Ryzen 3000: AMD deliberately limited Boost behavior in favor of longevity, says Asus staff

#5704540

Undying

2019-08-27 08:34

I would trade logevity for performance any day. Isnt that overclocking is for?

#5704550

asturur

2019-08-27 10:09

if they lower the maximum boost they need to respec the cpu and marketing material. Provably they will just boost for less time?

#5704552

Netherwind

2019-08-27 10:20

sverek:

Boost is automatic overclocking, it does work out of the box. Basically AMD is already overclocking CPU for us, no much gain by overclocking it manually. Still, would be awesome to have an option to "disable" this safe feature and go for higher clocks.

The gain would be stable clocks if that's something one is after. For example, if I play AC:Odyssey I typically get an average of ~4325MHz boost (with PBO but honestly I don't think it does anything at all) with clocks fluctuating between 4275-4350 but if I OC my CPU to 4400MHz, that's what I get regardless of what's happening in the game or with the temps. The performance difference (+75MHz) is probably very small but I liked seeing a constant frequency with my old 6700K and it's possible to get the same here.

#5704556

Alan Stables

2019-08-27 10:38

Sounds like damage control from ASUS as in boosts tests their boards were the worst, other manufactures such as msi and giga and ASRock hitting advertised boost on some (not all).

#5704559

fantaskarsef

2019-08-27 11:07

I wonder what they mean in terms of longevity. Will the CPU die withing 2 years with the more aggressive boost? Within 5? Hard to know if one wants the higher clocks or not with not knowing the facts or at least, the expectations AMD puts into this.

#5704560

Netherwind

2019-08-27 11:12

Alan Stables:

Sounds like damage control from ASUS as in boosts tests their boards were the worst, other manufactures such as msi and giga and ASRock hitting advertised boost on some (not all).

In a way, I'm hoping you are right and that we get better AGESA (like 1.0.0.2) which boosted better.

fantaskarsef:

I wonder what they mean in terms of longevity. Will the CPU die withing 2 years with the more aggressive boost? Within 5? Hard to know if one wants the higher clocks or not with not knowing the facts or at least, the expectations AMD puts into this.

Even if there is a hard cap, I'm not sure AMD would want to make a statement about it 🙂 Imagine what would happen then.

#5704562

Alan Stables

2019-08-27 11:17

Also it comes from an Intel enthusias (ASUS employee)t, lst time i remember shammy with amd was back in a64 days before core series ; Take this with a massive grain of Intel PR saltyness, don't believe me do your own research.

#5704563

fantaskarsef

2019-08-27 11:19

Netherwind:

Even if there is a hard cap, I'm not sure AMD would want to make a statement about it 🙂 Imagine what would happen then.

Sure, you're 100% right. Just imagine, what a sensible user could make of that, a choice, an educated decision... 😱:D

#5704571

Glottiz

2019-08-27 12:01

I ran Intel CPUs overclocked 24/7 for the last 20 years or so and never ever had a problem. Worth mentioning that each CPU I used at a minimum of 4 years.

#5704592

MegaFalloutFan

2019-08-27 13:25

Time to sue AMD for fake advertising.

#5704605

Evildead666

2019-08-27 14:02

MegaFalloutFan:

Time to sue AMD for fake advertising.

Go for it, see how far you get. Which Ryzen 3000 cpu did you get ?

#5704607

Evildead666

2019-08-27 14:04

Francesco:

All the evidence say that AMD pushed the new Ryzens near to their limits, in order to get the best reception possible. Look also at the X570 chipset, they really wanted to put in all the features needed to get an edge over Intel, pushing the chipset to the point it needs active cooling. All of this is ok, I just hope longevity will not suffer much. I have no flag, owned many Athlons in the past, switched to Intel when AMD cpus started to suck, owned a bunch of I5s since then and all of them served me very well and lasted many years of hard usage. Recently I switched back to AMD (3600) since I got pissed by how every new intel CPU was just a refresh of the previous ones, I wanted to reward innovation. Kudos to AMD, but if the new Ryzen will not prove to be reliable CPUs they will hardly have a second chance to strike the sleeping giant.

The X570 chipset wasn't designed. If you read a bit more, you would know that it is just the IO chip from the Ryzen chips themselves, because ASMedia didn't have the actual chipsets ready in time... Nothing was "squeezed in" to the chipset, it just doesn't have any power saving states, as it wasn't meant to be a motherboard chipset....so it runs pretty fast and hot.

#5704612

Denial

2019-08-27 14:08

Evildead666:

Go for it, see how far you get. Which Ryzen 3000 cpu did you get ?

3900x and I've yet to see boost clocks or even similar clocks to what the reviewers were getting on initial bios. Do I care that much? Not really - chip still performs well and better than my 7820x - should AMD be called out on it though? Absolutely. The larger point here is exactly what loophole said - if any other company had done this people would be losing their shit but AMD does it and half the community just handwaves it away, some people trying to make it out as a good thing. As I said in the other thread it sets a precedent for AMD to get away with things like this as they have for years now.

#5704618

Evildead666

2019-08-27 14:23

Denial:

3900x and I've yet to see boost clocks or even similar clocks to what the reviewers were getting on initial bios. Do I care that much? Not really - chip still performs well and better than my 7820x - should AMD be called out on it though? Absolutely. The larger point here is exactly what loophole said - if any other company had done this people would be losing their crap but AMD does it and half the community just handwaves it away, some people trying to make it out as a good thing. As I said in the other thread it sets a precedent for AMD to get away with things like this as they have for years now.

