AMD Ryzen 3000 CPUs Can Overclock To 5 GHz Single & 4.5 GHz All Core OC

wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-3000-zen-2-cpu-5-ghz-overclock-4-5-ghz-all-core-boost/

We need stop antisemitism

Attached: Screenshot_20190530-160051.jpg (1080x1431, 648K)

Other urls found in this thread:

pcgamesn.com/amd/ryzen-3000-cpu-overclocking
tomshardware.com/news/gigabyte-amd-ryzen-3000-pcie-4.0-x470,39377.html
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

How can I delete other people's posts?

OY VEY

kek

AMDbros ASSEMBLE

RAPE RAPE RAPE RAPE RAPE RAPE RAPE RAPE RAPE RAPE RAPE RAPE RAPE

Attached: 1559152048585.gif (320x240, 585K)

SHOAH

big if true

Lmao at amdcels
Ive been clocking my 8700 on ALL cores for over a year already

At 5ghz

tig if brue

Jebus.

OH NO

Attached: Ryzen_2700x_vs_8700k.png (629x1032, 72K)

O
H
N
O

Attached: 1559068788330.jpg (1271x672, 172K)

ADORED TV
VINDICATED

wtf does this piece of shit chart have to do with what is currently being discussed u mental retard

DON'T BUY THESE. WAIT FOR 4TH GEN

based retard

based Intel headquarters working full time

Oh yes 1% of all zen 2 chips can hit 5ghz on only 1(one) core. Thanks AMD! Meanwhile the 8600k/8700k/9900k can reach 5ghz+ all core with ease.

Until the zombies get ya!

>wrong about literally every single thing
K

>30% increase in LoL
>Ryzen 3000 will tie Intel in meme 2080ti 1080p benches
CPUs don't matter. Computers don't matter.
Nothing matters.

It's a stock 8700k with a 1080ti just like the AYMD demo

>4.8GHz is achievable on all cores
>~4.4GHz performs similar to a 5Ghz 9900k – in Cinebench
RIP intel

It's stock Ryzen 3000 too. :^)

Who the fuck cares FX series was first consumer CPU to do 5ghz and it meant fuck all.
All you stupid fuckers act like this is some retarded back to the future shit where once your CPU reaches 5000mhz you are magically teleported out of your mom's basement.

Just like the stock 2700x and vega right ;)

>zen on a process optimized specifically for low power usage can't OC so zen 2 on a process optimized for high performance definitely can't either
See you at E3.

The process is in it's early stage retard
Intel couldnt hit 5ghz in the beginning either
If could they oc it, they would
Theres no reason to be behind intel on 7nm other than that it's not possible to clock higher

>If could they oc it, they would
Why didn't the 9900k launch with a stock all core 5Ghz then "retard"?

It already is 50% faster in ST Performance than ryzen, why should they push this housefire even more?

DELID DIS

this
I thought Jow Forums was smarter than this

And Ryzen is already better multicore, vastly better efficiency where they're sitting, and cheaper. Oh, and they have parity in single thread.
Why would they push it further and ruin the massive efficiency lead? Especially when they constantly get slammed for inefficient GPUs?
They didn't != They can't

We're probably going to hear about the OC capabilities during E3.
At least they hinted at something like that.

pcgamesn.com/amd/ryzen-3000-cpu-overclocking

>We quizzed AMD’s Erin Maiorino about the overclocking potential of both the Ryzen 3000 CPUs and the X570 chipset as a whole,
>The somewhat cryptic response was: “No, no comment on that just yet… in ten days, we should be pretty good.”

Can't wait to see the how far the clocks actually go.
Would be crazy if that 5GHz turned out to be true. It would absolutely decimate Intel.

>5.0GHz is doable, but it’s a challenge
>5GHz boost isn’t infeasible
>5Ghz all core is pretty much a no-go.
So which is it?

