The motherboard and bios revision agesa version more specifically Precision Boost 2, will clock your cpu resulting in higher scores in R20the stepping is almost always limited by temperature.4750mhz Ryzen 9 3950X vs 5.2ghz 9900ks vs 4.7+ghz 7980XE : A Modest Destiny? :D
Precision boost overclocking PBO is not to be confused with precision boost. PBO is not short hand for precision boost. I run an x aorus xtreme board, with the latest agesa 1.
Running temps are about mid 70's for the test under sustained loads I'm around c with around a 24c ambient temp. Also disable and close all RGB software and related bloatware services, Asus being the largest offender, followed by corsair and gigabyte bloat ware for RGB in second place tie.
Precision boost 2 will ramp up the clock based off of 3 things, but the important one is temprature. Using all core load folding home in my case the case temps levelled off at 94c with max pump speed and fans, with a 23c ambient. Set your core voltage to manual, leave it at default then throw in a negative voltage offset by Based on ambient temperature, and pause time between runs.
Tldr; Get a cooler. TDP is a joke and this is no exception. The undervoltage For highest benchmarks in my experience do the following. Bios revision for your mainboard with the 1.Taking the original Ryzen platform up to 16 cores from the eight that it launched with offered a very significant upgrade path to first-generation Ryzen buyers, but it also raised questions about whether two memory channels would be enough to keep the CPU fed.
Until Intel launched the K, AMD had an eight-core CPU sharing space in the mainstream desktop market with an Intel platform that topped out at four cores and eight threads. Coffee Lake reset things a bit closer to parity later that same year, but AMD undoubtedly liked being able to queue up 2x the CPU cores in an apples-to-apples comparison.
With the Ryzen 9 X, it can do that again. Dual-channel DDR provides But a lot has changed since the days when single-channel DDR configurations roamed the Earth. Caches are much larger, prefetching algorithms have improved, and the widespread adoption of SMT offers opportunities to hide memory access latencies.
Windows 10 with the latest updates and patches was used. Nvidia GeForce driver Using PBO on a Threadripper voids its warranty. At the top of the market, we have to compare the parts that exist. Furthermore, the Cascade Lake X family drops in the not-too-distant future, bringing significant price cuts.
The point of including the Threadripper X and the Core iXE is to see how the newer part changes the shape of what has come before, and maybe to get a sneak preview of what the Cascade Lake versus Ryzen performance comparison is likely to look like. Background image by Catstradamus.
Graph overlay by ExtremeTech. The Ryzen 7 X and Core iK are retained to give some performance data on last-gen chips. The Threadripper X is included to check for any signs of memory bandwidth shortfalls now that AMD is putting 16 cores on just two memory buses, and for the most direct core to core comparison. The Ryzen 9 X and the Threadripper X are near-evenly matched, trading wins with each other across the test.
The Ryzen 9 X consistently renders in percent the time of the X. Our other test results are included in the slideshow below. Handbrake is now included. Handbrake and our 3D rendering performance results show the X is truly best-in-class. Overall, the Threadripper X competes most effectively with the Ryzen 9 X.
Gaming performance is up next. This is often the place where I note that GPU performance varies only a little at the top-end of the market and that the differences between these CPUs are narrow. Gaming performance shows a few surprising wins for the Ryzen Threadripper X, but the Ryzen 9 X hits higher frame rates overall and offers more regular performance besides. The fact that AMD is delivering performance gains like this in a high-core part is particularly impressive.
Cinebench is not the be-all-end-all of performance measurement, but these are still tests that Intel has been reliably winning for at least a decade. The Ryzen 9 X is a further uplift over the X and the X in both single-threaded and obviously multi-threaded performance. Do you need a Ryzen 9 X?
Probably not. It offers both of those things in the same CPU rather than asking users to choose between one or the other. It demonstrates sustained, multi-year double-digit performance improvements, even considering the constraints of bringing a core part into a dual-channel memory configuration — constraints which do not seem to bind third-generation Ryzen as much as some, including myself, were concerned they might.Even when overclocking, older CPUs still had a fixed maximum clock speed and once your cooling could no longer extend the clocks, you were at a point where you could determine which cooling solutions were good enough or could be considered overkill.
These days, clock speeds are dynamic. A CPU no longer has a set clock speed value.
