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

Discussion in 'HardForum Tech News' started by FlawleZ, May 30, 2019.

  1. FlawleZ

    FlawleZ Gawd

    Messages:
    790
    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2010
    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/
     
  2. Kardonxt

    Kardonxt 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,880
    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2009
    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.
     
  3. $trapped

    $trapped [H]Lite

    Messages:
    94
    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2012
    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.
     
  4. NKD

    NKD [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    7,526
    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2007
    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.
     
    GoldenTiger and Chimpee like this.
  5. JNavy89GT

    JNavy89GT [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,777
    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2001
    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.
     
  6. NKD

    NKD [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    7,526
    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2007
    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.
     
  7. JNavy89GT

    JNavy89GT [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,777
    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2001
    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
     
  8. JNavy89GT

    JNavy89GT [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,777
    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2001
    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
     
    ZeroBarrier likes this.
  9. Derangel

    Derangel [H]ard as it Gets

    Messages:
    17,524
    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2008
    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.
     
    LightsOut41 likes this.
  10. Chimpee

    Chimpee [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,385
    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2015
  11. odditory

    odditory [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    5,333
    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2007
    Welp, my 9900k @ 5.2Ghz all core is good for now then.

    Wait for Ryzen 4.
     
    ZeroBarrier likes this.
  12. Krenum

    Krenum [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    15,402
    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2005
    If it can't run at 5ghz, not biggie. It just needs to be fast.
     
  13. OrangeKhrush

    OrangeKhrush [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,492
    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2016
    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
     
  14. tempertantrum

    tempertantrum Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    315
    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2009
    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...
     
  15. IdiotInCharge

    IdiotInCharge [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    10,294
    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2003
    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.

    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.
     
  16. IdiotInCharge

    IdiotInCharge [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    10,294
    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2003
    OrangeKhrush should probably list a full denomination for the currency they are using...
     
  17. OrangeKhrush

    OrangeKhrush [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,492
    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2016
    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.
     
    N4CR likes this.
  18. pillagenburn

    pillagenburn Gawd

    Messages:
    946
    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2006
    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: Jun 1, 2019
  19. IdiotInCharge

    IdiotInCharge [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    10,294
    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2003
    You should probably stay away from public forums...
     
  20. pillagenburn

    pillagenburn Gawd

    Messages:
    946
    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2006
    Dammit, I phrased that incorrectly
     
  21. IdiotInCharge

    IdiotInCharge [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    10,294
    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2003
    ;)
     
    FlawleZ likes this.
  22. odditory

    odditory [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    5,333
    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2007
    But it is a biggie.

    32e269.jpg