Discussion My New Ryzen 5 3600 Hits 4.5 Ghz @ 1.28v

[Rigg]

In anticipation of the upcoming zen 3 release and Zen 2 XT refresh, I decided to sell my 3900x now before resale plummets in the near future. After hearing it mentioned that the more recent 3600's were clocking much higher than older silicon I decided to go ahead and pick up an R5 3600 last week as a place holder. The 3600 CPU was manufactured the 7th week of 2020. I have a full custom loop so I figured I'd OC the snot out of it and share what I found.

PCPartPicker Part List

Yes, I fully realize this a ridiculous build to pair with a 3600. Still I think impressive results could be had with a good mid-range air cooler and B series board.

I ended up achieving stability with CCX0 @ 4.55 Ghz and CCX1 @4.5 Ghz. This took around 1.28V as reported by HWI64 on SVI2 under heavy load. I'm running low (level 2) LLC so voltage is set to a fixed value in BIOS of 1.3125. I was able to pass multiple runs of Intel Burn Test Standard, over an hour of Prime 95 with AVX disabled, and a full 8 hour Real Bench stress test. As I found with my 3900x the temps get toasty in a hurry when you start pushing the clocks. Even with fairly sane voltage. Here are some results to check out:





EDIT:

I have updated thermal data after playing around with my fan curve. An extra 500 RPM dropped water temps by 5c after reaching steady state. I'm including a data with %100 fan speed for reference. While I originally had the fan profile set for absolute silence I think the new data is probably more realistic. While the fans are now audible under heavy load they are what I would consider completely tolerable.

 

[darkswordsman17]

The real question is does this matter with regards to performance? Wasn't OCing with Ryzen fairly pointless as you often wouldn't actually get a performance benefit because the chip itself was doing a better job of managing things to offer the best performance and so many people were seeing no real performance boost, just higher power use and heat. I know some complained because of the micro clocking or whatever (where it was only staying at the boost clock for like fractions of a second).

 

[itsmydamnation]

The real question is does this matter with regards to performance? Wasn't OCing with Ryzen fairly pointless as you often wouldn't actually get a performance benefit because the chip itself was doing a better job of managing things to offer the best performance and so many people were seeing no real performance boost, just higher power use and heat. I know some complained because of the micro clocking or whatever (where it was only staying at the boost clock for like fractions of a second).

a 3600's max pbo is 4200, he is running what 4.55ghz all core, so yes that would make manual OC very much worth it. Now if you could use PBO to get a single core upto 4.7 or higher then PBO would beat manual OC again.

 

[SPBHM]

The real question is does this matter with regards to performance? Wasn't OCing with Ryzen fairly pointless as you often wouldn't actually get a performance benefit because the chip itself was doing a better job of managing things to offer the best performance and so many people were seeing no real performance boost, just higher power use and heat. I know some complained because of the micro clocking or whatever (where it was only staying at the boost clock for like fractions of a second).

well, it's pointless because the OC margin was small compared to default turbo modes, if you can get a couple of hundred MHz over the default full load max clock there will be a difference, but at the end of the day even from 4000 to 4500 is just 12% increase or so, so it's not huge anyway, but...

 

[piokos]

a 3600's max pbo is 4200, he is running what 4.55ghz all core, so yes that would make manual OC very much worth it. Now if you could use PBO to get a single core upto 4.7 or higher then PBO would beat manual OC again.

The question was about performance gain, not frequency.

In anticipation of the upcoming zen 3 release and Zen 2 XT refresh, I decided to sell my 3900x now before resale plummets in the near future.

So you sold one CPU, but you bought another one - which also loses value over time. You lose twice on opening the box.
Also, looking at your kit, it's not like you'd go bankrupt because of a few $.

And since 3900XT won't hit the shelves before mid July, you've willingly halved your multi-thread CPU performance for at least 1.5 month. Which probably means you don't need that much throughput anyway.

You like buying CPUs, just admit it. No shame in that. Why make up stories about losing resale value?

 

[DrMrLordX]

Wasn't OCing with Ryzen fairly pointless

No. Running my 3900x (from July 2019) @ 4.4 GHz static is a substantial performance increase in everything except ST synthetics.

Any kind of modern game, MT benchmarks/productivity apps, etc. it's a performance gain.

Last year, people would have killed for a 4.5 GHz 3600! That's an insane clockspeed for a chip that used to struggle to hit 4250 MHz overclocked. Only 3800x chips could somewhat-reliably maintain all-core OCs that high.

 

[piokos]

No. Running my 3900x (from July 2019) @ 4.4 GHz static is a substantial performance increase in everything except ST synthetics.

