Discussion Redefining the boost frequency of AMD processors - THE REAL BOOST

[Kocicak]

I bought a 12 core Ryzen processor with claimed boost frequency of 4600 MHz. I does reach this frequency with extremelly light load, but under sustained light load it appears, that only two cores run at around 4550 MHz. It feels like I got less than I payed for.

It may be usefull to use the boost frequency as a real meaningfull parameter. I propose this definition:

Boost frequency is the frequency at which at least third of the cores of the processor can run with sustained load.

The above mentioned 12 core processor would need to have four cores capable of sustained running at 4600 MHz to be sold as having the boost frequency 4600 MHz. My processor has "the real boost" just 4500 or even 4450 MHz.

It sound fair and reasonable, at least to me. What do you think?

 

[chrisjames61]

I bought a 12 core Ryzen processor with claimed boost frequency of 4600 MHz. I does reach this frequency with extremelly light load, but under sustained light load it appears, that only two cores run at around 4550 MHz. It feels like I got less than I payed for.

It may be usefull to use the boost frequency as a real meaningfull parameter. I propose this definition:

Boost frequency is the frequency at which at least third of the cores of the processor can run with sustained load.

The above mentioned 12 core processor would need to have four cores capable of sustained running at 4600 MHz to be sold as having the boost frequency 4600 MHz. My processor has "the real boost" just 4500 or even 4450 MHz.

It sound fair and reasonable, at least to me. What do you think?

TBH it sounds ridiculous.

 

[Kenmitch]

Considering you wanted a "3600 x 2" for $249, I have a feeling you will always feel like you got less than what you paid for. Can't you just be happy with an awesome CPU? Or you could always buy Intel you know.

I didn't realize it was THAT guy....Explains everything now.

 

[Thunder 57]

I didn't realize it was THAT guy....Explains everything now.

Yea, I have a feeling I've been blocked by that guy, but, whatever. I have a feeling he just puts cotton in his ears because everyone saying how wrong he is just dismissed. I don't know how he still gets away with the bold crap considering he has been warned for it before, but meh, I'll leave the moderating to the mods.

 

[Kocicak]

Guys, you are pretty close to ah hominem attacks, stop doing that.

I proposed functional system of specifiying CPUs which would give consumers (with conjunction with actual performance measurement - how long would a certain amount of workload take to fininsh) a clear picture about performance of the CPU, much better than what are they getting now.

If you do not like it, why dont you react like DrMrLordX did, with rational arguments? I will respond to him later, because it requires some thinking and formulating arguments from me.

 

[therealmongo]

@Kocicak

Mate, you are 'rationalizing' something that does not require it.

You have an opinion, I have an opinion, everyone has an opinion, thats all it is.

As you really feel that a CPU manufacturer should specifiy exact characteristics of how and when a CPU will act in x, y, z scenarios and according to 1, 2, & 3 workloads you are leading someone to believe that you have no clue on how complex modern CPUs are.

I suggest you look for a different past time/hobby as what you are discussing is never going to happen in the consumer workspace .........

 

[UsandThem]

If you do not like it, why dont you react like DrMrLordX did, with rational arguments?

That's what users did when you first came here. I just can't think of anything at this point that will change your mind (or very unreasonable) expectations. You have a great CPU, enjoy actually using it. Play games, edit video, listen to music, create some Microsoft Office projects.......... just do something besides constantly watching your CPU boost rates. You knew exactly how this CPU boosted before you bought it, so if you don't like it for whatever reason, sell it, and buy something else that will achieve your ideal boost rates.

The simple truth is at this point you've beaten the dead horse so many times, you can't even tell it was a horse to begin with.

 

[Kenmitch]

The simple truth is at this point you've beaten the dead horse so many times, you can't even tell it was a horse to begin with.

Dead horse > dog food > poop is how it plays out.

 

[.vodka]

I bought a 12 core Ryzen processor with claimed boost frequency of 4600 MHz. I does reach this frequency with extremelly light load, but under sustained light load it appears, that only two cores run at around 4550 MHz. It feels like I got less than I payed for.

I''ll take you seriously one last time.

You got exactly what you paid for, a CPU that ridicules almost everything in Intel's current lineup and blows it out of the water in perf/$ and perf/w, save for ultra high (>165Hz) refresh rate gaming only because of the existence of the factory overclocked 9900KS (5GHz on all 8 cores space heater). Enjoy your top of the line tech.

If you're somehow still not satisfied, next year you can do a drop in upgrade to a Zen3 gen CPU (Ryzen 4xxx) that will further ridicule Intel's Comet Lake (Skylake v6?) lineup. The beauty of AM4.

