• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

AMD Ryzen 3000 Builders Thread

Page 105 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Pulled the best memory scores I've gotten so far. I can't seem to get the board to take 15 for a tCL setting though. I can set it for 15 in Ryzen Master as well as in BIOS but it sets itself back to 16 upon booting (No error beeps or anything, just resets back to 16).
Edit....Just happened to read why in another thread, GearDown setting only allows even numbers for tCL. (Thanks Det0x)
 

Attachments

  • 60116dram.JPG
    60116dram.JPG
    192.8 KB · Views: 20
Last edited:
Just got a 3600x installed on a Gigabyte Aorus B450 Pro Wifi. Had a 2600x in there for 2 days and jumped on an $80 upgrade to the 3600x.

Any reason why my CPU Multiplier keeps jumping from 36 to 41.25/42 every single second? Thus causing CPU speed to jump, cpu temps to jump, cpu fan speed to ramp up and down which sounds like a drone flying around your head?
 
The multiplier jumping around would be normal. You can either alter the temperature/fan setting to a slightly higher value or if you're lucky your bios/fan software may have a threshold delay of some sort you can set so that the fan speed changes don't kick in unless the temperature is above X amount for Y number of seconds.
 
YBS1 said:
The multiplier jumping around would be normal. You can either alter the temperature/fan setting to a slightly higher value or if you're lucky your bios/fan software may have a threshold delay of some sort you can set so that the fan speed changes don't kick in unless the temperature is above X amount for Y number of seconds.
Click to expand...
jumping from 36 to 42 every 1 second is normal?
 
Trying a new beta BIOS E7C35AMS.A20, seems to have fixed a few things. Need to try tightening up my RAM a bit again. I wish AMD had an AVX2 clock offset. I'm running at 4.4GHz now, it's stable except for Linpack.
 
Last edited:
Ajay said:
I wish AMD had an AVX2 clock offset.
Click to expand...

That's one of the reasons why I threw up my hands and went back to stock + voltage tweaks for everyday use. What I really wish is that PBO let me boost as high as manual overclocking did . . . but I can't figure it out, so I gave up on that too.
 
DrMrLordX said:
That's one of the reasons why I threw up my hands and went back to stock + voltage tweaks for everyday use. What I really wish is that PBO let me boost as high as manual overclocking did . . . but I can't figure it out, so I gave up on that too.
Click to expand...
Yeah, Zen2 is great, but AMD still has work to do. I hope we see nice improvements on RAM/CPU tweaking. I don't know why something like Ryzen Master can't figured out the best configuration for me and save it as a profile to the UEFI ROM. That would be cool.
 
DrMrLordX said:
That's one of the reasons why I threw up my hands and went back to stock + voltage tweaks for everyday use. What I really wish is that PBO let me boost as high as manual overclocking did . . . but I can't figure it out, so I gave up on that too.
Click to expand...

Try ratio overclocking? Turn off PBO, figure out your 24/7 safe voltage limit, then raise each CCX until you its limit, then the next CCX, etc on and on. Each CCX will now boost to X ratio whilst staying under the max voltage you set. I got my 3900x to 7900 in R20 this way whilst staying under 1.32v. CCX ratios were 4.5/4.4/4.3/4.3 p95 avx stable. But for the record, I run it stock w/o PBO 24/7.
 
thesmokingman said:
Try ratio overclocking? Turn off PBO, figure out your 24/7 safe voltage limit, then raise each CCX until you its limit, then the next CCX, etc on and on. Each CCX will now boost to X ratio whilst staying under the max voltage you set. I got my 3900x to 7900 in R20 this way whilst staying under 1.32v. CCX ratios were 4.5/4.4/4.3/4.3 p95 avx stable. But for the record, I run it stock w/o PBO 24/7.
Click to expand...

Haven't tried that before. Care to clarify? Never heard of it, honest. There' s no feature in Ryzen Master to do anything like that that I can tell. Only static OC. Don't see anything like that in my Aorus Master UEFI either.

Or are you talking about old-school pstate OC?
 
DrMrLordX said:
Haven't tried that before. Care to clarify? Never heard of it, honest. There' s no feature in Ryzen Master to do anything like that that I can tell. Only static OC. Don't see anything like that in my Aorus Master UEFI either.

Or are you talking about old-school pstate OC?
Click to expand...

In the manual overclocking mode selecting the ones circled in red is what you need to do.

Example.png

You may need to deselect the far left single one currently in red in the photo to make them visible. Don't remember as I'm on my laptop currently.
 
Last edited:
Kenmitch said:
In the manual overclocking mode selecting the ones circled in red is what you need to do.
Click to expand...

Oh, that's just per-CCX static OC. That won't help. Depending on workload, stability within my preferred voltage/temp limit can vary from maybe 4150 MHz (crazy AVX2 stuff like Larry's PrimeGrid workload) to 4400 MHz (basically, anything not AVX/AVX2). I have to dial in a different OC per workload. Blender is 4350 MHz, CBR20 is 4375 MHz, games are 4400 MHz, etc. If I can figure that out on my own, why can't PBO do it for me? Alternatively, give me application profiles ala Radeon Settings. I can have per-application overclock profiles for my Radeon VII using that software.
 
There are 4 different profile you can use with RM, Creator, Game, and Profiles 1&2. You can set these all independently and even rename them - but you do have to manually select them. I’d be happy if the CPU would automatically throttle down when running AVX workloads (whether via bios settings or Ryzen Master). Oh, and can RM minimize to the tray please AMD - preferably with the ability to right click on the icon and select and apply profiles.
 
