Der8auer: "Good number of Ryzen 3000 chips does not reach boost clock"

Discussion in 'Frontpage news' started by Hilbert Hagedoorn, Sep 2, 2019.

  1. fry178

    fry178 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,067
    Likes Received:
    377
    GPU:
    Aorus 2080S WB
    @BReal85
    so i guess your whining to all other companies too, as long as your rig isnt completely passive,
    i remember cpu/case/psu/gpu having fans. so thats ok, but adding one to the heatsink on a chipset is bad? rofl.

    not even talking about the fact
    1. do you know the noise all the different fans on the different boards make?
    2. if they are louder than all other fans 80% of users are running?
    3. do you know that there are things like fan control/profiles that allow to adjust speed thus noise?
    4. that for example msi is turning off the fan below certain temps?
    even when i switched the bios to balanced mode (always running the fan), it never got audible over the 8dba fans (case/rad) im running throttled.

    guess thats the thing now, troll ppl about non-existing issues
     
  2. Astyanax

    Astyanax Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    17,016
    Likes Received:
    7,353
    GPU:
    GTX 1080ti
    not hitting the advertised boost clock at a quantifiable rate where it should is a problem for AMD, this can bite them in the ass if enough disgruntled users get together.

    They need to work on getting the SMU more mature and convey more clearly what they consider should be the average boost.

    This is why nvidia in the video card segment doesn't advertise the max boost clock on its specs, it advertises the average, which is typically within the center of the boost table.

    AMD need to work with Board builders to get these chips functioning to consumer expectation per the pre-release marketting. Yes they are good chips

    AMD though it has a higher IPC, is still being outperformed due to the competition having higher clocks.
     
    Last edited: Sep 3, 2019
  3. sykozis

    sykozis Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    22,492
    Likes Received:
    1,537
    GPU:
    Asus RX6700XT
    You're comparing actual theft, a criminal act, with a minor spec deviation... Try harder... One is illegal, the other only causes a few people to whine and cry....
     
    fry178 likes this.
  4. Astyanax

    Astyanax Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    17,016
    Likes Received:
    7,353
    GPU:
    GTX 1080ti
    A spec deviation post sale is theft.
     
    gx-x likes this.

  5. jwb1

    jwb1 Guest

    Messages:
    725
    Likes Received:
    157
    GPU:
    MSI GTX 2080 Ti
    Some people here have short memories too. AMD had a lawsuit before due to misleading customers.

    It just amazes me the hypocrisy here is astounding. Its no wonder AMD fanboy's are known as the worst.
     
    gx-x and Nima V like this.
  6. Cyberdyne

    Cyberdyne Guest

    Messages:
    3,580
    Likes Received:
    308
    GPU:
    2080 Ti FTW3 Ultra
    AMD clearly knew that their new CPU's can't do above 4.2 GHz reliably. Even the chips that do boost well typically only hit that speed a very small fraction of the time, to the point it's nearly useless.

    I think AMD didn't want the tech laymen to assume CPU speed by advertised GHz. 4.2/4.3 GHz is a very weak jump from Ryzen 2k. People were expecting super high GHz from Zen 2, people like seeing that.
    But AMD got their Core speed improvement from from other places, like the IO chip, better memory management, and a huge cache. Things that can improve core speed just as much as pure GHz, but they are not as sexy sounding as 4.6 GHz. And it's hard to educate people who don't look at tech reviews like us here.

    But perception is everything, and AMD felt that lying was worth the risk.
    Maybe they should have taken a note from their own history and advertised core speed as "4800+" or something. Like the old Athlons, where that was used to signify the equivalent speed the CPU was capable of, compared to the competition.
     
    Last edited: Sep 3, 2019
    fry178, fredgml7, Ricardo and 3 others like this.
  7. Astyanax

    Astyanax Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    17,016
    Likes Received:
    7,353
    GPU:
    GTX 1080ti
    Now this i can agree with.
     
  8. MerolaC

    MerolaC Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    4,370
    Likes Received:
    1,082
    GPU:
    AsRock RX 6700XT
    I feel like not many people watched Derbauer video on this.
     
  9. Astyanax

    Astyanax Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    17,016
    Likes Received:
    7,353
    GPU:
    GTX 1080ti
    im pretty sure everyone replying to this thread watched the entire video.
     
  10. sykozis

    sykozis Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    22,492
    Likes Received:
    1,537
    GPU:
    Asus RX6700XT
    Show me exactly where AMD guarantees the boost speeds.

    Seriously.... How much are you getting paid to troll these threads? Are you paid per post?
     
    Evildead666 likes this.