You're ruining that CPU's efficiency (and you love praising it on this forum...). I really don't see the point.

How is the power draw in idle?

Any kind of modern game, MT benchmarks/productivity apps, etc. it's a performance gain.

Well, we're still missing any kind of quantitative data.

Last year, people would have killed for a 4.5 GHz 3600! That's an insane clockspeed for a chip that used to struggle to hit 4250 MHz overclocked. Only 3800x chips could somewhat-reliably maintain all-core OCs that high.

It's also hitting over 80*C under a custom water loop, which means this OC probably won't be accessible for most 3600 owners. It's a budget CPU after all.

It would make more sense if OP run that 3600 with the bundled Wraith Stealth.

 

[itsmydamnation]

You're ruining that CPU's efficiency (and you love praising it on this forum...). I really don't see the point.

How is the power draw in idle?

oh look someone who doesn't know how Zen 2 works.....
my static 4.2ghz OC at idle (10-20% cpu usage) CORES consumers 5-6watts total but thax for you faux concern........

It's also hitting over 80*C under a custom water loop, which means this OC probably won't be accessible for most 3600 owners. It's a budget CPU after all.

It would make more sense if OP run that 3600 with the bundled Wraith Stealth.

pretty much complete BS, a good value of money air cooler like a 212evo will handle it fine, i have a much smaller cooler on then that. Heat density is the problem for OCíng Zen not aggregate heat energy. If you had one you would know that.


your rear guard action for the last bastion of intel ( clock speed) is both cute and amusing

 

[coercitiv]

You're ruining that CPU's efficiency

This will be fun to watch. Tell us more about inefficient power usage and clocking CPUs close to the process limit.

 

[piokos]

oh look someone who doesn't know how Zen 2 works.....

I don't think that's a mandatory knowledge these days.

my static 4.2ghz OC at idle (10-20% cpu usage) CORES consumers 5-6watts total but thax for you faux concern........

20% is not exactly idle. You CPU hovers so high because of the OC or was it like that before?

And the impact on uncore? And the whole system?

pretty much complete BS, a good value of money air cooler like a 212evo will handle it fine, i have a much smaller cooler on then that.

But you're on 4.2GHz. He does 4.5GHz.

Heat density is the problem for OCíng Zen not aggregate heat energy. If you had one you would know that.

I know that and owning a Ryzen has absolutely no significance here. I can read.

 

[piokos]

This will be fun to watch. Tell us more about inefficient power usage and clocking CPUs close to the process limit.

I'm not really interested in flame with AMD supports. I asked a few question and - hopefully - I'll get some answers - not just insults as usual.

You don't have to treat me as anti-AMD, because I'm not (not in this thread anyway). But I'm very much OC-sceptical.

 

[Zucker2k]

This will be fun to watch. Tell us more about inefficient power usage and clocking CPUs close to the process limit.

WE know what the flagship Intel 10900k looks like (power consumption and temps) when overclocked. Can we see the same for Zen 2 (3900x and 3950x)? This has to be the best kept secret in all of modern day computing. It's quite amusing to watch.

 

[coercitiv]

I'm not really interested in flame with AMD supports. I asked a few question and - hopefully - I'll get some answers - not just insults as usual.

You made a statement and proceeded to fansplain to somebody how their CPU is obviously under-performing due to lack of quantitative data.

You're ruining that CPU's efficiency (and you love praising it on this forum...). I really don't see the point.

As I previously said, this will be fun to watch.

 

[DrMrLordX]

You're ruining that CPU's efficiency

pfffffffffffffffffffffffffffffft

You didn't even ask how much power it uses with that setting. It uses 165W peak doing something like CBR20. That's a mixed AVX2 workload, by the way. Using something "lighter" like CPUz benchmark, and it's 130W. Oh no, there goes my efficiency!!!!!

(and you love praising it on this forum...)

There's a reason for that. You can get some nice clocks even out of old samples if you keep temps below 70C using not very much voltage. That's the trick to overclocking one of these things. The XT chips should be very interesting. Let's face it, the chip I have ceases to matter in about two weeks. Along with a lot of other hardware. Let the games begin . . .

How is the power draw in idle?

We had an entire thread dedicated to that. It's pretty high thanks to the I/O die and IF overhead. These are not laptop chips.

It's also hitting over 80*C under a custom water loop, which means this OC probably won't be accessible for most 3600 owners. It's a budget CPU after all.

Oh darn, they might have to settle for 4.4 GHz . . .

@Zucker2k

The most I have ever pushed out of this CPU is about 200W, and that was playing with some unnecessarily-high voltages running Prime95 SmallFFTs. I could have dropped volts lower to get power down. It's irrelevant anyway. Matisse is dead, long live Matisse!

edit: tuning for voltage properly, I got Prime95 SmallFFTs down to 172W.

