling system setup, but that was the whole idea behind Precision boost 2 wasn't it? To operate your processor at speeds and voltages within safe thermal limits and stability. The problem with their algorithms is they are focusing on something like and excessive 200% guaranteed stability at the sacrifice of the performance that could be gotten. They're playing it too safe. The current algorithm doesn't even care that CCD0 can run much faster and seems limited by what CCD1 can do.

I also feel they should just abandon the whole single core boost idea. In my testing, an entire CCX at the voltage they are using can do 4.6ghz in the loads that would hit 4.6ghz on one core in a 3-thread load. One of these tests is Cenebench R20. By CCX overclocking, setting the AMD single core voltage of 1.4625 (minimum), and running a 3-thread run, all 3 cores in CCD0/CCX0 will complete the test back to back and not exceed 50c. From this, I would think AMD would just go for a 3-core boost. After 4 cores load, they could easily have a 6-core boost of 4.5ghz. Single core boost is also way too interruptable with how they do it, which is why this boost will about never be seen in any modern game. But they are seriously downplaying these things and it irritates me. Out of the box, most people could be getting even better performance out of these, especially those that go beyond the box cooler. Manual overclocking is always the only way to get the performance we really should be getting out of these.

This may or may not be a bit different with 8-core processors, but I would love to also test this out with the 3950x. I'm pretty sure this would be reproducible, with 100mhz more for a 4700mhz 4-core boost and a 4600mhz 8 core boost.

I think Intel may or may not have realized that focusing on single core boosting is balls to with this 9900KS coming out (some day). They left the single core boost at 5ghz while also making the all-core boost 5ghz. Because they didn't bin cores silly like 3900x CCD1, they can do that. If AMD failed to add CCX overclocking, none of this would ever have been known and quite frankly this processor would be hot garbage because we would never be able to all-core OC CCD0 to the speed it could reach.

I'd just like some options to make auto-operation go as far as it could really go. Maybe they can make an option AGESA for a bios that can push more mhz where it can, so they dont have to outright change how they do it across the board, but at least have the option there. One of the things AMD likes to claim is that they are "Maximizing performance out of the box", but with how these perform out of the box, they are hardly maximizing performance. I would like to convey all of this to AMD at the hope that they would make some changes so that people REALLY dont have to resort to manual overclocking for the best safe, but not kindergarten safe, performance from their processors. That was my hope when they first announced precision boost and xfr, but it still has yet to be realized.

They will certainly last forever and a day with their current operation, but I doubt any longevity will be sacrificed if they go further.


----------



## neurotix

Great post Reikoji-san れいこじさん (yeah, I'm learning the language.. )

I agree 100%- individual staggered ratio CCX VID overclocking is the way to go. Even with the new bios on our boards, I get consistently higher performance at lower clocks and voltage than leaving everything on auto. Close to 7800 Multi in R20 and 540+ single thread. Stock with Auto voltage and even with PBO and +100MHz its only 7250 Multi and ~515 single, while running way hotter due to the higher volts.

I've explained it before, but not sure if you ever saw, I theorize this is because while 4600+ may be reported on core 0 and 4500+ on the others, no monitoring software can accurately report how often the chip changes frequency under load, and without something like a oscilloscope to analyze the frequency changes under default behavior on every core and record every change, its impossible to know. So even if it appears HWINFO64 is showing CCD0/CCX0 hitting or maintaining 4625MHz, HWINFO64 only updates what, twice a second?

4.6GHz = 4,600,000,000Hz (four billion six-hundred million Hertz). Many overclockers, and possibly a lot of OCN members (or LinusTechTips viewers) probably don't realize the simplest way to conceptualize 1 Hz = a light blinking on then off once per second. It is actually a measurement of time, to an extent, with frequency in Hz in an integrated circuit being the amount of times a transistor switches on or off in a second. So the huge number of transistors on the 3900x, at least in the 12 processor cores, are potentially turning on and off over 4 billion times in a single second.

That is important to know with Ryzen 3000- AMD themselves stated that initially, no monitoring software could accurately show the correct frequencies the chip was running at, except CPU-Z (which only shows Core 0), 
because Ryzen 3000 changes frequency dynamically 100 times more often than any x86 processor before it.

Thus, the processor cores could be changing clock speed, even under load, millions of times a second (in all likelihood, downclocking far below 4625MHz even if HWINFO64 says otherwise- can HWINFO64 show millions or potentially even billions of frequency changes per second, as illustrated with my explanation of Hertz and what 4.6GHz actually means? No! )

Why would it be downclocking all the time? If the chip were on auto voltage with the stock 1.5v VID and feeding that to core 0 and maintaining 4625MHz or even 4500MHz on CCD0 and 4100+ on CCD1 constantly, without some kind of clocking down (to around 3300MHz) temporarily possibly a pretty extreme amount of times a second, the heat density would surpass 100C on most people's ambient cooling nearly instantly and the chip would probably catch on fire. Yet in high performance power plan you will see CCD0 at 4400+ with CCD0, CCX0 above 4500, and CCD1 around 4300 but dropping down to 4000 occasionally. (If this were actually accurate I'd get higher scores in Cinebench than my manual CCX OC amirite? Yet, the opposite is true...)

This invisible downclocking would explain the huge performance disparity between an Auto PBO overclock aiming to boost to 4625MHz, and a manual CCX ratio OC, because it's really the only logical explanation. Or maybe potentially, with the AMD encrypted PSP hypervisor in the SoC, or even just the new microcode to fix the boost issue, it could even simply be reporting to the OS that it's hitting 4600+ when in actuality it may be the same as before (4500 max boost or less). The PSP (which is similar to Intel Management Engine) being another chip inside your chip... it could be easily made to spoof clock speed to avoid a huge (essentially overhyped and made up by YouTube personalities) PR disaster for AMDs new chips. That one is much more of a longshot, but who knows.

It is unlikely to be the case that the clock speeds are being spoofed, I was just playing Devil's Advocate for the sake of paranoia, lol. There's no evidence and no way to prove it. 

I am DEFINITELY hugely temp limited at just 4400 CCD0/4200 CCD1 and generally, trying for anything more with a manual OC (especially past 4200 CCD1 at all), I pretty much instantly freeze in Cinebench R20 as soon as my cores hit full load. I don't increase the VID much either. My cooling is the problem. And since CCX OCs literally destroy auto + boost in performance, it makes no sense at all that my system boosting to 4500+/4300 would not cause the same issue for me- too much heat- if it were actually the case or the clocks were sustained for as long as it seems.

