Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Gigabyte publishes AMD Ryzen 9 3950X overclocking manual

  1. #1
    HEXUS.admin
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    31,709
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    2,073 times in 719 posts

    Gigabyte publishes AMD Ryzen 9 3950X overclocking manual

    Document reveals the 16C/32T chip can consistently OC to 4.3GHz on all cores.
    Read more.

  2. #2
    Now 100% Apple free cheesemp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Near the New forest
    Posts
    2,931
    Thanks
    351
    Thanked
    243 times in 167 posts
    • cheesemp's system
      • Motherboard:
      • ASUS TUF x570-plus
      • CPU:
      • Ryzen 3600
      • Memory:
      • 16gb Corsair RGB ram
      • Storage:
      • 256Gb NVMe + 500Gb TcSunbow SDD (cheap for games only)
      • Graphics card(s):
      • RX 480 8Gb Nitro+ OC (with auto OC to above 580 speeds!)
      • PSU:
      • Cooler Master MWE 750 bronze
      • Case:
      • Gamemax f15m
      • Operating System:
      • Win 11
      • Monitor(s):
      • 32" QHD AOC Q3279VWF
      • Internet:
      • FTTC ~35Mb

    Re: Gigabyte publishes AMD Ryzen 9 3950X overclocking manual

    While I'm not against overclocking (looks at my ageing 3570k with decent OC) I'm wondering if all core OC is a good idea for gamers? Wouldn't all core OC just increase the chip temps and limit boost so you no longer hit the max single core speed? I know games are beginning to get better at threading however I'm sure most games still benefit from boosting say 2 cores higher than 16 to a lower degree? If you need raw CPU multithreaded grunt this does not apply of course (rendering etc) but for todays games I think it does...
    Trust

    Laptop : Dell Inspiron 1545 with Ryzen 5500u, 16gb and 256 NVMe, Windows 11.

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    2,207
    Thanks
    15
    Thanked
    114 times in 102 posts

    Re: Gigabyte publishes AMD Ryzen 9 3950X overclocking manual

    Quote Originally Posted by cheesemp View Post
    While I'm not against overclocking (looks at my ageing 3570k with decent OC) I'm wondering if all core OC is a good idea for gamers? Wouldn't all core OC just increase the chip temps and limit boost so you no longer hit the max single core speed? I know games are beginning to get better at threading however I'm sure most games still benefit from boosting say 2 cores higher than 16 to a lower degree? If you need raw CPU multithreaded grunt this does not apply of course (rendering etc) but for todays games I think it does...
    To be fair I wouldn't necessarily say gamers are the main target for the 3950x, I'd say they're more aimed at 'home' content creators and 3D etc.
    Would I overclock all the cores, probably not as it will reduce the life expectancy at least a little if you're working it heavily with rendering and encoding etc

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    MI
    Posts
    231
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    8 times in 8 posts
    • globalwarning's system
      • CPU:
      • AMD 1090T
      • Memory:
      • RIP JAW DDR3 1600 4x4GB
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Sapphire 7950 OC (Boost)
      • PSU:
      • Seasonic 750W
      • Case:
      • Old crap
      • Operating System:
      • Window 7 Ultimate 64bit
      • Monitor(s):
      • Hanns-G 281DPB

    Re: Gigabyte publishes AMD Ryzen 9 3950X overclocking manual

    Quote Originally Posted by LSG501 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by cheesemp View Post
    While I'm not against overclocking (looks at my ageing 3570k with decent OC) I'm wondering if all core OC is a good idea for gamers? Wouldn't all core OC just increase the chip temps and limit boost so you no longer hit the max single core speed? I know games are beginning to get better at threading however I'm sure most games still benefit from boosting say 2 cores higher than 16 to a lower degree? If you need raw CPU multithreaded grunt this does not apply of course (rendering etc) but for todays games I think it does...
    To be fair I wouldn't necessarily say gamers are the main target for the 3950x, I'd say they're more aimed at 'home' content creators and 3D etc.
    Would I overclock all the cores, probably not as it will reduce the life expectancy at least a little if you're working it heavily with rendering and encoding etc
    I would think that, at least in part, it *is* aimed at gamers, since it will have the highest advertised clocks of any of their CPUs, and we all know gamers want every little edge they can muster to pull the most FPS. (Or at least that's the logic behind halo products.)

    It does seem like have differentiated cores on higher core count CPUs would make sense, especially with Windows having better and better support for core affinities. Being able to clock higher on, say, 4 cores, while the other 12 are "high enough" seems like it would be the best of both worlds.

  5. #5
    Long member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,427
    Thanks
    70
    Thanked
    404 times in 291 posts
    • philehidiot's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Father's bored
      • CPU:
      • Cockroach brain V0.1
      • Memory:
      • Innebriated, unwritten
      • Storage:
      • Big Yellow Self Storage
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Semi chewed Crayola Mega Pack
      • PSU:
      • 20KW single phase direct grid supply
      • Case:
      • Closed, Open, Cold
      • Operating System:
      • Cockroach
      • Monitor(s):
      • The mental health nurses
      • Internet:
      • Please.