AMD Ryzen 9 3950X CPU Review
Instead, you are given a base clock as a minimum standard of what you can expect under load. Then, you are given a boost clock value which is what the CPU can achieve under certain ideal conditions.
We do know how to trigger these conditions for test purposes but there are a lot of variables here and what you get varies by individual configuration and even by specific CPU. They are electrical design current, power package tracking, and thermal design current. One additional factor is CPU temperature.
下克上！ AMD锐龙9 3950X评测
If you hit the limits, it will drop the clocks to a lower range to reduce not just temperatures, but in order to keep EDC, PPT and TDC within a certain operational range. There are precision boost 2 values and PBO values. The latter is set by the motherboard or the user and are obviously more generous and allow the CPU to reach higher clocks conditions permitting. Above, you can see under load, I have a clock speed of about 3. The slightly lower clocks compared to the X make sense given that the X has more cores and the same TDP ratings.
To be clear, the clock speeds varied under PB2 depending on the application. As stated earlier, I did see 4. As you can see, the clock speed is now 4. Though technically, this is a form of overclocking. Our clocks in Cinebench R20 are actually slightly worse here as you can see. Of course, you can go into the BIOS and adjust the values in the PBO menus to increase these, however, in my experience doing so accomplishes nothing.
Slight or wild increases have no discernable impact either way. I say that for a couple of reasons. Under Auto-overclocking or PBO, the temperature ceiling is raised significantly. Nice review and I appreciate the insights offered. Self reply to add that the chart also lists it as being tested on Windowsbut the next paragraph details it as being run on Windows Forums New posts Search forums.
New posts What's new Latest activity New profile posts. Members Current visitors New profile posts Search profile posts. Log in Register. Search titles only.
Search Advanced search…. New posts. Search forums.
Michael Nager. Joined May 3, Messages 74 0. Joined Mar 15, Messages 3, 1. Joined Sep 3, Messages 1, 3. Michael Nager said:. In the course of his experimentation he has managed to degrade his Ryzen 7 X and I fear that with the way he is configuring his Ryzen 9 X he will be doing the same thing there as well.
In the video he has put up some benchmarks where, by configuring PBO in the BIOS he managed to get the results up by some amount, the problem is though, that he is doing so at higher voltages than I consider to be prudent and also at higher temps than I experience with my X. Actually Hardcore Overclocking. That is totally different from PBO settings he tested and suggested on his videos.
If you did read his own commends on the degrade discussion you would know that.AMD recommends a mm AIO watercooler as the minimum bar for entry for the Ryzen 9 X, and advises that beefier coolers can unlock more performance. For stock testing, we used the same Corsair Hi mm watercoolers that we use in the lab for testing chips that don't come with a bundled cooler.
We also used a beefy custom watercooling loop with two mm radiators for overclocking testing. You'll need to install the 1.
You'll also need the Windows May Update or later to enable the topology-aware scheduling implementation. Also, be aware that silicon quality, your motherboard, and firmware all play a role in the efficacy of AMD's unique boosting implementation, so your results may vary.
Ryzen 3950x with low Cinebench R20 score
With those prerequisites in place, we turned to our now-standard test for measuring boost clocks. We begin by recording the frequencies of each core during a series of commonly-used tests that should expose the peak frequencies. These programs only execute on one core of the processor, which typically allows the chip to reach its peak boost frequency within its power, current, and thermal envelope. We also used tests with intermittent "bursty" workloads: PCMark 10, Geekbench, and VRMark run in rapid succession after the first two tests.
With 16 cores hammering away, the per-core frequency recordings create almost-unintelligible charts, so the album above only includes the maximum and minimum frequencies recorded during each 1-second measurement interval ms sampling. That means these measurements could come from any one core, but it makes the charts easier to digest. We've also plotted chip temperature on the right axis the dark red line. We reached 4.
We frequently reached 4. Better cooling yields much better results: At stock settings, we reached 4. We also examined the output from our logging software and noticed that the boost activity occurred much more frequently in active cores. That's an improvement over what we've seen with past firmwares that incorrectly boosted inactive cores. Temperatures peaked at 75C with the Corsair Hi's fans cranking away at full speed, but these workloads primarily consist of lightly-threaded activity with short bursts of multi-threaded activity.