(honestly would rather have Vermeer but oh well)

 

[coercitiv]

WE know what the flagship Intel 10900k looks like (power consumption and temps) when overclocked. Can we see the same for Zen 2 (3900x and 3950x)? This has to be the best kept secret in all of modern day computing. It's quite amusing to watch.

We'll get updated review data on this once the "XT" chips come up. And don't worry about it, once overclocked it will be just as bad as Intel in terms of efficiency loss, only this time you'll have to choose a side while looking at an AMD product: performance within a sane stock TDP or just unleashed performance at 200W+?

Moreover, if the new XT chips trash their TDP rating I know what my stance will be, do you know yours?

 

[coercitiv]

You don't have to treat me as anti-AMD, because I'm not (not in this thread anyway). But I'm very much OC-sceptical.

I don't have a problem with people who take a stance towards a certain brand as long as it does not detract from the quality of their arguments, including consistency. Throughout the years I've seen many positive examples on this forum.

That being said I don't treat you as anti-AMD, I treat you as a troll (in this tread anyway): a very much OC-skeptic who decided to "intervene" in an overclocking thread on a CPU enthusiast forum. What could go wrong, especially without solid prior knowledge about Zen 2 overclocking and power management?

 

[amrnuke]

You're ruining that CPU's efficiency (and you love praising it on this forum...). I really don't see the point.

Well, we're still missing any kind of quantitative data.

You claim he's ruining the CPU's efficiency without any quantitative data.
You then chastise another poster's lack of quantitative data.
Pick a side and let us know whether you want data or not.

It's also hitting over 80*C under a custom water loop, which means this OC probably won't be accessible for most 3600 owners. It's a budget CPU after all.

This thread isn't about a budget build. It's a discussion about how much better the silicon is now for Zen2.

It would make more sense if OP run that 3600 with the bundled Wraith Stealth.

No, it wouldn't, because that's not what he showed. He showed us how a 3600 performs under custom water. At release, one simply couldn't extract this type of clock speed from a 3600, even under custom water. Things are much better now.


Why are you so antagonistic about all this? Do you work at Intel or something, and it hurts you personally to see AMD making progress?

 

[Shmee]

Guys cool it. Lets quit it with the bickering.

I think the improvement in silicon is impressive, especially helping in games. 3900X would still likely be better in compute work, even if not as good silicon.

Anyway, I am going to be optimistic about a Vermeer upgrade later on.

 

[DrMrLordX]

3900X would still likely be better in compute work, even if not as good silicon.

3900XT is coming. If AMD "accidentally" slipped some of the newer CCDs into 3600s, it stands to reason that 3900x chips from the same batch might exhibit similar behavior. Remember, "bad" CCDs on 3900x chips from 2019 were slightly better than 3600s. Heck my "bad" CCD will do 4.4 GHz.

 

[therealmongo]

Haters gonna hate

Such a timeless quote is perfect here

"Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and to remove all doubt "

Now I have one of these upstairs for a client of mine to go into a gaming rig im building for him.

Seeing what the new silicon can do, I have already purchased another one for my myself to replace the 3600X I am currently running.

For those of us who like to overclock, its a no brainer .....

 

[IEC]

Leave it to someone who has clearly never used a Ryzen 3000 series chip to claim it doesn't idle or that it uses a lot of power. My own experiences say otherwise. The power-saving features in these chips are quite advanced:



I wish reviewers would also measure the Joules of energy used to complete a given benchmark or task. That would more accurately reflect the high efficiency of 7nm parts. Which you can improve versus stock parameters even further by running in ECO mode or by manually setting PPT targets to hit your ideal perf/W.

 

[thor23]

Manual OC is much better for efficiency in terms of power usage and temperature.

 

[thor23]

Here's some data on how a 4.2ghz manual OC compares to a 3600 at stock. As you can see average core power consumption is about 30% lower with a manual OC.

 

[Shmee]

I will say that you guys have chips that run a lot cooler than mine. Is it possible that my launch 3700X is just a hotter chip, or is there something wrong with my old H110i GT do you think?

Idle temps seem around 50C in ryzen master. CPU vcore seems high though, around 1.4V peak. Using ryzen balanced power mode.

 

[amrnuke]

I wish reviewers would also measure the Joules of energy used to complete a given benchmark or task. That would more accurately reflect the high efficiency of 7nm parts. Which you can improve versus stock parameters even further by running in ECO mode or by manually setting PPT targets to hit your ideal perf/W.

Some reviewers do - TechPowerUp for instance.