However, the only real tangible reason my single thread performance is LESS, 30 points so, with auto boosting on the first CCX claiming well above 4550MHz, compared to a manual overclock of 4400MHz across CCD0, seems to be explained well by my theory that auto boost is probably clocking the entire chip down even when HWINFO64 reports otherwise. It is not a maintained 4625MHz (which you CAN clearly see as it will never maintain it very long) and the clocks will dynamically adjust to compensate for heat, and yeah I get that this is how boost works, but the disparity in performance makes me think that the cores are only actually hitting those speeds for millionths or billionths of a second, and tweaked to a preference of always showing only the highest frequency achieved during the timeframe, even if in reality they are more often than not, NOT at the clock speed claimed.

Even with manual CCX OC on the latest BIOS versions, I still get the improved thread handling, which is much better at running single threaded workloads on CCD0, CCX0 always, and boosting only that Core Complex. So why is my single thread 30 pts higher at 4400MHz manual vs Auto "4625MHz"? (CCX OCs disable some of the power saving features. This is pretty much why. But it demonstrates Reikoji's point well.)

Btw, I've noticed that with a manual CCX OC in Win10, HWINFO64 shows the clocks to be static but often shows lower voltage than my 1.360 VID- possibly because of LLC (1.351v) and with lower VID I see much lower temps than auto, under load and even at idle. Idle is 35C~37C in Win10 1903 at the desktop, at 22C ambient, with spikes to 44C or so every 10 seconds (only started happening since I got to 1900MHz fclk with my RAM). Generally below 40C though idle with the monitors asleep, or doing basic desktop tasks, web browsing, etc. Adding a G.skill RAM cooler I had laying around and never used, and a SP140 behind my rear panel ziptied in place to some cables, blowing directly on the socket and VRMs, helped a lot.

Where it gets interesting is under Linux, as with my manual OC and lowered VID, my chip idles as low as 27C, and only goes as high as 33C, it is most often idling under 30C and Windows never does. This is despite it claiming it is at 4400MHz, and power states/ACPI are supported in my distro as it has the Ryzen 3000 firmware modules in the kernel. I cannot see voltage in Linux though, just clock speeds and power states, because lm-sensors doesn't support Ryzen 3000 (or possibly our motherboard) yet. I can't really see if load temps are different either as I simply don't use anything in Linux that would require 100% CPU, and just use it for office tasks, video, browsing etc. And as a server using Samba shares for video/anime, it doesn't reencode anything like Plex. So LAN speed and I/O are the only factors, and it doesn't use much CPU.

Anyway the temp thing makes me wonder if idle voltages are being reported correctly at all, either, and vcore is much lower than reported- or if it idles much cooler compared to stock (even with manually setting vcore) because the clocks on all cores aren't constantly bouncing around between 3300MHz~4500MHz seemingly at random (Even with Ryzen Balanced Power Plan) which causes more switching, thus generating more heat, from more of the chip switching on and off rapidly and quickly.

Do you notice lower temps and especially idle temps with manual CCX OC versus Auto + Boost as well, Reikoji?

Also you might want to fix the second paragraph as you said CCD0 when you appear to have meant to say CCD1 (weaker chiplet), twice in that paragraph. (Speed mentioned was around 4300MHz and after you mentioned CCD0 being 4500+, so I assumed you meant CCD1- but you might want to correct it for clarity)

Finally, I'm thrilled with my purchase. Maybe I'm just a dumb old man, but I really think this is a fantastic platform to OC on. I hear all these complaints nowadays that 'overclocking is dead because of boost', 'none of the chips now have any headroom', 'they all overclock identically', 'theres nothing right now to be excited about' and so on. 

I think thats just straight false with Ryzen 3000, as it really rewards memory ocing, learning the platform (so many people can't even find half the settings Ryzen DRAM Calculator spits out under advanced, in AMD CBS...glad I took the time!), and there are numerous ways to approach overclocking it. If you just set your DOCP RAM profile (XMP), set 1.3v vcore, maybe turn PBO on, let it auto boost and call it done (Like JayzTwoCents did!) then sure its boring!

But my manually tweaked memory OC and manual CCX OC is going to trash your Cinebench scores... put the time and effort in!

People have been saying OCing is dead since Sandy Bridge released and was doing 5GHz on air on like 60% of chips, some people were even doing 5.2... they basically said its too easy.

Usually the ones that believed that 'memory oc beyond DDR3 1600MHz doesn't matter' and didn't take the time to tweak their ram or push it higher. They also said 'cache doesnt matter' while others were going through hundreds of bsods OCing Ring Bus and PLL. 

Its only dead if you can't find something else to tweak, and improve by even the tiniest amount... Ive had my kit for a over a month and still am not anywhere near done!


----------



## CeltPC

*Vendors Price Gouging the 3900X*

Good gosh they are ripping people off with prices up to $800.00 now. They should be ashamed of themselves, but really, who would be willing to buy at these inflated prices? Thank goodness I at least got mine at normal retail.


----------



## neurotix

CeltPC said:


> Good gosh they are ripping people off with prices up to $800.00 now. They should be ashamed of themselves, but really, who would be willing to buy at these inflated prices? Thank goodness I at least got mine at normal retail.


Isn't $800USD basically what Canadians and Australians pay for a $499 product normally? Pretty messed. And that's just international economics. (Never seen an Aussie on here who was happy about paying for PC parts.)

This is scalping, and its been going on for years now in the tech field, and is definitely highly immoral and unethical, and certainly should be illegal, yet somehow is not.

The same could be said for many, many things lately in this country and the world in general lately. What else is new, lol?

(Unfortunately, already likely obscenely wealthy capitalists or investors bought up all the stock, especially during those 1~2 weeks the tech tariffs were rolled back, knowing full well it was in high demand and AMD can't get very many into the country, because Japan and Korea no longer have a trade agreement anymore, breaking the supply chain for Ryzen 3000. I also got all my stuff at MSRP and the m.2 was $79 on sale. Check newegg, some sellers want $1100 for the 3900x alone, which is about what I paid for chip, board, memory and ssd.)


----------



## neurotix

Sorry for double (or more like triple posting):

https://www.anandtech.com/show/1487...ing-perception-with-amds-frequency-metrics-/7

Maybe Reikoji and others here had read that. I actually had not and only found a link to it after the last post I made, that Imouto linked in the news thread about the issue, talking about der8auers survey. Just finished the whole article. (I used to check Anandtech daily and read the full articles about every new major hardware release, but stopped some time ago...)

