WCCFTech - Ryzen 3000 can OC to 5Ghz single and 4.5Ghz All Core

FlawleZ

Gawd
Joined
Oct 20, 2010
Messages
1,007
The overclocking details come straight from Chiphell where forum member ‘One Month’, the same guy responsible for showing us the first look at the Ryzen 3000 APUs has given us the overclocking details for Ryzen 3000 CPUs.

  • 4.8GHz is achievable on all cores
  • ~4.4GHz performs similar to a 5Ghz 9900k – in Cinebench
  • 5.0GHz is doable, but it’s a challenge
  • Overclock for overclocking, Ryzen 3000 is still faster
  • 5GHz boost isn’t infeasible
  • 5Ghz all core is pretty much a no-go.
  • 1.35V for all core 4.5Ghz
  • Memory is being run very loose and slow to assure the stability for testing
I would still take with a grain of salt but the source has proven credible in the past. That Aida64 screenshot of 3900X @ 4.6Ghz looks tasty too.
https://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-3000-zen-2-cpu-5-ghz-overclock-4-5-ghz-all-core-boost/
 

Kardonxt

2[H]4U
Joined
Apr 13, 2009
Messages
3,168
The article keeps just saying Ryzen 3000. Ryzen 3900x with 12 cores @ 4.4ghz being equivalent to an 8 core 9900k in Cinebench is much less impressive than say the 8 core 3700x @ 4.4 being equivalent. I assume they are talking about the 3900x but it would be nice if they were less obscure about it.
 

$trapped

Weaksauce
Joined
Jan 18, 2012
Messages
126
The article keeps just saying Ryzen 3000. Ryzen 3900x with 12 cores @ 4.4ghz being equivalent to an 8 core 9900k in Cinebench is much less impressive than say the 8 core 3700x @ 4.4 being equivalent. I assume they are talking about the 3900x but it would be nice if they were less obscure about it.
AMD, at least in this instance (I'm not up on their historical comparisons), to be comparing chips of similar cost. $489 - 9900k, $499 - 3900x.
 

NKD

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
7,856
while I expect the overclock to be around 4.5ghz at least. WCCFTECH is quoting translations from redditt discussion and picking and choosing. lol! Honestly whether its true or not they need stop linking Reddit posts where people are still debating what was said. He took one particular comment lol.

This is directly from redditt.

  • 4.8GHz is achievable on all cores
  • ~4.4GHz performs similar to a 5Ghz 9900k – in Cinebench
  • 5.0GHz is doable, but it’s a challenge
  • Overclock for overclocking, Ryzen 3000 is still faster
  • 5GHz boost isn’t infeasible
  • 5Ghz all core is pretty much a no-go.
  • 1.35V for all core 4.5Ghz
  • Memory is being run very loose and slow to assure the stability for testing
But people are still debating the translations lol. and WCCFTECH makes a whola article about it.

5GHZ is doable but its a challenge and then 5ghz all core is pretty much a no-go. Someone typing that translation should have known that is contradicting in its own lol.
 

JNavy89GT

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Apr 25, 2001
Messages
1,777
As much as I love AMD; they can’t just match performance with intel. They need to pull an Athlon again and beat Intel. Both in IPC and hopefully MHz as well. I’m concerned these lower clocks will hinder AMD in that regard. Intel still sold plenty of slower P3/4 cpus when AMD was stomps them in performance. And this Navi pricing rumor is nuts if true. I’d love a Radeon card again but not at parity pricing.
 

NKD

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
7,856
As much as I love AMD; they can’t just match performance with intel. They need to pull an Athlon again and beat Intel. Both in IPC and hopefully MHz as well. I’m concerned these lower clocks will hinder AMD in that regard. Intel still sold plenty of slower P3/4 cpus when AMD was stomps them in performance. And this Navi pricing rumor is nuts if true. I’d love a Radeon card again but not at parity pricing.
Not sure what you are talking about. Wait for the reviews will you? Its looking good and 3800x is matching or beating 9900k with less boost clocks.
 