As long as it says "Up to" that's it. Internet bandwidth from ISP's. "Up to 100Mbit Internet". They guarantee the base clock, and then the boost clock is "Up to". No one would have a leg to stand on. I'm happy with my 3800X. I also believe that we are still a way away from the Final Bios versions, for any AM4 Motherboard. What we have today, is still not the final clocks etc. As for the "Review Bios", you'd have to prove that they deliberately held back the "proper" Bios, and I don't think that is going to be done either. I suppose when you don't have the deep pockets of Intel, you can't have the same sort of CPU launch.

#5704625

Denial

2019-08-27 14:34

Evildead666:

As long as it says "Up to" that's it. Internet bandwidth from ISP's. "Up to 100Mbit Internet". They guarantee the base clock, and then the boost clock is "Up to". No one would have a leg to stand on. I'm happy with my 3800X. I also believe that we are still a way away from the Final Bios versions, for any AM4 Motherboard. What we have today, is still not the final clocks etc. As for the "Review Bios", you'd have to prove that they deliberately held back the "proper" Bios, and I don't think that is going to be done either. I suppose when you don't have the deep pockets of Intel, you can't have the same sort of CPU launch.

https://www.amd.com/en/products/cpu/amd-ryzen-7-3700x#product-specs There is no mention of up to on this page at all and even the "max boost clock" the "max" part was added 15 days ago: https://www.reddit.com/r/hardware/comments/cp9zug/amd_has_updated_the_ryzen_product_pages_to_be/ AMD posted a video where they say you should be able to do 200mhz+ beyond the highest clock printed on the box. As it currently stands I can't even hit the box speed, I'm capped nearly 100mhz below it on a $380 motherboard with liquid cooling. Couple all that with every single board getting lower clocks on newer bios's compared to review/release ones and ASUS saying this and I don't really see how you can take it any other way. Again, it doesn't make the processor bad - but it needs to be called out so they stop doing it in the future.

#5704632

H83

2019-08-27 14:44

Man i feel bad for everyone affected by this issue. And i agree with Denial, AMD should be called by this type of "issues" the same way we call other companies when they pull silly stunts like this.

#5704637

Netherwind

2019-08-27 14:51

Denial:

3900x and I've yet to see boost clocks or even similar clocks to what the reviewers were getting on initial bios. Do I care that much? Not really - chip still performs well and better than my 7820x - should AMD be called out on it though? Absolutely. The larger point here is exactly what loophole said - if any other company had done this people would be losing their crap but AMD does it and half the community just handwaves it away, some people trying to make it out as a good thing. As I said in the other thread it sets a precedent for AMD to get away with things like this as they have for years now.

Care to share some of your results?

Evildead666:

I'm happy with my 3800X. I also believe that we are still a way away from the Final Bios versions, for any AM4 Motherboard. What we have today, is still not the final clocks etc. As for the "Review Bios", you'd have to prove that they deliberately held back the "proper" Bios, and I don't think that is going to be done either. I suppose when you don't have the deep pockets of Intel, you can't have the same sort of CPU launch.

So am I, it mostly boosts to 4325MHz in games and the maximum single core boost I've seen is 4550MHz (if iCUE is disabled). I could also run an all-core OC @ 4400MHz to get an even boost in games.

#5704659

Reardan

2019-08-27 15:27

Netherwind:

Care to share some of your results?

We don't need his results. Something like 96% of 3900x's don't hit their advertised boost.

Evildead666:

As long as it says "Up to" that's it. Internet bandwidth from ISP's. "Up to 100Mbit Internet". They guarantee the base clock, and then the boost clock is "Up to". No one would have a leg to stand on. I'm happy with my 3800X. I also believe that we are still a way away from the Final Bios versions, for any AM4 Motherboard. What we have today, is still not the final clocks etc. As for the "Review Bios", you'd have to prove that they deliberately held back the "proper" Bios, and I don't think that is going to be done either. I suppose when you don't have the deep pockets of Intel, you can't have the same sort of CPU launch.

If your defense is, "Hey, the ISPs do it," you've already lost.

#5704678

Netherwind

2019-08-27 15:59

Reardan:

We don't need his results. Something like 96% of 3900x's don't hit their advertised boost.

Oh, it's that bad...

#5704682

Denial

2019-08-27 16:04

Netherwind:

Care to share some of your results?

I'll do some extensive testing at some point. I just know that when I first got my x570-E with original bios, I saw within 25mhz of advertised boost - with the latest bios (at the time before the board died) that dropped to 125mhz away from advertised. I then switched to gigabyte aorus pro and now its roughly 100mhz. I don't stare at it or record it throughout the day but in my quick testing with a few different apps that's the behavior I've seen.

Reardan:

We don't need his results. Something like 96% of 3900x's don't hit their advertised boost.

3800x, the processor that both Netherwind and Evildead666 have on average are the best at hitting their advertised speeds - mine is the worst - feels bad =( Like I said it's not that big of a deal but when you give a little companies tend to take a lot. If these processors weren't capable of hitting those speeds reliably they should have never been advertised as that speed.