The section titled "How Quick Can Turbo Occur" on that page basically confirms my 'theory' in that previous long post on why manual CCX OCs greatly outperform Auto Boost clocks, and the explanation about I gave about frequency changes was basically correct except for the finer details: Dr. Cutress explains that the clocks change every 1~2ms, which is 1000-2000 times a second. (Far less often than the 'millions' I claimed, but I was on the right track.) Unless you have monitoring software that can poll at that level and a 2k Hz refresh rate monitor...  lol

He even states outright I was also correct in my suspicions; that "the core polled will return to the monitoring software what it feels (?) is the highest clock over that time period" (not verbatim but he writes something like that), verifying what I suspected about the 4600MHz+ under Auto voltage + Boost basically being the chip lying. (It will probably just report the highest frequency achieved and throw out anything less, even if over a 500ms/0.5 second duration that HWINFO reports in, frequencies was jumping around like mad and under 4200 or something for most of that time. This explains the huge single thread performance disparity between "4625MHz" auto and my manual 4400 CCD0 OC. And btw, I did try 'Ryzen Master' and "overclocked" my chip to 4500 CCD0/4300 CCD1 and the Cinebench R20 single and multithread scores were basically the same as Auto + Boost through the bios, yet the Ryzen Master software reported clocks to be at what I set them as the entire time. Ludicrious...)

So there you go. Or perhaps more accurately, there I go, since I have my explanation for why performance is so much higher under manual CCX OC at 225MHz lower frequency. And I already knew that under full load, using manual CCX OC prevents the chip from lowering frequencies at all. (I am still confused about idle temperatures being so much lower with a manual CCX OC though, under both operating systems; it seems as if just the VID being lowered from 1.5v to my 1.36v wouldn't decrease it so much, especially when the chip is always locked at 4400/4200, and being at higher frequencies always generated more heat even under no load in the past.)

Since I was on Shaminos beta bios until recently I had been manually CCX overclocking pretty much the whole time I've had the system, and enjoying vastly higher performance, while most others seemed to be concerned about the 4625MHz issue. (And a lot of them complaining and hyping the issue in the news thread didn't even own a Ryzen 3000 rig let alone the 3900x. Some even had 3570ks in their sig rigs...)

Anyway, I'd urge anyone interested in the issue to read that entire Anandtech article, and especially all 3900x owners. 

And tl;dr: I really hope your bios allows manual CCX ratio + lowered VID overclocking, and if you want better game performance, learn how to do it if you can cool it (even 4400MHz locked on your first three cores gives a huge ST boost), and get your RAM up to 3800MHz Memclk/1900MHz Fclk. If you think this last bios "fixed" the issue and you are now getting 4600MHz+ on your first three cores in games, you're not. If you read this post, my last longer one, and thay section of the Anandtech article, you might come to understand why yourself.


----------



## Reikoji

CeltPC said:


> Good gosh they are ripping people off with prices up to $800.00 now. They should be ashamed of themselves, but really, who would be willing to buy at these inflated prices? Thank goodness I at least got mine at normal retail.





neurotix said:


> Isn't $800USD basically what Canadians and Australians pay for a $499 product normally? Pretty messed. And that's just international economics. (Never seen an Aussie on here who was happy about paying for PC parts.)
> 
> This is scalping, and its been going on for years now in the tech field, and is definitely highly immoral and unethical, and certainly should be illegal, yet somehow is not.
> 
> The same could be said for many, many things lately in this country and the world in general lately. What else is new, lol?
> 
> (Unfortunately, already likely obscenely wealthy capitalists or investors bought up all the stock, especially during those 1~2 weeks the tech tariffs were rolled back, knowing full well it was in high demand and AMD can't get very many into the country, because Japan and Korea no longer have a trade agreement anymore, breaking the supply chain for Ryzen 3000. I also got all my stuff at MSRP and the m.2 was $79 on sale. Check newegg, some sellers want $1100 for the 3900x alone, which is about what I paid for chip, board, memory and ssd.)


Its really not the vendors doing it. So far legitimite vendors have only raised the price of the 3900x by $30-$50. In non-austrailian or Canadian dollars, the $800's we see are simply from scalpers like "DealsADay", not Major retailers. AMD hasn't done anything to the prices, its just people capitalizing on the popularity of the 3900x.



neurotix said:


> Sorry for double (or more like triple posting):
> 
> https://www.anandtech.com/show/1487...ing-perception-with-amds-frequency-metrics-/7
> 
> Maybe Reikoji and others here had read that. I actually had not and only found a link to it after the last post I made, that Imouto linked in the news thread about the issue, talking about der8auers survey. Just finished the whole article. (I used to check Anandtech daily and read the full articles about every new major hardware release, but stopped some time ago...)
> 
> The section titled "How Quick Can Turbo Occur" on that page basically confirms my 'theory' in that previous long post on why manual CCX OCs greatly outperform Auto Boost clocks, and the explanation about I gave about frequency changes was basically correct except for the finer details: Dr. Cutress explains that the clocks change every 1~2ms, which is 1000-2000 times a second. (Far less often than the 'millions' I claimed, but I was on the right track.) Unless you have monitoring software that can poll at that level and a 2k Hz refresh rate monitor...  lol
> 
> He even states outright I was also correct in my suspicions; that "the core polled will return to the monitoring software what it feels (?) is the highest clock over that time period" (not verbatim but he writes something like that), verifying what I suspected about the 4600MHz+ under Auto voltage + Boost basically being the chip lying. (It will probably just report the highest frequency achieved and throw out anything less, even if over a 500ms/0.5 second duration that HWINFO reports in, frequencies was jumping around like mad and under 4200 or something for most of that time. This explains the huge single thread performance disparity between "4625MHz" auto and my manual 4400 CCD0 OC. And btw, I did try 'Ryzen Master' and "overclocked" my chip to 4500 CCD0/4300 CCD1 and the Cinebench R20 single and multithread scores were basically the same as Auto + Boost through the bios, yet the Ryzen Master software reported clocks to be at what I set them as the entire time. Ludicrious...)
> 
> So there you go. Or perhaps more accurately, there I go, since I have my explanation for why performance is so much higher under manual CCX OC at 225MHz lower frequency. And I already knew that under full load, using manual CCX OC prevents the chip from lowering frequencies at all. (I am still confused about idle temperatures being so much lower with a manual CCX OC though, under both operating systems; it seems as if just the VID being lowered from 1.5v to my 1.36v wouldn't decrease it so much, especially when the chip is always locked at 4400/4200, and being at higher frequencies always generated more heat even under no load in the past.)
> 
> Since I was on Shaminos beta bios until recently I had been manually CCX overclocking pretty much the whole time I've had the system, and enjoying vastly higher performance, while most others seemed to be concerned about the 4625MHz issue. (And a lot of them complaining and hyping the issue in the news thread didn't even own a Ryzen 3000 rig let alone the 3900x. Some even had 3570ks in their sig rigs...)
> 
> Anyway, I'd urge anyone interested in the issue to read that entire Anandtech article, and especially all 3900x owners.
> 
> And tl;dr: I really hope your bios allows manual CCX ratio + lowered VID overclocking, and if you want better game performance, learn how to do it if you can cool it (even 4400MHz locked on your first three cores gives a huge ST boost), and get your RAM up to 3800MHz Memclk/1900MHz Fclk. If you think this last bios "fixed" the issue and you are now getting 4600MHz+ on your first three cores in games, you're not. If you read this post, my last longer one, and thay section of the Anandtech article, you might come to understand why yourself.