  11. Cyberdyne

    Cyberdyne Guest

    Messages:
    3,580
    Likes Received:
    308
    GPU:
    2080 Ti FTW3 Ultra
    That's not fair, the spec sheet on their own website says:
    "Base Clock
    3.8GHz
    Max Boost Clock
    4.6GHz"
    Do we really need the word "guaranteed" next to every spec?
    Since it doesn't say 12 cores guaranteed should I expect to sometimes get less?
     
    gx-x, mat9v9tam, Nima V and 1 other person like this.
  12. Reddoguk

    Reddoguk Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,661
    Likes Received:
    594
    GPU:
    RTX3090 GB GamingOC
    I just built a 3700X / MSI/Gaming 570X system for a friend and the mobo came with a broken Realtek® 8111H Gigabit LAN Controller.

    I mean the mobo worked but the Lan was fubar. Anyway that first mobo his chip only hit 4.2 but with default cooler.

    When he went back to the shop with the broken mobo they only had a more expensive MSI 570X on offer so he took it.

    Once he got it up and running with his Noctua the new mobo/chip combo hit's the 4.4 no problem.

    So slightly better mobo or slightly better cooling? or just luck with the mobo and not the CPU?

    If you ask me i personally believe 570X and 3xxx need some time, maybe REV 2 will be much better no?
     
  13. Neo Cyrus

    Neo Cyrus Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    10,780
    Likes Received:
    1,393
    GPU:
    黃仁勳 stole my 4090
    I have to agree with this. When max specs are listed, it's been implied for years now that, that's what you'll get, given reasonable cooling. It was a dick move on AMD's part. They're starting to recover, starting to make of bit of money, and they're already starting to become bigger assholes. Whatever amount of greater sales their marketing department thought they'd get, with this little lie, wasn't worth the black mark it put on their reputation at a point in history where they're finally coming out of the hole they were put in.

    I've seen all the corporate lies in the world, and even I expected 4.6GHz single core turbo when I ordered my chip. As in actually consistently holds 4.6GHz. I never would have expected 4 to 4.2GHz-ish with a 1/10th of a second peak at 4.5GHz. Intel may be the personification of scum and villainy, with the physical form a festering pile of vomit, but at least their advertised clocks (even though they often didn't and probably still don't mention that it's single core) are actually delivered for enough seconds that it's notable.

    As a side note, I want to mention that the advertised TDPs of Intel are big fat lies, those are the base clock TDPs meaning they're worthless. Turbo, which all Intel chips have used forever now, throws those TDP numbers out the window. AMD's advertised TDP is the turbo clock TDP, not base.
    I'm betting it's slightly the cooling, but more the motherboard stock settings/behavior, not necessarily the physical hardware itself. The default settings a lot of mobos use for Ryzen 3000 from what I've seen are absolutely idiotic. As I mentioned, MSI pumps 1.488V through the 3900X with stock settings.
     
    Last edited: Sep 3, 2019
    gx-x likes this.
  14. Astyanax

    Astyanax Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    17,016
    Likes Received:
    7,353
    GPU:
    GTX 1080ti
    again, this is why intel and nvidia only advertise the average attainable boost on their cpu's and gpu's respectively.
     
  15. MonstroMart

    MonstroMart Maha Guru

    Messages:
    1,397
    Likes Received:
    878
    GPU:
    RX 6800 Red Dragon
    To be fair you never know.

    Ryzen should reach the advertised boost clock there's no denying that. The up to is just poor marketing (and maybe illegal in some countries). They should advertise what you'll get for sure and leave the extra room as a lottery.

    Having said that you never know what you'll get. Even if they would advertise the minimum expected boost which they should do you still would not know. I bought a fair number of pieces in the past because they were supposedly according to reviews great overclocker just to find out they would not overclock **** because i did not win the silicon lottery. That's why now i totally avoid the overclock part of a review while making a purchase decision of a cpu or gpu. It's just not reliable most of the time since manufacturers send binned hardware to reviewers most of the time.
     
    Last edited: Sep 3, 2019
    fry178 likes this.