AMD's Ryzen processors have drastically improved single-threaded performance, but you'll lose that benefit if you manually overclock. That's simply because the chips can't be manually overclocked on all cores to reach the same frequency as the single-core boost frequency.
As we've seen with other Ryzen processors, we couldn't maintain an all-core overclock beyond 4.Full stop. Review over. With the core Ryzen 9 X, AMD is essentially running down the field, spiking the ball, and doing what the NFL would probably fine for excessive end-zone celebrations these days. Yes, fans wearing blue jerseys may consider heading for the parking lot or simply waiting around so you can end up on the Jumbotron tearfully watching the clock run out. So stick around as we break down just how insanely, stupidly fast the new Ryzen 9 X is.
True fans stay until the last second runs out, so you can cry as your team leaves the field in the agony of defeat. Clocks also vary, with the Ryzen 9 X boosting to 4. Base clocks—essentially worst-case-scenario clock speeds—are also lower, at 3. Little else changes except, well, the price, which some diehards consider too high we disagree. PBO Auto on for testing. Our rationale is that it comes switched on out of the box by all board vendors.
Testing with it off is further from fact than testing with it on auto, even if auto may vary slightly from board maker to board maker. Besides being a real product, Cinema4D is also integrated into effects engines such as that small indie app called Adobe After Effects. First up is multi-threaded performance, where the result is pretty much everything you expected to see from a core CPU going up against core and 8-core CPUs.
We also use Cinebench to measure single-threaded performance, to give you an idea of how it will perform in far more mundane applications such as the majority of Office tasks and even Adobe Photoshop.
The Ryzen 9 X shocked us by pulling out slightly ahead in Cinebench R20 using a single thread. This ray tracing application has roots in the Amiga era, but it's been dutifully updated by supporters.
We also ran POV Ray 3. V-Ray is a physically based renderer that has been used on such little projects as Avengers: Endgame, where V-Ray was used on the Thanos character, among other Marvel-related things. The result is as expected: a thrashing of the Core i9 at the hands of Thanos. And yes, all that for a drop of blood. Even Intel fans should gape in awe at the multi-core performance of a consumer core Ryzen 9 chip in V-Ray.
Our last rendering test is the Corona Renderer. One thing Corona is particularly proud of is being CPU-based only. And then you can look in awe at the performance of the core Ryzen 9 X. Corona is a CPU-based unbiased photorealistic renderer. No surprise, more cores means more performance. The results above are all expected.
Of the tasks typically done on computer, 3D rendering and 3D modelling usually offer the best performance scaling for the CPU cores.More on that later. However, this will decrease your single to low-thread-count performance.
What happens if you run a heavy workload on a server with PBO enabled and stock? You should really undervolt it. As you can probably deduce without me, PBO is great for gaming and other workstation use. Not so much for severs. You can tweak PBO a little bit to gain a tiny bit more performance. I like doing these things on Winblowshowever it should be possible on Linux with some user experience differences. The tools should be available. Let it cook for a few minutes.
And now the fun part. Generally b chipset mainboards are not fit to run Ryzen 39xx - often even at stock they will cook their VRM struggling to power it. While on the other hand, pretty much all the X have good VRM and will be fine. You can consult the mainboard mastersheet or listen to Buildzoid ramble about mainboards time table in the comments.
Beware, stay away from SoC voltage. Leave it. Undervolting is simple - set some nice low voltage, and start at some reasonable all core multiplier. This varies from chip to chip of course, for x you can start with You can also use stress-ng on Linux but your mileage may vary.
Now the other way around, eh? Say 42x and 1. Again set vcore via offset 1. Now test it the same way as with undervolting above. In the next blog post we will look at cooling and case airflow, and I will introduce you to my OCD workstation :. Workstation - Use tweaked PBO. Server - Use manual all core scalar. We just fix it to that value. Maxed out performance - use maximum safe voltage We will learn about it below.
Undervolting - use low voltage, and a bit lower clock. Recommended way to go for servers of any kind. OC - Maximum safe voltage aka FIT voltage I like doing these things on Winblowshowever it should be possible on Linux with some user experience differences.
OC Tweaking And now the fun part. Undervolting Undervolting is simple - set some nice low voltage, and start at some reasonable all core multiplier. Share on:.