Yes. In derbaurs servey video I also suggested that he change HWinfo's polling rate to its fastest of 100ms, since I knew that the frequency of the processors changes faster than any monitoring software, even ryzen master, can pick up. The core that hits 4600mhz is hitting 4600mhz more often than anyone could see at a mere 500mz poll rate. Can see it better at 100ms but it hits it more often than that. In that way, the processor is holding the frequency in its own way, its just bouncing between 2 cores for 'single thread loads' at a hyper rate that cant be seen by software.

However, the problem for some still, even me, is that one of the cores it bounces between does not hit 4.6ghz in the Cenebench test. The primary hits 4.6, while the other one hits 4.575. Outside of the test it can be seen going up to 4600, with something obviously much lighter then Cenebench. In any run cases, the boost speed can be broken far too easily by some idle process in the background as I suggested in the other post, which is why they need to be more aggressive with how many cores can be boosting boost, and some light activity in CCD1 should not be allowed to break the boost speed. 

When Closing absolutely everything down, I get up to 529 in R20 single core run, which is 4 points shy of what I would get if I manually forced CCD0/CCX0 to 4.6ghz. This is because that one bounce core wont hit 4.6, not on its own.


----------



## Synoxia

Question: how much should a 3700x be performing with PBO enabled? Mine does 206 single core and 2200 multi with 102 bclk. I am especially interested in single core, can 3700x users test? I'm trying to get near 3900x 210


----------



## Synoxia

What's the max single core score of 3700x cb r15 with 3800 ram? 205?


----------



## Reikoji

Synoxia said:


> What's the max single core score of 3700x cb r15 with 3800 ram? 205?


between 204 and 206 is what it should do at 4.4ghz.


----------



## Streetdragon

So the big question is; How do you overclock/test your CCD Speed?
i just entered 1.3V in Ryzenmaster and startet at 4.000Mhz on all cores. Run Cinbench R20.
If Pass Add 25Mhz till it crashes. Than lowered 25Mhz.
Continiued with the secound CCD and did the same.

Now im at CCD0 4.3Ghz and CCD1 with 4.2Ghz with around 1.26V. Drops to 1.25V or so.

So i have a good headromm for more voltage right?


----------



## davidenko7

Guys I'm trying to dynamically overclock my 3800x working with voltage offset. I enabled PBO and set max performance increase up to 200MHz. I noticed I have best single/multi core performance decreasing voltage by -0.1v. If I go over -0.1 I have performance decrease on cinebench. Am I working well? I have always made manual all cores OC. Furthermore I read activating PBO automatically increase CPU parameters but it just raised PPT and TDC to 4096A but EDC is always limited to 140A. Why? I have an Asus X570 Crosshair VIII Hero and CPU is under custom loop. Thanks


----------



## Streetdragon

After setting the CCD with 1,35V i got the following result:
https://www.overclock.net/forum/28145348-post282.html

Here some Forza Horizon 4 CPU render reults with temps, voltage and watt readings:

Soo yeah its "easy" to beat the high power PBO mode!


----------



## Synoxia

With amd_chipset_drivers_v1.8.19.0915 my REAL best boost cores were core 1 and core 4, which corresponds to grey circle and star respectively. Those were the only to boost with x 44.3/44.5 multiplers (ryzen 3700x)
With amd_software_1.09.27.1033 (latest chipset) now it seems it's favoring core 6 and core 8 (grey circle and yellow star respectively) but those in fact clock lower than core 1 and core 4...


----------



## Reikoji

Synoxia said:


> With amd_chipset_drivers_v1.8.19.0915 my REAL best boost cores were core 1 and core 4, which corresponds to grey circle and star respectively. Those were the only to boost with x 44.3/44.5 multiplers (ryzen 3700x)
> With amd_software_1.09.27.1033 (latest chipset) now it seems it's favoring core 6 and core 8 (grey circle and yellow star respectively) but those in fact clock lower than core 1 and core 4...


Mine still doesnt use the gold star.


----------



## Synoxia

Reikoji said:


> Mine still doesnt use the gold star.


i just went back to the old driver. Best boosting core are not those of the 2nd CCX, but whotf knows anyway, ryzen 3k is pretty much beta.


----------



## Marius A

Synoxia said:


> With amd_chipset_drivers_v1.8.19.0915 my REAL best boost cores were core 1 and core 4, which corresponds to grey circle and star respectively. Those were the only to boost with x 44.3/44.5 multiplers (ryzen 3700x)
> With amd_software_1.09.27.1033 (latest chipset) now it seems it's favoring core 6 and core 8 (grey circle and yellow star respectively) but those in fact clock lower than core 1 and core 4...


true i get lower single core max boost frequency also with the September drivers, that is why i went back to the august ones, ofcourse with proper cleaning revo unistaller with advanced +amd cleanup tool


----------



## OCmember

Will I need an aftermarket cooler if I'm not overclocking?


----------



## 99belle99

OCmember said:


> Will I need an aftermarket cooler if I'm not overclocking?


No.


----------



## m4fox90

3900X dropped to $499 on Amazon. Taking the plunge...


