So is overclocking that important anymore when CPU's boostclocks pretty well at least in Ryzen's?

So is overclocking that important anymore when CPU's boostclocks pretty well at least in Ryzen's?

Attached: overclock intel.png (516x128, 7K)

Boost clocks are pretty much stock clocks that are reduced because of cooling performance with cheap stock coolers.
Overclocking can take you higher then the boost clock is and for longer when you have proper power circuitry on your motherboard and a proper cooling solution.

ryzen? no
they boost to the ceiling already.
maybe the 2200g apu is worth it and the gpu oc.
otherwise, it's better to undervolt.
4GHz 1.1v for 2700x

yeah, maybe ryzen 7nm next year will be more overclockable?

memory tweaking is the new oc

It is still good on the non-X models on AMD, since they have lower clocks

Likely. That, and RAM latency is the place to go with Ryzen right now, and that's what new processes and refinement are for. Intel has been doing that for the last decade with their uArchs all based on the same one.
Word out there right now is that the new smaller process will also allow for more cores per CCX, too. But there's no official releases on anything, and it's too early to tell. Looking at what Zen did, and at what Zen+ improved, I'd say Zen2 has decent potential. If it closes the gap in gaymes even further, maybe even supersedes it, and does add more cores, Intel is royally fucked.

the interesting thing is that intel is releasing the 8 core coffee lake on q4 to try and undercut zen2, but even a really conservative 25% bump in overall performance is already going to make it irrelevant

I don't know about Pinnacle Ridge, but overclocking my ryzen 1600 was worth it

Coreboot and Libreboot do not support over-clocking

Please someone implement overclocking in a FOSS BIOS

>overclocking when you cant run proprietary software
lmao

Interesting that when you buy X models you don't get much out of overclocking.

it's because the single core turbo is already at the voltage wall
you can trick it into going a little bit higher if you do a slight BCLK overclock

I doubt it, they'll probably have it boosting to the limit again.
With how good XFR2 and Precision Boost are, there's barely a point in traditional overclocking.

eh, traditional OC can get more out of multi core performance compared to XFR and PB

on ryzen X models you really don't want to touch anything other than the memory. XFR is far better than a manual overclock especially in single core performance.

this will be interesting to you

Attached: evni0utcdnt01[1].png (600x805, 63K)

Bclk overclocking can cause issues with NVMe, PCIe and pretty much any shit connected to the SoC

Not with an external clock generator.

Remember how we used to overclock FSB before? It's the same shit now, AMD Platforms play nicer with BCLK than multiplier.

It's because you have less incentive to, what's the point of trying to OC my CPU to 4.2GHz at all times when I can just run it with precision boost 2, get 4.125-4.2GHz all core OCs anyways (depending on the task), AND 4.35GHz dual core turbos for programs that need it?
Take a look at the difference in 2700 vs 2700X turboing, someone doing anything highly threaded will have their clocks drop off a cliff on the 2700. The manual OC is a lot more of a bonus in that case than doing it on a 2700X which will already boost itself to near 4.2.

Attached: clock_analysis_compared.jpg (975x503, 51K)

we have no idea of the road amd will take on their first 7nm
if its HPP instead of LPP then the 5ghs base clock sounds reasonable enough

proprietary software is fine, as long as its not your actual operating system or firmware for your computer

>inb4 you parrot stallmans incongruous beliefs