Ajay said:
but you do have to manually select them.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's what annoys me. It would be nice if Ryzen Master could select the most-restrictive profile based on which applications are operating. Though I sort of understand why they don't attempt such a thing.
 
DrMrLordX said:
That's one of the reasons why I threw up my hands and went back to stock + voltage tweaks for everyday use. What I really wish is that PBO let me boost as high as manual overclocking did . . . but I can't figure it out, so I gave up on that too.
Click to expand...
Yeah - I’m pretty much at the same point. I don’t have the best binned ram or cpu, so it’s just pointless. If I really wanted to have fun tweaking, I’d have to have gone Intel, but the budget the wife and I agreed on didn't include $300+ for custom water. C'est la vie. System run fast and problem free if I don’t push it.
 
Just so I can feel better about how much money I saved, whats the Intel equivalent to the AMD 3600x in terms of gaming at 1080p and 1440p?
 
LOUISSSSS said:
Just so I can feel better about how much money I saved, whats the Intel equivalent to the AMD 3600x in terms of gaming at 1080p and 1440p?
Click to expand...
According to Techpowerup i5 9400F is the comparable gaming processor from Intel
www.techpowerup.com

AMD Athlon 3000G with Vega 3 Graphics Review

AMD's Athlon 3000G is the dream of every entry-level system builder. Priced at only $49, it offers four threads, integrated Vega graphics, and an unlocked multiplier. We overclocked it beyond 4 GHz with minimal voltage increases, and memory support has improved, too.
www.techpowerup.com www.techpowerup.com
Cost of i5 is actually lower on Newegg. $160 for i5 and $215 for 3600X

Are you a human?

www.newegg.com www.newegg.com
 
Running a Ryzen 3900x on an Asrock x470 Gaming K4.
Using Bios rev 3.5 as the system refuses to post with the 3900x with rev 3.7, but a 3700x works fine as well as the older 2700.

Getting an all core overclock of 4.4 Ghz @1.4 volts stable. Max temps of about 80c (harshest benchmarks and torture tests). Using single instances of Handbrake it barely breaks 70c. It's actually Prime 95 stable for 24 Hours @ 1.35 volts, but quickly fails with heavier loads. Even runs prime 95 with an all core oc of 4.5 Ghz @1.4v (24 hours), but fails on the Intel Burn-in utility.

One thing I haven't been able to get working is smartboost. On stock settings it does an all core max of 3.8 Ghz with no individual core boosts.
 
For those of you who use PBO, i found these settings to help alittle with the performance


PPT = 300
TDC = 230
EDC = 230
Scalar = x4

Using higher settings actually lowered performance.
Can maybe get over or atleast close to 10k in R20 Cinebench multithread with PBO enabled
 
LOUISSSSS said:
what what? then why do people say the AMD Ryzen cpus are a much better bang for your buck in gaming than their respective intel price equivalent CPUs?
Click to expand...
That's not accurate for the current gen. The accurate statement is that AMD Ryzen CPUs are much better bang for your buck all around.

In gaming, if that's literally ALL you do, a 9400F ($129) + 2080 Ti ($999) beats a 9900K ($449) + 2080 Super ($689) for the same price, by ~13-15% at 1440p and 15-20% at 4K. This is because in gaming at 1440p and above, the single biggest limiting factor is the GPU, not the CPU.

However, if you want to go back and nit-pick, you could make an argument that the Ryzen 1600AF overclocked plus a 2080 Ti is close enough to the 9400F plus a 2080 Ti that the $40-50 you save might be worth it.

But for current gen, the statement that Ryzen is better for gaming is just not true. I'm curious who told you that.

The true statement is that for Intel and AMD in the current gen, at 1440p gaming and higher, all of the available CPUs are about equivalent and you'd be better off spending any extra money over a 9400F or 3600 on a better GPU. Unless you do anything more than gaming, in which case you may need to consider a better CPU.
 
LOUISSSSS said:
what what? then why do people say the AMD Ryzen cpus are a much better bang for your buck in gaming than their respective intel price equivalent CPUs?
Click to expand...
Intel has decreased price to be competitive with AMD cpu. Also R5 3600 is much better bang for buck cpu, 3700x is good, 3900X is also cool for what it offers. Good thing for AMD is that you can upgrade the cpu in the same socket next year. I might do this later with my R5 1600.
Also i5 9400F has 6 core and 6 thread. Comparable AMD cpu is R5 3500, which for some reason AMD didn't release in USA. Where it's available, it's cheaper than 9400F. For comparison, I'm showing you price from India

Intel Core i5 9400F | 6 Cores 4.1 GHz | Desktop Processor

Intel Core i5 9400F | 6 Cores 6 Threads 4.2 GHz | Desktop Processor - Intel 9th Gen Six Core Core i5 Processor Is known for its budget mainstream performance
mdcomputers.in mdcomputers.in

AMD Ryzen 5 3500 | 6 Cores 4.1 GHz | Desktop Processor

AMD Ryzen 5 3500 | 6 Cores 6 Threads 4.1 GHz | Desktop Processor - Zen 2 Architecture - DDR4 3200 - 7nm FinFet Process Node - Entry Level gaming CPU
mdcomputers.in mdcomputers.in
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top