----------



## her9019

Hope to have my 3900x in by Monday (fingers crossed) thanks to amazon.


----------



## Marius A

OCmember said:


> Will I need an aftermarket cooler if I'm not overclocking?


yes , if you want the best results out of youre chip, stock cooler gave me 9 degrees more than my noctua nh u12a, with the stock cooler which is hdt type all the paste was at the edge of the cpu and the center was empty really crappy. Why i say that is because for ryzen 3000 highest factor in its boosting algorithm is temperature, keeping it under 75c is key to get best performance while keeping it stock for exaple stock cooler + stock 3800x cinebench r20 scores 4935, noctua nh u12a +3800x stock 5000+ . A stock cooler i think it does a decent job on the 65w cpus , but when the big boys hit the room , 3800x and 3900x they need more .just my 2 cents on the matter. Besides 80+c i dont think is good for any pc part on the long term, And overclocking aint worth it if you can run it cold enough stock, it will boost just great so that aint worth to overclock it and deal with instability


----------



## Synoxia

Just gonna leave this there


----------



## MFarkha

Edit: changed settings completely.


----------



## Hydroplane

Wonder how the 3900 will OC compared to the 3900X? Would the lower 65W TDP potentially allow higher OC headroom?


----------



## 99belle99

Hydroplane said:


> Wonder how the 3900 will OC compared to the 3900X? Would the lower 65W TDP potentially allow higher OC headroom?


No. If AMD a binning them properly the X model should be better.


----------



## Marius A

Synoxia said:


> Just gonna leave this there


wow that is impressive PBO mate , what motherboard is that with and what ram, cooling and settings??max i got from my cpu is 1 core boosting 50 mhz more than the max boost specified for my cpu


----------



## Mumak

Bringing a new HWiNFO feature into your attention - *CPU Effective Clock* and monitoring of *thermal throttling* on Zen.
Introduced in: https://www.hwinfo.com/forum/threads/hwinfo-v6-13-3955-beta-released.5957/
More details: https://www.hwinfo.com/forum/threads/effective-clock-vs-instant-discrete-clock.5958/


----------



## d0mini

Mumak said:


> Bringing a new HWiNFO feature into your attention - *CPU Effective Clock* and monitoring of *thermal throttling* on Zen.
> Introduced in: https://www.hwinfo.com/forum/threads/hwinfo-v6-13-3955-beta-released.5957/
> More details: https://www.hwinfo.com/forum/threads/effective-clock-vs-instant-discrete-clock.5958/


Oh Mumak. I love how much time, energy and passion you put into this. It makes me happy. Thanks for the update, I'm sure all of us here can't wait to try it out!


----------



## Alex0401

Please tell me in the graphics, the processor and memory are correct or is something wrong? Thank you!


----------



## m4fox90

What kinds of all-core OCs are y'all seeing on 3900X? I did 4.3 before I had to go do other life things. Don't recall voltage unfortunately..


----------



## VPII

m4fox90 said:


> What kinds of all-core OCs are y'all seeing on 3900X? I did 4.3 before I had to go do other life things. Don't recall voltage unfortunately..


For everyday I'm at 4.267ghz using 1.23vcore, but 4.36ghz is not problem for benching only as it requires 1.36 or more vcore.


----------



## dansi

Mumak said:


> Bringing a new HWiNFO feature into your attention - *CPU Effective Clock* and monitoring of *thermal throttling* on Zen.
> Introduced in: https://www.hwinfo.com/forum/threads/hwinfo-v6-13-3955-beta-released.5957/
> More details: https://www.hwinfo.com/forum/threads/effective-clock-vs-instant-discrete-clock.5958/


almost 5 years ago i stumbled upon hwinfo.
Mumak left a good impression of his software that i kept recommending this over hwmonitor which was the rage back then.

Glad to see you come so far.


----------



## MishelLngelo

Every link gets me to 6.12, where to download 6.13 ?


----------



## cybrnook

MishelLngelo said:


> Every link gets me to 6.12, where to download 6.13 ?


Here you go: https://www.hwinfo.com/files/hwi_613_3955.zip


----------



## Mumak

MishelLngelo said:


> Every link gets me to 6.12, where to download 6.13 ?


In the middle of the download page a grey button "Download latest Beta ..."


----------



## MishelLngelo

Oh tnx, didn't realize it's portable only.


----------



## Krisztias

Alex0401 said:


> Please tell me in the graphics, the processor and memory are correct or is something wrong? Thank you!


Hi!

I don't think, that you need so high vddg, but it seems like ok for the first look. What memory you running and why do you asking?


----------



## Alex0401

Krisztias said:


> Hi!
> 
> I don't think, that you need so high vddg, but it seems like ok for the first look. What memory you running and why do you asking?



motherboard x570 Aurus Master
My memory G.SKILL Trident Z Neo - 2 x 8 Go - DDR4 3600 MHz CL16.
because everyone complains that they have some kind of problems. So I wanted to find out. I turned on the XMP profile in BIOS and manually set the voltage to 1.35


----------



## Cidious

Marius A said:


> yes , if you want the best results out of youre chip, stock cooler gave me 9 degrees more than my noctua nh u12a, with the stock cooler which is hdt type all the paste was at the edge of the cpu and the center was empty really crappy. Why i say that is because for ryzen 3000 highest factor in its boosting algorithm is temperature, keeping it under 75c is key to get best performance while keeping it stock for exaple stock cooler + stock 3800x cinebench r20 scores 4935, noctua nh u12a +3800x stock 5000+ . A stock cooler i think it does a decent job on the 65w cpus , but when the big boys hit the room , 3800x and 3900x they need more .just my 2 cents on the matter. Besides 80+c i dont think is good for any pc part on the long term, And overclocking aint worth it if you can run it cold enough stock, it will boost just great so that aint worth to overclock it and deal with instability



I run a 3800X on a Mortar with and H80i and I don't get to 5000 point. Just shy at 4980.. just like that 5000 points? I think it also has something to do with how well binned the chip is. Or maybe my motherboard won't boost far enough? I have just PBO on. No enhanced settings.


----------



## VPII

Cidious said:


> I run a 3800X on a Mortar with and H80i and I don't get to 5000 point. Just shy at 4979.. just like that 5000 points? I think it also has something to do with how well binned the chip is. Or maybe my motherboard won't boost far enough? I have just PBO on. No enhanced settings.