---------------------------------------------

As for the boost, If you research a bit, you'll see AMD's boost behavior is exactly like this since the 2000 series:

AMD Agesa ABBA with Boost Clock Fix Tested on Ryzen 3900X

AMD has finally responded to the Boost Clock issues on their Ryzen 3000 processors by releasing a fix for their AGESA BIOS firmware. We take a detailed look at the new clocking behavior and thoroughly test the update on the 12-core Ryzen 9 3900X in our extensive application and game suite.

www.techpowerup.com

Intel's boost definition isn't the same as AMD's boost definition. If you want to inform yourself more, read this.

AMD gives you this nice curve, and an up-to keyword, effectively extracting the most out of what a particular piece of silicon can do. This isn't new. You weren't played.

With your 3900x you paid for chiplet quality that can be pushed to ~4.65GHz on low threaded loads and an all core boost that drops down to ~4.25GHz. Naturally a 3600 uses lower quality chiplets that can't do this, so they're limited to ~4.2GHz at safe voltages. Chiplet quality matters.

If it's not clear by now, upgrade your BIOS to the latest release to get the latest benefits on boost with the newest available AGESA (1.0.0.3ABBA). Do upgrade again when the 3950x launches in less than a month and motherboard vendors release their new BIOSes, there will be a new AGESA relase (1.0.0.4) with further fixes.

If even after updating your BIOS you still don't get that juicy ~4.65GHz top boost, then upgrade your cooling.

 

[VirtualLarry]

If even after updating your BIOS you still don't get that juicy ~4.65GHz top boost, then upgrade your cooling.

This! If you're on Ryzen 3000-series CPUs, and still using the stock cooler, and not on water (AIO WC is fine), then IMHO you're doing it wrong.

 

[Kocicak]

If even after updating your BIOS you still don't get that juicy ~4.65GHz top boost, then upgrade your cooling.

I discussed the behavior of my particular 3900X in another thread, whis has been locked. You probably missed it.
DESPITE having x570 motherboard with the latest bios (Asus X570 Strix F with 1201 bios) and having AIO liquid cooler, the highest sustained speed (even with SuperPi) was 4550 MHz.

That was the reason why I started this thread where I am trying to come up with some specification methodology which would give customers reliable information about a product they are buying.

 

[scannall]

I discussed the behavior of my particular 3900X in another thread, whis has been locked. You probably missed it.
DESPITE having x570 motherboard with the latest bios (Asus X570 Strix F with 1201 bios) and having AIO liquid cooler, the highest sustained speed (even with SuperPi) was 4550 MHz.

That was the reason why I started this thread where I am trying to come up with some specification methodology which would give customers reliable information about a product they are buying.

I'm not sure that Ghz as an indication of performance is still all that valid. Throughput, say Flops for everyone except gamers. And FPS for them matter more than Ghz. Different workloads will produce different thermals, which means just Ghz alone isn't constant.

If there were some mythical CPU that was top dog in FPS, or throughput in video encoding, rendering etc but ran at 1 Ghz, would you still demand the 5 Ghz competition even if performance were worse for example?

 

[chrisjames61]

I discussed the behavior of my particular 3900X in another thread, whis has been locked. You probably missed it.
DESPITE having x570 motherboard with the latest bios (Asus X570 Strix F with 1201 bios) and having AIO liquid cooler, the highest sustained speed (even with SuperPi) was 4550 MHz.

That was the reason why I started this thread where I am trying to come up with some specification methodology which would give customers reliable information about a product they are buying.

You need to stop ruining other threads with this. Your thread was locked for a reason.

 

[Kenmitch]

This! If you're on Ryzen 3000-series CPUs, and still using the stock cooler, and not on water (AIO WC is fine), then IMHO you're doing it wrong.

I'm eagerly awaiting winter to test this theory out with my 3700x. I've never seen it boost beyond 4400MHz in any uEFI version yet. My desk is almost window sill height so I plan on just sitting the tower in front of the open window with the intake fans facing outwards. Just got to wait for some chilly low's to hit SoCal to see. I'm leaning towards it won't boost beyond 4400MHz with PBO enabled in Ryzen Master. If not I'll try to tweak the uEFI, but still not holding my breath.

 

[.vodka]

I discussed the behavior of my particular 3900X in another thread, whis has been locked. You probably missed it.
DESPITE having x570 motherboard with the latest bios (Asus X570 Strix F with 1201 bios) and having AIO liquid cooler, the highest sustained speed (even with SuperPi) was 4550 MHz.

That was the reason why I started this thread where I am trying to come up with some specification methodology which would give customers reliable information about a product they are buying.

Have you installed the latest chipset driver? What version of W10 are you running?

Ideally you'd like to be on 1903/1909 and running the latest chipset driver.

 

[Atari2600]

If you really don't want the CPU, feel free to send it to me.

I'll pay the postage for you...

 

[UsandThem]

If you really don't want the CPU, feel free to send it to me.

I'll pay the postage for you...

If that falls through, I'll trade him my 2700X Anniversary Edition for your CPU. Sure his CPU costs over 2X what I paid for mine, but I just hate to him "suffer" in all of his posts. No person should have to deal with that amount of disappointment.