Chinks with ES chips in hand have already said 5ghz all core is probably not happening, but 4.8ghz should be attainable.
Hitting 4.6ghz at these power levels is pretty impressive,but everything always has its own power curve, and there are always critical inflection points. Maybe 5hgz clocks won't be attainable for most chips until partial EUV stepping with 7nm+

>If could they oc it, they would
>Theres no reason to be behind intel on 7nm other than that it's not possible to clock higher
Other than AMD trying to make their TDP ratings at least vaguely resemble reality, unlike Intel.

What a 3800x can do within the bounds of its 105w TDP is not necessarily indicative of what it can do with a more heavy duty cooling solution and a lot more wattage. Remember that AMD hasn't even revealed how high the XFR frequencies on these chips will be.

Also note that, with adequate cooling, Radion VII overclocks quite well on the same manufacturing process (though of course they'd be on different parts of the voltage/freq curve).

that 5ghz is possible, but impossible via "boost" since it needs manual OC and work to properly work, not to mention good cooling. It's not something you can get to work out of the box without manual tinkering.
>5ghz on all core is a no go
that one is meant the way it is, not possible ON ALL CORES you retard

5GHz all core is definitely unattainable, I have no doubts about that.
But if the single core can tickle that region then it's pretty damn amazing.
All core anywhere +4.5GHz would be awesome. The 2920x does 4.15 all core turbo.
+400mhz higher all core boost and the IPC increase thrown on top of that and it's a beast of a CPU coming to the market.
It'll be interesting to see how the 16 core model will do along with Threadrippers.

>Why would they push it further and ruin the massive efficiency lead? Especially when they constantly get slammed for inefficient GPUs?
Because first impressions matter and they can't afford to be behind intel on 7nm
>Oh, and they have parity in single thread
No they don't, they only catched up to the stock 8700k, if they won't have good oc capability, intel will still lead in Performance although only by a margin
They just need to push it, so they will be remembered as the faster one and not the one who goes for compromises
You can't compare gpus and cpus, even on the same node they work completly different and you can't say if one processing unit hits high clocks, that the other one will too
And the vega 7 doesen't clock that good in reality
The tdp doesen't say shit, it could be the 1800x all over again
Just wait for proper tests and stop falling for these shitty ryzen is only 10% behind intel memes made by poorfags who sit on phenoms and ivy bridge i5s and never even touched a zen cpu

>You can't compare gpus and cpus, even on the same node they work completly different and you can't say if one processing unit hits high clocks, that the other one will too
Process nodes have voltage curves that broadly tend to hold across different chip types. The larger issue is that Radion VII and Ryzen 3000 will be in different parts of the voltage curve.

>And the vega 7 doesen't clock that good in reality
In overclocking its more thermally limited than voltage limited, and overclocks quite decently on liquid cooling. Notably, being thermally limited on overclocks rather than running into a nearly vertical voltage wall (as on GF's 14nm LPP and 12nm LP) would a big improvement for overclocking Zen 2 vs Zen and Zen +

>And the vega 7 doesen't clock that good in reality
Go lookup what TDP means and how AMD and Intel calculate theirs differently.

>Just wait for proper tests
This amounts to saying disband Jow Forums because there's no point in talking about technology at all beyond what YouTube e-celeb clickbait whores ram down everyone's throats in the form of colorful charts.

>Single thread
Fucking kek.
The year 2000 called

>No they don't, they only catched up to the stock 8700k,
Holy shit you are dumber than a sack of bricks.
"Caught" is the word you are looking for.
And in what world is it only parity when you OC one CPU but not the other? What would happen in that circumstance if you OCed the stock CPU? It would be faster. AKA not parity.
Stock to stock, OC to OC, that's parity.

If Single thread doesen't matter why ayymd increases it on their 3000 series?

Pajeet, go home.

Rude

isn't league of legends a souped up version of the WC3 engine? Why doesn't it run at 1000fps on a modern PC?