I found that manual overclocking helps a lot seen that you are able to see how far your cpu can go at a certain vcore. Having done all this I was trying top test the whole issue of performance loss when using a negative vcore offset. Well there is no truth to it, if you know your cpu. Before I post the results I'd like to put things into perspective. My cpu is all core stable at 4.267ghz using 1.2375vcore, and it is also stable at 4.317ghz using 1.3vcore, so I went the high negative of-set route, at first -0.125vcore the -0.1375vcore. First result however is with PBO max and vcore auto, second with -0.1250 vcore off-set and third with. 
-0.1375vcore off-set. CPU all core at Auto vcore was hovering 100.4 x 4.15 and 4.25 and with the negative off-set 42 and 41.75.


----------



## Krisztias

Alex0401 said:


> motherboard x570 Aurus Master
> My memory G.SKILL Trident Z Neo - 2 x 8 Go - DDR4 3600 MHz CL16.
> because everyone complains that they have some kind of problems. So I wanted to find out. I turned on the XMP profile in BIOS and manually set the voltage to 1.35


If you like, you can try out the Ryzen Dram Calculator from 1usmus. It's a very nice tool to set up your RAM or OC with it 

https://www.overclock.net/forum/13-...locking-dram-am4-membench-0-8-dram-bench.html


----------



## BUFUMAN

Hi I have a new Ryzen 3800x at allcore OC x43 with offset +0.15V. 

Is it possible to use P-states like with the old 1700x  at allcore OC?

It doesn't downclock like my 1700x.
I don't like the Boostmode at 1.5V and the temps. It's not necessary for me.

Thanks for your help!

Gesendet von meinem LYA-L29 mit Tapatalk


----------



## dajez

BUFUMAN said:


> Hi I have a new Ryzen 3800x at allcore OC x43 with offset +0.15V.
> 
> Is it possible to use P-states like with the old 1700x  at allcore OC?
> 
> It doesn't downclock like my 1700x.
> I don't like the Boostmode at 1.5V and the temps. It's not necessary for me.
> 
> Thanks for your help!
> 
> Gesendet von meinem LYA-L29 mit Tapatalk


Do you mean with the app zenstates? Manual overclocks on first gen Ryzen disabled downclocking aswell.


----------



## BUFUMAN

dajez said:


> Do you mean with the app zenstates? Manual overclocks on first gen Ryzen disabled downclocking aswell.


No i dont use this APP. 
I used PSTATES at CBS menu set to 43. i use OFFSET Voltage now. 

The thing is i am not sure about the downclock. Ryzen Master show me that the CPU is downclocking. HWINFO64 not.
Another difference no matter what i setup VDDCR-SOC is always at 1.1 is this my SOC? if it is its not 1.1V as u can see at my screenshot.

thanks!


----------



## dajez

BUFUMAN said:


> No i dont use this APP.
> I used PSTATES at CBS menu set to 43. i use OFFSET Voltage now.
> 
> The thing is i am not sure about the downclock. Ryzen Master show me that the CPU is downclocking. HWINFO64 not.
> Another difference no matter what i setup VDDCR-SOC is always at 1.1 is this my SOC? if it is its not 1.1V as u can see at my screenshot.
> 
> thanks!


My Hwinfo64 shows me the effective clocks whitch are the clocks ryzen master is showing


----------



## BUFUMAN

Same here if everything is on Auto and with Boost. But my temps are low. What should I believe now?

Gesendet von meinem LYA-L29 mit Tapatalk


----------



## Delta9k

My latest CPU a 3950X. Used another Aorus Master x570 - This is my favorite x570 board with the Unify not far behind. Im still waiting for a few things to arrive but I will be taking this off the bench and suiting it up proper into a chassis and will use as my new daily driver. Final system config TBD beyond the motherboard CPU and RAM.


----------



## nimajneBOC

Is there anywhere to compare chip I think my chip is pretty good but wanted some validation. Runs 4.3 @1.2875v with high llc (still drops 5 to 15mv) and can run 4.4 @ 1.33v but that is only CB stable not p95.


----------



## BUFUMAN

With the Batch number? i think my CPU is also good - allcore 4.3Ghz 1,28V didn't test more atm.


----------



## nimajneBOC

BUFUMAN said:


> With the Batch number? i think my CPU is also good - allcore 4.3Ghz 1,28V didn't test more atm.


Is that AVX or not i found that 4.3 was fine for everything but i had to drop to 4.2 in order to get AVX stable.


----------



## BUFUMAN

nimajneBOC said:


> Is that AVX or not i found that 4.3 was fine for everything but i had to drop to 4.2 in order to get AVX stable.


Not AVX. I test my system with Realbench, Karhu RAM Test, World of warships, BF1/4/5, Forza.



Gesendet von meinem LYA-L29 mit Tapatalk


----------



## nimajneBOC

BUFUMAN said:


> Not AVX. I test my system with Realbench, Karhu RAM Test, World of warships, BF1/4/5, Forza.
> 
> 
> 
> Gesendet von meinem LYA-L29 mit Tapatalk


tbh i still run 4.3 for 24/7 but have a 4.2 profile if i ever run into any programs that use AVX


----------



## BUFUMAN

nimajneBOC said:


> tbh i still run 4.3 for 24/7 but have a 4.2 profile if i ever run into any programs that use AVX


always have a second plan


----------



## dajez

BUFUMAN said:


> With the Batch number? i think my CPU is also good - allcore 4.3Ghz 1,28V didn't test more atm.


1.28V mentioned where btw?


----------



## SrKag

Why is my new 3700x down clocking to 3450 and 3480 in idle? I have not read that it would go below 3600. My idle temp is between 28 & 30 c


----------



## Nizzen

SrKag said:


> Why is my new 3700x down clocking to 3450 and 3480 in idle? I have not read that it would go below 3600. My idle temp is between 28 & 30 c


Do you need more @ idle?


----------



## ikem

got my 3800x in. Back to AMD. 

so far 4.35 on 1.3v stable. Going to see if I can drop a little more.


----------



## Pedros

question ... is it normal the 3900x idles at 39-50ºC ?

Is there anything we can do to get these temps lower ( no manual overclock for now ) ?

Thank you!


----------



## Oversemper

Pedros said:


> question ... is it normal the 3900x idles at 39-50ºC ?
> 
> Is there anything we can do to get these temps lower ( no manual overclock for now ) ?
> 
> Thank you!