JNavy89GT

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Apr 25, 2001
Messages
1,777
The article keeps just saying Ryzen 3000. Ryzen 3900x with 12 cores @ 4.4ghz being equivalent to an 8 core 9900k in Cinebench is much less impressive than say the 8 core 3700x @ 4.4 being equivalent. I assume they are talking about the 3900x but it would be nice if they were less obscure about it.
I do think they are referring to the show demo system beating intel 9900k with 8core/16t Ryzen 2 at 4.4 or 4.5! I could be wrong
 

JNavy89GT

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Apr 25, 2001
Messages
1,777
Not sure what you are talking about. Wait for the reviews will you? Its looking good and 3800x is matching or beating 9900k with less boost clocks.
Look, I wanna believe but I’ve been burned by thre AMD hype machine too much to trust. And re benches amd is winning. I don’t play cinebench. I play games. If amd is better, great sign me up. I’m just saying, how I’m reading the tea leaves; is that AMD isn’t getting the clocks we wanted as of yet. I’m worried that will translate to performance parity vs beating intel. And they have to beat them and offer compelling pricing to get people to switch. I hope they are not squandering their opportunity
 

Derangel

Fully [H]
Joined
Jan 31, 2008
Messages
19,016
Look, I wanna believe but I’ve been burned by thre AMD hype machine too much to trust. And re benches amd is winning. I don’t play cinebench. I play games. If amd is better, great sign me up. I’m just saying, how I’m reading the tea leaves; is that AMD isn’t getting the clocks we wanted as of yet. I’m worried that will translate to performance parity vs beating intel. And they have to beat them and offer compelling pricing to get people to switch. I hope they are not squandering their opportunity
If by "clocks we wanted" you mean the stupid rumors that were never more than rumors and wishful thinking its kind of your fault for expecting it. Also, there is a lot more to performance than raw clock speed.
 

Krenum

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 29, 2005
Messages
15,952
If it can't run at 5ghz, not biggie. It just needs to be fast.
 

OrangeKhrush

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
1,622
The PC industry is one of goldfish mentality. Intel have never replicated the same perf/efficiency value of Sandybridge at the time when lower (if 3.3-3.7 is actually slow) clocks delivered exceptional performance at great efficiency. Now there is this 5ghz love affair that I can only attribute to lay baseball fans thinking a pitchers ERA is the be all and end all without understanding of XFIP, SIERA or more advanced metrics.

I am a take out the box, put together and use person. I don't buy aftermarket cooling and right now if you want to run a intel K part I need to drop 1-2K on a top end cooler whereas going to a 2600 was out the box into the ITX setup and no issues. AMD has found a way to Sandybridge, deliever good performance at great efficiency and I can do it saving a lot of money.

Hoping for some nice AMD ITX boards as a 3600 looks very appealing to now retire the 5960X
 

tempertantrum

Limp Gawd
Joined
Apr 19, 2009
Messages
392
I don't buy aftermarket cooling and right now if you want to run a intel K part I need to drop 1-2K on a top end cooler whereas going to a 2600 was out the box into the ITX setup and no issues.
Wait... what top end commercially available consumer cooler would you need to pay even 1K for? A fully custom water cooled system wouldn't cost you 1k, even with 2 GPU water blocks, a mono block, and RAM cooler...
 

IdiotInCharge

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 13, 2003
Messages
14,283
Intel still sold plenty of slower P3/4 cpus when AMD was stomps them in performance.
Intel got pretty close as soon as they decided to stop using RDRAM, and they maintained an edge in chipset and driver stability for most of the pre-Athlon64 releases.

Also, there is a lot more to performance than raw clock speed.
IPC * clockspeed --> single-core performance. As nice as it would be for all of our workloads to be parallel and thread-friendly, many still aren't, so single-core performance is still important.
 

IdiotInCharge

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 13, 2003
Messages
14,283
Wait... what top end commercially available consumer cooler would you need to pay even 1K for? A fully custom water cooled system wouldn't cost you 1k, even with 2 GPU water blocks, a mono block, and RAM cooler...
OrangeKhrush should probably list a full denomination for the currency they are using...
 

OrangeKhrush

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
1,622
Wait... what top end commercially available consumer cooler would you need to pay even 1K for? A fully custom water cooled system wouldn't cost you 1k, even with 2 GPU water blocks, a mono block, and RAM cooler...
In my country working on taxes and hyper inflation:

H115i is 2.5K
H100i RGB is 2.4K
NZXT Kraken 240ml - 1.9K
Hyper 212 is 600 bucks but bulky and ugly.

9900K is 11K while a 2700 is 4.3K so I can imagine a 3700 being well cheaper than the 9900K which is currently being flogged by all distributors for specials now. I guess they foresee Intel parts selling badly again soon.
 
  • Like
Reactions: N4CR
like this

pillagenburn

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Oct 3, 2006
Messages
1,098
I need higher overclocks, higher IPC and higher core counts so that i can run more things that secretly track everything I do.
 
Last edited:
Top