  16. bobblunderton

    bobblunderton Master Guru

    Messages:
    420
    Likes Received:
    199
    GPU:
    EVGA 2070 Super 8gb
    This is my first post. I figured this was as good a reason as any to post this.
    I went down to MicroCenter with a big wad of cash and bought all the components I needed to make a system for around a grand, in US dollars, and I had a spare video board laying around, too.
    Purchased Ryzen 3700x processor, Asrock Phantom Gaming 4 motherboard*, 32gb (2x16gb) sticks of CL15 3000mhz** RAM (was on sale nice and cheap!). Got a few other new things as well.
    Hooked it to a Seasonic 620 watt power supply, and put it in a Fractal Define something-something full-tower (used, E-bay auction, 50$ cash, pickup location was located 15 minutes from the parts store, hoo-rah!).
    I did not purchase an aftermarket cooler, I used the stock cooler. This tower has a few fans in it, and not much else. I used an existing RX 480 8gb video card I had here already, as it's still plenty 'good enough' to do what I need/want. First thing I did was scrape all the pre-applied 'meh' quality thermal paste off the heat-sink, as there's *WAY* too much on there (mine was thickness of a 'store savings club' store card - that's WAY too much!), and I stuck on some 'Coolaboratory Liquid Metal' (conductive!) on the bottom of the heat-sink after I had cleaned the old stuff off with alcohol. I barely used any of it, maybe just enough to make half a sprinkle (as per sprinkles on cake or cup-cakes), any more and it wanted to ooze out between the processor and heat-sink and so I didn't want to risk it letting out any 'magic smoke'
    I've also got an external USB blu-ray drive (four dollars, yes, open box) and an inland 1tb NVME m.2 (102$, system drive), which is plenty good enough for the price paid.
    Upon installing Windows 10, I noticed that all was well, and went ahead and purchased an Ebay Windows 10 Retail ESD key for cheap, as that worked when 'UR CD KEY' site DID NOT WORK (wasted 15$ on UR CD KEY, never going back THERE). Was < one third cost on Ebay for same thing anyways.
    I have benchmarked the system. It is stable. It works. I am coming from a 5 year old 4790k that has put in it's day and paid for itself now.
    The only BIOS adjustment I made was making sure it read the XMP profile (Micron-sourced Crucial Ballistix memory, 2x 16gb sticks, I believe dual-rank), which was one click once I was on the right option page.
    I have Windows 10 Pro 1903 image installed here, it's been updated, too. I have the Ryzen BALANCED power plan active as that's plenty good enough, and it shouldn't ROAR at night while I sleep.

    TL:DR
    This 3700x processor boosts to 4.45~4.5 ghz single core when there is almost no load / light sporatic load and you are milling about reading web pages, doing scripting, etc.
    This 3700x processor boosts to 4.25ghz 'all day' if I keep a load or game on the system, or leaving polling software (Core Temp, or similar software, as polling for temps creates a load).
    This 3700x processor will happily go past 4.25ghz to 4.275ghz if I keep it cool enough, as it likes to do that often when the system is first booted and is on the desktop.

    This is just a regular store bought chip and the absolute cheapest X570 motherboard in the store (that was new, they had cheaper B450/X470 board but I lacked a gen 1 or 2 chip for Bios Updates, and Bios flashback boards were as expensive or more than my Asrock board I have here). I snagged the 50$ discount off the motherboard when purchased with a processor. This is in NO way a cherry picked or binned CPU, or motherboard.

    Clarifications listed here for ease of reading the above:
    *Yes, I am aware, that Asrock Phantom Gaming 4 is no Asus Hero or Gigabyte Aorus of the likes I owned before, but for the price, I am no one to complain about any part of it. Plus it had an Intel NIC and 8 sata ports, so really, it's not all bad being cheap. I am not planning on doing mega-overclocks. If I wanted more speed than a 3700x gives from the factory, then I could buy the 3800x or the much more powerful 3900x (or the 3950x in September). Spending 100's on overclocking when you can just move up to a better CPU or high-end-desktop platform in-stead with that cash and buy any 30~35$ cooler to get you by at stock settings, I don't understand. It was fun back in the core 2 or Athlon days (ex: q6600 G0 Slackr, Core i7 920 D0, Pentium dual-core E5200), but it's not what it used to be (nor do I want the heat and noise, or need flashy disco-tech in my house). I also have not installed the Ryzen Master software.
    BIOS on the board is whatever shipped with the board which I purchased in the last week of July. 1.0.0.2? Don't quote me, however. I will update if I run into any issues, and only then.
    **Yes, I am aware, that 3000mhz RAM is not as good as 3600mhz in sheer bandwidth (poorer latencies non-withstanding), and is not the fastest for top-end IF speeds. This ram was ON SALE and works 100% with this board and that's all I cared about. I could use the Ryzen DRAM calculator to re-configure it, but honestly, this PC is quick enough not to concern myself with it. It's also stable.

    USE CASES:
    I make maps for BeamNG.Drive and occasionally dabble in some 3D games like city-builders or even simple stuff like RIMWORLD. BeamNG will use ALL the cores you can feed it. I also model with Maya LT (as my brain is allergic to learning Blender3d, it seems), so I need to have a stable, competent system, for my tasks. I also work a lot with graphics and sound mostly due to the content creation I do here. I don't need it slowing down or running out of RAM when I am healthy enough to work on the map (I am physically disabled), I want to just sit down and get to work on stuff. Several unfortunate events lead to my 4790k machine feeling under the weather (a few too many lightning hits, the power substation in town exploded, blowing a LOT of electronics out on the north side of town, killed the SeaSonic and the secondary sata ports / front USB on the Asus Hero z97 board). Hats off to Seasonic, best RMA experience ever, even almost 5 years after purchase.