    Re: Gigabyte publishes AMD Ryzen 9 3950X overclocking manual

    Quote Originally Posted by globalwarning View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by LSG501 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by cheesemp View Post
    While I'm not against overclocking (looks at my ageing 3570k with decent OC) I'm wondering if all core OC is a good idea for gamers? Wouldn't all core OC just increase the chip temps and limit boost so you no longer hit the max single core speed? I know games are beginning to get better at threading however I'm sure most games still benefit from boosting say 2 cores higher than 16 to a lower degree? If you need raw CPU multithreaded grunt this does not apply of course (rendering etc) but for todays games I think it does...
    To be fair I wouldn't necessarily say gamers are the main target for the 3950x, I'd say they're more aimed at 'home' content creators and 3D etc.
    Would I overclock all the cores, probably not as it will reduce the life expectancy at least a little if you're working it heavily with rendering and encoding etc
    I would think that, at least in part, it *is* aimed at gamers, since it will have the highest advertised clocks of any of their CPUs, and we all know gamers want every little edge they can muster to pull the most FPS. (Or at least that's the logic behind halo products.)

    It does seem like have differentiated cores on higher core count CPUs would make sense, especially with Windows having better and better support for core affinities. Being able to clock higher on, say, 4 cores, while the other 12 are "high enough" seems like it would be the best of both worlds.
    Indeed for gamers I suspect the higher clocks on fewer cores would be optimal. I wonder if it boosts based on workload? If you're doing some mighty rendering work and are loading all the cores, it may decide that clocking all cores to a lower level is better than boosting to all.

    I also wonder how much of this is to stay within the TDP envelope? We all know that Intel cores do a lot of their boost behaviour to stay within certain TDP specifications rather than due to real thermal limits.

    One thing I would say (which I think you were also suggesting) is that gamers wanting "the edge" is often just wasted money. Anandtech showed that for gaming an i3 paired with a better GPU is a far better spend. I think once you've maxed out the GPU, throwing monies at the CPU often results in spending a fortune for little appreciable gain.

    I look at something like this and go "yeh, I could absolutely afford it but am I ever going to come close to taxing it? Isn't something like this wasted on someone like me?" I just don't render videos whilst I'm gaming and playing HDR 4K on a different monitor next to me.

    I think for all but the wealthiest gamers, this kind of stuff is best left alone (even if the budget allows it) and the money saved and put towards the next upgrade or towards upgrading things which are often overlooked. Like sound. Or a HD floppy drive rather than that DD drive most people are sporting.

  6. #6
    Senior Member Xlucine's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    2,154
    Thanks
    297
    Thanked
    186 times in 145 posts
    • Xlucine's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus TUF B450M-plus
      • CPU:
      • 3700X
      • Memory:
      • 16GB @ 3.2 Gt/s
      • Storage:
      • Crucial P5 1TB (boot), Crucial MX500 1TB, Crucial MX100 512GB
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVGA 980ti
      • PSU:
      • Fractal Design ION+ 560P
      • Case:
      • Silverstone TJ08-E
      • Operating System:
      • W10 pro
      • Monitor(s):
      • Viewsonic vx3211-2k-mhd, Dell P2414H

    Re: Gigabyte publishes AMD Ryzen 9 3950X overclocking manual

    Quote Originally Posted by globalwarning View Post
    I would think that, at least in part, it *is* aimed at gamers, since it will have the highest advertised clocks of any of their CPUs, and we all know gamers want every little edge they can muster to pull the most FPS. (Or at least that's the logic behind halo products.)

    It does seem like have differentiated cores on higher core count CPUs would make sense, especially with Windows having better and better support for core affinities. Being able to clock higher on, say, 4 cores, while the other 12 are "high enough" seems like it would be the best of both worlds.
    Both intel and AMD chips do this as part of their boost behaviour

  7. #7
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    Posts
    7
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    0 times in 0 posts

    Re: Gigabyte publishes AMD Ryzen 9 3950X overclocking manual

    AMD is best for game, but intel is more suitable for working.

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Stafford
    Posts
    112
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked
    2 times in 2 posts
    • ultrasbm's system
      • Motherboard:
      • ASUS TUF
      • CPU:
      • Ryzen 7 5800x
      • Memory:
      • 64Gb DDR4-3600
      • Storage:
      • 1Tb WD Black PCIe NVMe SSD
      • Graphics card(s):
      • nVidia RTX3090 FE
      • PSU:
      • Corsair 800watt
      • Case:
      • IN WIN 909
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 Enterprise x64
      • Monitor(s):
      • 2x Dell 32" Curved 1440p
      • Internet:
      • 540Mbps Virgin

    Re: Gigabyte publishes AMD Ryzen 9 3950X overclocking manual

    Quote Originally Posted by gudjohn View Post
    AMD is best for game, but intel is more suitable for working.
    Erm...Talk about a sweeping generalisation...care to expand upon that?

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •