I haven’t manually OC’ed anything since the days of my Phenom II x4 965. …I miss that era.
Since then, I’ve only ever made anything I’ve messed with draw three times more power for a negligible amount of extra performance in some specific workloads. I’ve made it run worse on occasion. Especially now with how everything auto-boosts, I just set XMP, make sure the motherboard isn’t doing anything stupid with power management (looking at you, Asus), and call it a day.
I have a manually tuned each of the power states and precision boost settings to get 4.85GHz to stick on the 5600X. The generic clock offset doesn’t keep it above 4.8, so extra fine tuning was required. I think the definition of “manual OC” has shifted since the days of keying in a BCLK and balancing each voltage. Now it’s selecting an offset and tuning power/frequency curves point by point to get your desired result.
I think even that is fairly uncommon to these day, the vast majority even previous enthusiasts just let them run for the most part. If they do anything it is more than likely memory tuning. I am just thinking about coverage even on youtube, every one I watch once did OCing, even less serious like L1 and now it is pretty much just install, give decent cooling and maybe push memory even from the previously serious record chasers.
For sure it is still a thing, but it seem like the tail end of what it used to be recognisable as.
When on windows I now use software to push allcore to 3.9 for battlefield. I envy those who can use PBO. I also want the x3d but don’t need it, but maybe I can pick it up in a year or so and sit with current PC for at least another five years. I think that’ll also allow me to push my samsung b die even higher, and the less time I have to spend on the cpu, the more time I can spend punching myself in the dick while popping out the cmos battery.
Well the thing is when there is a voltage cap, then it might have an impact on PBO as well.
it wouldn’t really matter much if the 3D-Vcache is really going to be,
a significant performance uplift in most gaming and productivity workloads.
But i´m more currious about the actual problem they where,
facing with the 3D-Vcache that they have to lock it down.
I’m assuming stability issues but what does this say about the future of zen4?
AMD’s priority is still to make unlocked cpu´s.
Yup i agree that missing manual oc doesn’t have to be that big of a deal at all.
I’m really curious too see what this thing can do.
And what kind of conclusions we could from that.
When they announced 3D vcache… was it a year ago? It seems ages ago now, but I inferred that they were talking about the 6000 series being a refresh of the 5000 series, but with 3D cache across the board. Instead I guess what this is is closer to a one-off proof of concept, at least for now. I wonder what the volume of this thing is going to be.
I found the recent announcement weird too. There were three generations of CPU announcement including this, the 6000 and 7000 series, across a variety of platforms. When they announce the 5800X3D and the 7800X for the same year I’m not sure of the reasoning in buying the 5800X3D, it would be like buying Kaby Lake when Coffee Lake was months away (or Rocket Lake and Alder Lake, for a more recent example).
Its first gen locked for overclocking bevause voltage reasons only. I love how people makle everything else up like vampires and werewolfs.
Next gen 3D memory may or maybe locked. You know nothing john snow.
Let’s be real AMD killed overclocking with the way their CPUs dynamically boost anyway. Most Ryzen “overclocking” involves undervolting and reducing heat these days. Any performance boost you might get is a bonus.
People on AMD keep saying stuff like this, but it just doesn’t compute to me. It’s like when people complained about Intel only keeping motherboards for two generations. I was on my previous CPU for 10 years – I don’t expect to keep my motherboard or RAM from one CPU to the next.
I’ve been on the same motherboard+RAM for five years, I don’t expect to have to upgrade every component when I decide I need 20% more CPU horsepower. Shouldn’t that just drop right in if it can be made to do so? Seems awfully wasteful to replace four components just to upgrade one. (1600X>3600X>5600X)
No, I don’t expect any component to just “drop right in” to my old motherboard. That didn’t even support PCIe3.0. It didn’t support m.2 boot drives (although I could use them as additional storage). Modern CPUs are two DDR generations ahead. I don’t think that ancient standards should be maintained in perpetuity. I also don’t agree that CPU performance has only increased 20% in the last decade. My current CPU has ten more cores than my previous.
They meant, to me, that when they want 20% more as in 3600X to 5600X or more, they just get the next gen CPU as AMD mad a decision to support AM4 through its life time. I personally have 3700X and if I wanted a jump in performance I get the semi generational jump to revised 5800X over my 3700X and also the bonus of the 3DVCache.
No one exprect a two ran generatio ngap to support a CPU jump like that, thats just silly. and the performance gap in that time have been much greater than only 20%, you are talking DDR2… that what a Core 2 Quad? The mind reels at the thoughts of the percentage jump between say a Q9500 and a 5800X if that is even comparable across companies and times.
I didn’t misread anything. They responded to my post specifically talking about upgrading CPUs every decade. And really there hasn’t really been a big enough jump between Ryzen 1000 and Ryzen 5000 to really justify changing out. For the vast, vast majority of people changing out their GPU is much more beneficial than swapping out even a midrange CPU. I would go so far as to say most people still on 6th gen Intel are still fine. I find this expectation that you’re going to want to buy a new CPU every 18 months or so not only incredibly wasteful, but displays an awful lack of confidence in AMD products.
idk if you have just lost track of dates, but you’re listing CPUs and RAM standards from 15 years ago. 10 years ago was Sandy Bridge and DDR3. That’s what I upgraded from. Personally if I were still on Haswell I wouldn’t be considering upgrading for a little while yet. When I moved to AMD I was under no illusion of keeping the motherboard for my next upgrade, probably in another 10 years so I find the argument completely moot.
The thing is, as well, that I really should add is that this long term support does come with issues. For example there was a problem of Bulldozer and its derivatives being stuck on PCIe 2.0 for so long. Obviously that platform had other issues, but I don’t think it’s beneficial to keep ancient features for years after the industry has moved on just in the name of compatibility. Additionally Ryzen has already encountered issues of its support tables essentially having to overwrite old CPU models for new ones in BIOS due to space limitations. There are motherboards that if you update their BIOS they will brick old CPUs. You can’t just keep supporting an endless list of brand new CPUs without issue.
I don’t really get the issue. Buy the best CPU you can afford, upgrade it when it no longer does what you need it to, and the platform will be obsolete by then anyway so it’s moot.
You said 10, they said 5. You also said two ram generations, both of what I listed are in that time frame.
Yes clearly if you change your motherboard, ram, and CPU that is how you like to change you systems. I am many others can have motherboards that are 5 years old and replace on that cycle because we prefer it and do it with everything potentially from 1X00 Ryzen to 5X00 Ryzen cpus, all with out changing motherboard or ram. it is possible.