Just assembled 3800x+asus x570-f. EKWB custom water. Idles at the same temps, this is because auto voltage can hit 1.5v. So these 39-50C is internal transient temperature which can be lowed only by undervolting. Mine hits 4525 Mhz on 6 cores (not simultaneously, just statistic during the use), the remaining two "bad" cores hit 4450. These frequencies are the combination of good cooling with unrestricted autovoltage. Also I have PBO activated and set to +200Mhz mode. When I run intel burn test all cores are at 4.2 with 1.3 voltage, temp not exceeding 75C, everything automatically by mobo. So mobo pushes cores as high as its internal algorithms allow it, but it tends to apply massive overvoltage to eliminate instability and crashes. I'm kinda ok with it, coz anyway I'm going to swap 3800x for something like 4950x when (if) it arrives for AM4.


----------



## Giustaf

hello! 

is there any user who overclocks his 3900x to 4.400Mhz all core with asus x570 (possibly crosshair viii)?

I have overclocked my ram but I don't know how to do it with CPU! 

can you help me please?


----------



## MishelLngelo

SrKag said:


> Why is my new 3700x down clocking to 3450 and 3480 in idle? I have not read that it would go below 3600. My idle temp is between 28 & 30 c


Depends on power settings, I can have mine under 2000 and less than 1V when CPU is under 1% usage.


----------



## Oversemper

Pedros said:


> question ... is it normal the 3900x idles at 39-50ºC ?
> 
> Is there anything we can do to get these temps lower ( no manual overclock for now ) ?
> 
> Thank you!





Oversemper said:


> Just assembled 3800x+asus x570-f. EKWB custom water. Idles at the same temps, this is because auto voltage can hit 1.5v. So these 39-50C is internal transient temperature which can be lowed only by undervolting. Mine hits 4525 Mhz on 6 cores (not simultaneously, just statistic during the use), the remaining two "bad" cores hit 4450. These frequencies are the combination of good cooling with unrestricted autovoltage. Also I have PBO activated and set to +200Mhz mode. When I run intel burn test all cores are at 4.2 with 1.3 voltage, temp not exceeding 75C, everything automatically by mobo. So mobo pushes cores as high as its internal algorithms allow it, but it tends to apply massive overvoltage to eliminate instability and crashes. I'm kinda ok with it, coz anyway I'm going to swap 3800x for something like 4950x when (if) it arrives for AM4.


Suddenly I've managed to considerably lower idle temps when I was tinkering with ram overclock applying different dram calculator values in bios. It was like this. My 3800x on auto soc voltage successfully booted on Infinity Fabric 1866Mhz, ram is 3733Mhz. Infinity Fabric 1900Mhz unbootable for me whatever the soc voltage. Soc auto-voltage for IF 1866 & ram 3733 is 1.1v. I lowered it to 1.05 and it's stable in every torture test. CPU temps (idle and torture test) were not affected by the soc voltage at all.

Then I decided to apply VDDG CCD, VDDG IOD and VDDP voltages from the DRAM calculator. First I used the "Min." values from the calculator which are 0.950, 0950 and 0.700 ("700" in bios), respectively. It did not boot. The auto values for VDDG CCD, VDDG IOD and VDDP for me are unknown because they are not shown in the bios and I do not use ryzen master (the lesser there programs/services in windows the better). The "Rec." values from the calculator for me were 1.025, 1.025 and 0.900. But I tried 1.000, 1.000 and 0.900. It booted alright and I started HM monitor and did not believe my eyes. *CPU temp now idles down to 33*! It almost never touched anything below 40 prior to that. Maximum temperature in intel burn test using 90% of ram did not change, it is 71-72 for me. Cinebench score also did not change. So, I guess, ASUS x570-f on bios 1405 (latest) sets too high VDDG CCD, VDDG IOD and VDDP, which keeps idle CPU temp elevated. It should be taken into account.


----------



## Sam64

Thanks Oversemper, i can reproduce exactly the same behaviour with my C8H Board (with 3900X, RAM 3733CL16, FCLK 1866). My VDDG voltages were set to 1.075 before. Now i reduced both to 1.000 and my idle CPU temp went down from 41 to 34. Minimum CPU voltage (set to Auto as before) also went down to 0.931v. Very nice finding!


----------



## Chito

Welp, my 3900x died. Had been running solid for four months, and it bluescreened today and wouldn't get back into windows. A few hours of troubleshooting later, and it's running as long as I only enable the first two cores on CCD0. Going to any more than that on CCD0 means I reboot loop/bluescreen.

CDD1 cores seem ok, but I can only run them pairwise so I'm limited to four cores until I RMA this thing.

First CPU failure I've had in basically forever as far as I can remember.


----------



## Kaltenbrunner

Maybe for fun I'll get a Ryzen 7 3700X and mid-level modo, and try it for a month, and then either sell my i5-9600k or re-sell the ryzen


----------



## neurotix

Kaltenbrunner said:


> Maybe for fun I'll get a Ryzen 7 3700X and mid-level modo, and try it for a month, and then either sell my i5-9600k or re-sell the ryzen


Depends on if you have anything to gain from Hyperthreading or not. If you play at high refresh rate especially 1080p the i5 is better. DigitalFoundry tested this pretty well.

Basically at 1080p 240hz only. 1440p 144Hz may have issues too.

For *ALL OTHER* gaming scenarios, Ryzen is totally fine and the higher you push the resolution, the less advantage Intel has. A 3700X at 4.3GHz with 3733MHz ram still throws frames around no problem at 1080p; it's just that certain titles such as CS, Metro Exodus and a few others perform notably worse at 1080p @ high refresh rates on Ryzen 






Starts around 14:00.

If you play at a higher resolution, it really doesn't make much difference now, but 1080p at high refresh, Intel can have up to a 90fps or so advantage.

Of course, if you do other things with your system besides game (like any work), Ryzen is what you want for sure.


----------



## gupsterg

I believe I have an unused key for The Outer Worlds, private message me if you'd like to try it to see if it claims. It came with a CPU, I've claimed it from AMD rewards and you'd get the Epic store key.

*** edit ***

Given away now.


----------



## Oversemper

Maybe it will help somebody. I was having random reboots (once every 3-4 hours) when idling or doing something CPU not intensive like playing sniper elite 4. I did not check whether it was due to PBO or RAM overclock. I could stress test for 24+ or play PUBG half a day but then get a reboot when simply idling at desktop. So, I saw this thread https://community.amd.com/thread/241981, and followed the advice of Mr. murky to switch to ryzen high performance plan. No reboots now. I wander what is wrong with ryzen balanced plan...