    Entirely, I love my Ryzen 3700x, and very glad I did not buy another intel processor. I am on a fixed income, so budgeting is very real, but I can still afford a modern computer if I buy smart. My 4790k wouldn't go 100mhz over it's stock turbo speed, not even with a Phanteks TC-14 cooler (it was a red and white one?), delidding, and liquid metal above and below the heat-spreader. It just got so hot, that I couldn't use the stock cooler, and the 100$ air cooler couldn't even really corral the heat issue until it was delidded. Even then. 4400mhz was as high as it would go.
    When it came down to picking parts, sure I wanted good parts, they didn't have to be cream of the crop, but good parts yes. It came down to 'if I spend extra on this part, is it faster, and if so, does it justify the % cost increase VS performance increase?'. Over-all I am very satisfied with my Ryzen. I have been bumbling around with heaps of computer hardware we call a PC since the days of owning my first AM-486 DX-class 66mhz processor, around 1994~1995 - so close to 25 years. This build was very painless.

    Observations:
    The Ryzen is great, but it's fickly about how warm it is VS how much it boosts, even if it's only 50~60C, it can scrape off 25~50mhz. This is complicated by the 'way too much' thermal paste that comes preapllied on the heat-sink. This is also complicated by how much voltage you allow the BIOS to feed the CPU. Stock settings may seem alarming to some, but honestly, if it dies within the warranty period, I will RMA this one, buy another, sell the RMA one when it comes back and tests good, and call it a day. Sure, some might find room to complain, but as a person with budget first and fore-most, these components delivered, and I am quite satisfied.

    Also, I don't have any 'uncorrectable WHEA errors' in my logs, there's a dozen or two correctable ones over the course of a month, but none that are uncorrectable, nor any file table corruption.

    I hope this helps someone. I wouldn't have made this post so long, but it helps to have all the information there to alleviate page worth of replies in question form, about info that could have as easily been included before-hand.
    --Cheers!
     
    fredgml7 likes this.
  17. mat9v9tam

    mat9v9tam Guest

    Messages:
    37
    Likes Received:
    4
    GPU:
    MSI GTX970M @C1330/M2705
    I just love cookie analogy :)
    So if the box of cookies stated I will get 46 cookies and I got 45 (a common thing with 3900X it seems) but the cookies were so big that they were bigger (and tastier) then 50 cookies from competing vendor then... hell yes I would!!
     
  18. MonstroMart

    MonstroMart Maha Guru

    Messages:
    1,397
    Likes Received:
    878
    GPU:
    RX 6800 Red Dragon
    It's a survey though. How precise is it? I'm not really looking to buy a cpu so i don't have 20 minutes to watch the whole thing but does he explains what was the modus operandi to sort the data and exclude the trolls from the results? Cause when it comes to AMD vesus Intel versus nVidia you can be very sure at least half of it will be trolls.

    It depends. If the box advertise 90G i would rather have 9 x 10G cookies than 12 x 5G cookies ;)

    All fanboys are equally bad. There's no such thing as worse fanboys.

    AMD should know better though. It's not the year 2000 anymore where they had to advertise a number instead of the clock speed cause people would think it was worse because of a slower clock. I mean it's 2019 people know better and they watch reviews on Youtube. If the minimum guarantee boost clock is 4.4 then advertise 4.4 and the people lucky at the silicon lottery will be happy. If you have a different boost clock for 1 core, 4 cores and 16 cores then advertise all the correct boost clock depending on usage.
     
    Last edited: Sep 3, 2019
  19. mat9v9tam

    mat9v9tam Guest

    Messages:
    37
    Likes Received:
    4
    GPU:
    MSI GTX970M @C1330/M2705
    Could you maybe consolidate all your answers into one post?
     
  20. Mpampis

    Mpampis Master Guru

    Messages:
    249
    Likes Received:
    231
    GPU:
    RX 5700 XT 8GB
    To be fair to AMD, the term "Max boost clock" implies that the speed isn't guaranteed. "Boost clock", as a term, clearly states that it is dependent on many factors.
    It's the same as when your ISP said your internet connection is "Up to 24Mbits", or the "Max or peak power" of your speakers.
    Yes that makes them obnoxious, but the terminology used means they aren't technically lying.
    But still, they did lower the speed later. They should apologize for making a mistake in the first place. It would be a blow to their image, but it's not worse than what they are actually doing now.
     

Share This Page