>with ease.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Pretty sure the gap will be even less at 1440p, even then both CPU's get well over 200fps.

AMD just happens to consume less power and run cooler.

Attached: 8j3euqv0i2a01.jpg (765x630, 49K)

Does it say what resolution these games are being run at? If 4K, then the 3800x is amazing. If 1080p, then amd is still behind intel in gaming.

OH NONONONONONO AMD BTFO

NO PCIE 4.0 SUPPORT ON OLDER CHIPSETS! AMD CONFIRMED THIS THEMSELVES!

ENJOY YOUR GIMPED RYZEN 3000 ON YOUR X470 TAICHI ULTIMATE AND CROSSHAIR 7!!!!!!!!!! FEELING BUYERS REMORSE YET? HOW'S THE COPE?


HOW WILL AMD EVER RECOVER?

Attached: AMD BTFO.png (1072x274, 123K)

> PCIe 4 is not compatible on PCIe 3 mobos
Physics BTFO

No shekels for you, Chaim.

tomshardware.com/news/gigabyte-amd-ryzen-3000-pcie-4.0-x470,39377.html

t.

Attached: 1527629778452.jpg (679x758, 54K)

>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
fucking sold

Attached: 1480054902951.jpg (480x480, 37K)

You know those people with X79 motherboards actually upgraded to PCIe 3.0 after they upgraded to Ivy Bridge-E? No excuses for AMD, cope.

*AMD tells Gigabyte to shut it down*
Nothin personnel, kid.

amdahl's law called

Z77 here w/ PCIe 3.0
I'm buying Zen2.

Attached: 33a2e5d39d5aa5df95e6b0506b77d69c7d49275d6bfd4540ed77aa32b28a76e7.jpg (231x205, 11K)

Well, as long as we're living in fantasy land, AMD just announced they're releasing a 79-core 8 niggahurtz proc on IBM Nazi black magic -1nm graphene, get fucked Incel.

no argument to refute
SEETHING

you just want to spend money?

As if you had an argument to begin with. I don't even know why I'm still replying, you're obviously a dumb troll.

Well it's true. X79 motherboards(ALL of them, try finding one that doesn't but yet support Ivy Bridge) allows PCIe 3.0 when you upgrade to Ivy Bridge E. Why not the same on AMD motherboards?

Maybe your mind is not good enough to process simple english, sorry.

OK, and obviously X370 and X470 motherboard manufacturers are currently working on updating BIOS to allow PCIe 4.0 on those boards, so what's your point?

Only gigabyte. Also, AMD can ask them to shut it down. Why else would Robert Bollock say that? He is PART of AMD, keep that in mind.

AMD is not supporting PCIe 4.0 on X370/X470. We already knew that. They were leaving it up to the OEMs. And no, AMD can't force Gigabyte not to enable it on their boards. We know AsRock is working on it, and other OEMs have confirmed they are testing it as well. Your source is literally misinterpreting a Reddit post and then insisting you're right because you say so. Get fucked, Discord tranny Reddit double nigger.

>They were leaving it up to the OEMs. And no, AMD can't force Gigabyte not to enable it on their boards.

Well you obviously did NOT read the article:

"AMD decided to lock the function only to new X570 models."

Note "LOCK".

"He starts by telling about all the news published by both partner manufacturers and the media, and concludes that AMD will remove that opportunity through software (BIOS / UEFI)."

Implies AMD will go full Intel and lock down this feature.

"In cases where PCI Express 4.0 does not work properly, it is unclear whether the consumer's debt should be imposed on the motherboard or processor manufacturer (AMD), but also who is responsible."

Blame pushing by AMD to fault the OEMs instead. Hence the justified 'lock'.

"The decision to delete PCI Express 4.0 support with older motherboards is simply that AMD wants to take it safe before the uncertain, according to Hallock."

Again, more excuses.

"Another part that is likely to play is the sale of motherboards, where it is in the manufacturers' interest to sell new ones and in AMD's to sell their new control circuit X570 to the manufacturers."