Mine occasionally auto-boosts to 4.35 Ghz (spec is "only" up to 4.3 Ghz), so if you're all about that boost (no treble), all of your wildest dreams will come true. Dangit, now I'm in the mood for tater tots.

 

[Kocicak]

I am on Windows 1903, I cannot figure out what exactly in the list System devices in Device manager is the chipset.

BTW I already returned it yesterday. It seems I could buy it back with open box discount, it is listed already, but quite frankly I am not sure I want to mess with this CPU anymore. My plan now in to survive with Ryzen 3600 and wait for the next generation.

I also upgraded PSU, bought second set of memory so that I have four sticks and have Threadripper 2920X on hold as a possible interim CPU for a new TRX40 board. So that Is a second option now.

 

[Guru]

I'm eagerly awaiting winter to test this theory out with my 3700x. I've never seen it boost beyond 4400MHz in any uEFI version yet. My desk is almost window sill height so I plan on just sitting the tower in front of the open window with the intake fans facing outwards. Just got to wait for some chilly low's to hit SoCal to see. I'm leaning towards it won't boost beyond 4400MHz with PBO enabled in Ryzen Master. If not I'll try to tweak the uEFI, but still not holding my breath.

That is because the max boost clock of your CPU is literally 4400MHz. It won't boost more, not unless their is plenty of voltage, temperature and need for it. The 3700x is also a 65W CPU, so it will look to limit the speed where it can and run lower than 4400MHz.

Again you can enable PBO, but that generally boosts more clocks higher, rather than 1 or two cores over 4.4GHz. So yeah, PBO is mostly going to boost more cores at a higher frequency, but won't boost 1 core over 4.4GHz. 1 core boost over advertised frequency is reserved for autoOC.

 

[Kenmitch]

Again you can enable PBO, but that generally boosts more clocks higher, rather than 1 or two cores over 4.4GHz. So yeah, PBO is mostly going to boost more cores at a higher frequency, but won't boost 1 core over 4.4GHz.

6 of 8 hit 4.4GHz other 2 4.35GHz so I don't think it's a crappy 3700x. I'm still going to conduct the experiment to see, but like I said won't be holding my breath.

 

[Thunder 57]

This! If you're on Ryzen 3000-series CPUs, and still using the stock cooler, and not on water (AIO WC is fine), then IMHO you're doing it wrong.

I disagree. A cheap aftermarket air cooler is usually good enough.

I am on Windows 1903, I cannot figure out what exactly in the list System devices in Device manager is the chipset.

BTW I already returned it yesterday. It seems I could buy it back with open box discount, it is listed already, but quite frankly I am not sure I want to mess with this CPU anymore. My plan now in to survive with Ryzen 3600 and wait for the next generation.

I also upgraded PSU, bought second set of memory so that I have four sticks and have Threadripper 2920X on hold as a possible interim CPU for a new TRX40 board. So that Is a second option now.

Great, so now a re-seller has to take a loss and we all have to pay a little bit more because the CPU you got fell just 50MHz short. And now you are waiting for the next generation. Just buy Intel and be done with it! If I said what I really thought of you, I would be getting a vacation. Let's just say I don't hold you in high regard. And you whine about everything.

Can't be happy with the best mainstream CPU. Have to create multiple threads about why it sucks for some reason. That is why it was locked. Please, piss and moan somewhere else.

 

[Kocicak]

Great, so now a re-seller has to take a loss and we all have to pay a little bit more because the CPU you got fell just 50MHz short.
....
Can't be happy with the best mainstream CPU.

What? Are you serious? Returning a product which is somewhat inferior to other products is not normal in your opinion?

You are showing the Tesla owner mentality, who is irrationally willing to accept number of flaws, which owner of normal vehicle would never accept on a new car.

I am not emotionally attached to AMD, I got inferior product and I returned it. DEAL WITH IT, DELICATE SLOWFLAKE.



Personal attacks are not allowed in the tech forums.


esquared
Anandtech Forum Director

 

[VirtualLarry]

I got inferior product and I returned it. DEAL WITH IT, DELICATE SLOWFLAKE.

Projection... it's a hellava drug.

 

[.vodka]

I am not emotionally attached to AMD, I got inferior product and I returned it.

How is the 3900x inferior to anything else Intel offers for their mainstream and HEDT sockets? (save for the >12c HEDT models)

You do realize you returned a 3900x because of it falling ~50MHz (1%... margin of error) short of the advertised max single threaded boost clock (4.6GHz) and are now using an inferior 3600 that will never, ever go any higher than ~4.3GHz, right?

You do realize that ~4.55GHz boost clock in single threaded loads is mostly equivalent to a ~5GHz Skylake?

Besides, as far as I can tell you didn't test the latest chipset driver. You didn't list your BIOS settings. We could have helped you get the last 50MHz out of your CPU.

Oh well, enjoy your 3600.

 

[esquared]

This thread has run its course.


esquared
Anandtech Forum Director