AMD Chipset Drivers 2.01.15.2138, win10 1909.


----------



## Orgios

3700x stable at 4.3Ghz at 1.265V (manual OC) , good chip? Is this voltage considered safe? memory b die at 3800CL16

https://www.imageupload.net/image/3700x3.Lp20p


----------



## MishelLngelo

Yes, very good.


----------



## hotripper

Orgios said:


> 3700x stable at 4.3Ghz at 1.265V (manual OC) , good chip? Is this voltage considered safe? memory b die at 3800CL16


 Yeah I got the same except I was able to get 4350mhz. Might be worth trying for that little bit extra. Or not. haha


----------



## tolis626

Hi everyone! New owner of the 3800x here! Really glad coming back to AMD after over a decade! And boy, is this an upgrade over my trusty old, but aging 4790k. I mean, Cinebench R20 sums it up nicely. The 4790k balls to the wall overclocked (4.8GHz core at 1.344V, cache at 4.3GHz and RAM at 2400MHz CL10) nets me about 2300 points, best case scenario with almost nothing running in the background. The first run of the 3800x, nothing tweaked, just enabled PBO and set XMP, boom, 5000 flat. After a bit of overclocking to 4.4GHz all core it gets 5300 points. Insane.

Now, I have a few questions that scouring the web doesn't seem to hold any answers to.

1) Besides the basics, like messing with core multiplier, voltage and soc voltage, are there any other settings that are important to mess with to get a better overclock? I'm currently at 4.4GHz all core at 1.33125V in BIOS (somewhere around 1.325 with droop, maybe a tad lower), but I can't get 4.5GHz to work for the life of me at up to 1.425V. Other settings include 1.075V SoC voltage, and the other IO voltages whose names escape me right now are at 1.000v for the first two and 0.9V for the third one. RAM is currently set to 3733MHz CL16 at 1.35V and IF is 1:1 with the RAM at 1866MHz.

2) What is the maximum safe DDR4 voltage for the CPU's IMC? I mean, ok, Samsung B-die chips like on my G.Skill memory can take 1.5V easy from what I read, but what about the CPU itself? I could justify a RAM upgrade to 32GB if my RAM breaks, but I'd prefer that my CPU stays alive.

3) Does manually overclocking break C-states? As my system is set up, my cores barely enter C6 according to HWiNFO64. Ryzen Master does show the cores going to sleep, but usually shortly.

4) When manually overclocking, does the chip always stay at the voltage you set it to? In HWiNFO64 I get a lot of conflicting info. Core VID is always ~1.1V, core voltage stays at exactly what I set it to and the VCore that's I think reported by the motherboard shows as a tad lower (I'll assume due to droop). What gives? Ryzen Master shows the 1.1V VID reading, but a lower average core voltage. It's confusing to say the least. See the screenshot below of an x265 stress test I did to see what I mean, HWiNFO64 is open on the right.

5) Speaking of that screenshot, are clocks never actually reaching the value set in BIOS? Or is it misreporting the clocks in the "Effective core clock" readings? Because these usually hover at 4.1-4.3GHz under load and never ever reach 4.4GHz. Although they do sometimes show spikes to over 4.5GHz, but I don't believe those.

6) Is x265 stress test (from here) a good stress test for Ryzen 3rd gen? It was the most reliable for my old Intel, but I don't know if things have changed.

Thanks in advance for any input guys!


----------



## trivium nate

updated my bios and upgraded from a 1700X to a 3800X

Thermaltake P3 White//AMD RYZEN 7 3800X 8-Core 3.9 GHz (4.5 GHz Turbo)
Corsair H100i-PRO//GIGABYTE GA-AX370-Gaming K5 MB
EVGA RTX-2080TI (11GB) 1TB-SSD//8TBHDD(x2)
G.SKILL TridentZ Series 32GB//1000 Watt Corsair PSU
65"TCL-4KHDR-TV//Windows 10-(X64)


----------



## Sam64

Hi tolis626! 

Same situation here, end of last year: Coming from Blue-Team (i4790K), I had to learn some things first. Maybe check the following guide first, even it's only a google-translation, it's ok to read:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/14fzGFUSIv0S0nY4c6h5-Jzprtda6WhwG/view


----------



## cosminmocan

something is not right with your score, it should be at least 5200.


----------



## Alex0401

plz tell me, my processor is not a factory defect if it passed the test successfully?


----------



## nick name

Alex0401 said:


> plz tell me, my processor is not a factory defect if it passed the test successfully?


What are you talking about?


----------



## MishelLngelo

Alex0401 said:


> plz tell me, my processor is not a factory defect if it passed the test successfully?


It's not a test but benchmark, are you talking about the score ? Looks like you don't have PBO enabled.


----------



## Alex0401

nick name said:


> What are you talking about?


I mean, is my processor defective?


----------



## MishelLngelo

Alex0401 said:


> I mean, is my processor defective?


Why do you think it might be defective ?


----------



## jamie1073

Alex0401 said:


> I mean, is my processor defective?



Your CPU is not defective, you are just getting a lower score in R20 than you should. This indicates something maybe not enabled in the BIOS. PBO, Precision Boost Overdrive, is not normally enabled on motherboards by default. Mine was set to Auto which seemed to never use it. You would most likely get scores that are closer to what everyone else gets if you enable it in the BIOS. My 3900X scored lower in R20 bench tests as well compared to what others were getting and it was my PBO settings. By default A-XMP, memory settings, and PBO seem to be not enabled(turned on) by default. Being that you are building your own system you will find that somethings you need to enable or change to get the best performance.


----------



## Scoty

I have a MSI x570 Unify and a 3900X and in CB20 i get only 7170 points. Whene i see other scores here the most have over 7300. How can get more without higher temps?


----------



## MishelLngelo

Scoty said:


> I have a MSI x570 Unify and a 3900X and in CB20 i get only 7170 points. Whene i see other scores here the most have over 7300. How can get more without higher temps?


Need to keep temps up to 62 - 65c range and of course have PBO enabled, fast memory also helps.


----------



## artaud

I am fiddling with X570 Taichi and I cannot get an OC at 4.3 or 1.30v with R3900x ,, I also have ASUS ROG Strix X570-E Gaming and with this I get 4.3 at 1.25v with the calibration at minimum
Is anyone working with this board ?? I can't achieve something stable


----------