The actual truth in the article.

AMD have went full-Inturd/NoVideo on this one. This is definitely unacceptable you rart.

hello intel marketeer
I would like to say that I'll be switching to the 3700x from my 1700
thank you for reading this!

If this were true there would be more than one source for it, likely multiple English sources. There also wouldn't have been months of testing and validation from motherboard OEMs and a BIOS release enabling it for older motherboards that is still available. I'll believe it when I see it, until then you're a dirty fucking shill.

>The process is in it's early stage retard
>Intel couldnt hit 5ghz in the beginning either
Broadwell started with the Intel Core i7-5775, it had a frequency of 3.3 / 3.7 Ghz. Good chips made it to 4-4.4Ghz OC.

This new Ryzen generation with chiplets is starting a lot higher.
The only thing you have to go by for the OC limitation is the previous two Ryzen which were different nodes + architecture... while on the other hand, there were decades of CPU releases before that were able to be OCed beyond their boost specification.

>"~4.4GHz performs similar to a 5Ghz 9900k – in Cinebench"

Attached: 1547621284909.gif (200x150, 725K)

???? The opposite is true . Higher resolution =more gpu bound . If it s at 1080p then they matched intel

...and when you do see it, have some (cope) with you.

My nigga. 1700 gang.

Altough im waiting for 16 cores. Having such headroom for VM's is fucking epic when i used a fx4100 before the 1700.

How does Zen 2 IPC compare to Skylake? Zen was about 5% behind Skylake right?

Zen 2 IPC is at least on par with if not better than Coffee Lake.

Nice
Hopefully there is a Zen 2 chip that can reach at least 4.8GHz so I'm not losing any serial horsepower when switching over from my Intel.

Attached: 1514363428048.jpg (577x459, 110K)

Some overclocker in China claims 4.8GHz isn't all that hard to OC to. The 12-core boosts to 4.6GHz all core out of the box, so 4.8GHz should be achievable.

I hope they don't use some weird staggered binning
3600 reaching 4.8 would be really nice

gigabyte or MSI already included the 4.0 option in their bios update

i wonder what happens to the social credit of tech leakers

Attached: social-credit.png (960x2288, 207K)

intcel cope

You got it backwards
It's 1080p bound to CPU, 4k bottlenecked by GPU. Since the improvement is so high, it must mean it comes from 1080p, because if the numbers were from 4k resolution, the difference would be too small due to GPU limitations (2700x at 4k has similar fps than 9900k at 4k)

Clock speed != performance.

Clock speed is one metric. Instructions per clock is more important in this race at present. AMD is winning.

Attached: doge_honk_honk.png (899x795, 440K)

you would fucking hope so, seeing as you had to pay two overclocking taxes to do it.

>i wonder what happens to the social credit of tech leakers
Probably nothing, it aims to fight political dissenters, Muslims and people who act like insectoids or doesn't pay debts, or those who are addicted to videogaymes

Meaningless when zombie gets its security patch.

Riot doesn't want a good game. They only care about milking money through microtransctions

>reddit spacing
Opinion discarded.

(You)

>reddit spacing
way to announce that you've been here for five years or less

badly designed

INSTRUCTIONS PER CYCLE

>4.8GHz is achievable on all cores
Small chance
>~4.4GHz performs similar to a 5Ghz 9900k – in Cinebench
No way
>5.0GHz is doable, but it’s a challenge
Maybe
>5GHz boost isn’t infeasible
Maybe
>5Ghz all core is pretty much a no-go.
True
>1.35V for all core 4.5Ghz
Most likely
>Memory is being run very loose and slow to assure the stability for testing
True

retarded incel

>this is what AMDrones believe
And yet Another Massive Disappoinment

5Ghz is a mental barrier for Inturds. Nothing else matters.

dissapointment because it cant reach 5ghz? it doesnt need to reach 5ghz to beat incel cpus