My 3600 is running @ 4.2 GHz on all 12 threads all by itself. With 4.3 GHz being the best OC speed most people seem to be getting; then what’s the point? I imagine manufacturer GPU algorithm tuning is just around the corner as well. There’s still memory tuning but the benefits from that are small. Maybe it’s time for me to build a super cooler system. Maybe a sub zero oil bath. Hmm...
-
Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!
Overclocking becoming a thing of the past?
- Thread starter Thick8
- Start date
- Joined
- Nov 21, 2018
If you are one of the chosen ones they are overclocking pretty good in terms of Ryzen. But these are less then 1% of them.
The point is probably to make it run at the higher clock on all cores and not only one. What I mean is when you load all cores then it will run at 3.6GHz... so you can 'overclock' it to run at 4.1-4.2GHz on all cores/threads and probably lower voltage what won't cause thermal throttling so fast.
About the same is with new Intel chips. No idea what we will see in the next generations but probably nothing much better.
It doesn't change the fact that overclocking isn't required for long years. It's more like a group of users who always want something more. This is why people visit overclockers.com and other similar websites. Even though the CPU clock is quite disappointing, then there are other things which can be tuned like a memory clock. It also won't change much but let to play with additional options.
About the same is with new Intel chips. No idea what we will see in the next generations but probably nothing much better.
It doesn't change the fact that overclocking isn't required for long years. It's more like a group of users who always want something more. This is why people visit overclockers.com and other similar websites. Even though the CPU clock is quite disappointing, then there are other things which can be tuned like a memory clock. It also won't change much but let to play with additional options.
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2008
This is the new normal and we have to take it, like it or not. My concerns are if AMD are pushing right to the limit, it also forces Intel to do similar. I think I only really OC for the fun of it now, it's well past the time of doing it as necessity. Still adjusting to the bench stable mindset.
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2002
At least for Zen 2, I almost think PBO is there just to give enthusiasts the feeling that they have optimized or overclocked their system. I'll check to see if it makes a difference on my CPU sometime. It also seems like for most Zen 2 CPUs, they will boost up to pretty close what a manual OC could do, even with all core loads.
For my CPU (2600X) I was able to do 4.15MHz all core OC, which is exactly the same as the CPU does itself with PBO enabled (I have to be honest I never really tested with it off, except for initially with the stock cooler). By leaving it stock / with PBO enableld I get the same freq. in all core loads but an extra 100MHz for single core loads.
For my CPU (2600X) I was able to do 4.15MHz all core OC, which is exactly the same as the CPU does itself with PBO enabled (I have to be honest I never really tested with it off, except for initially with the stock cooler). By leaving it stock / with PBO enableld I get the same freq. in all core loads but an extra 100MHz for single core loads.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Nov 21, 2018
I think overclocking has changed. It use to be getting the most out of your cpu. Now everyone wants to get high world record overclocks. A 4.3-4.5 Ryzen 2 is not a slow CPU. It's not an amazingly high oc but it's not like you need to hit 5ghz + be realavent. Second gen Ryzen won't clock as high as Intel. But if it did do you realize how hard it would pound Intel into the ground?
I think we need to go back to our roots. Overclocking was never about getting clocks. It was about getting a little more out of your cpu. Very few people were going for pure clock speed and those people have pushed the second gen Ryzen to 5.8+ GHz. Overclocking is about getting more cpu for your money. I remember back in the day. My first system I bought and built my self. Sempron 2500+. Couldn't afford an Athlon. 1.75ghz and I was very happy hitting 2.2ghz. That's a 450mhz oc. I did it because I couldn't afford a better Athlon but wanted more cpu. Now today lol at the 3900x. Base clock of 3.8ghz and typically overclocking to 4.3 for people. That's 500mhz.
My 3900x made me feel like I was home. I been gone so long from AMD with this feeling of not having a super high oc but it was rewarding. It's fast and can beat higher clocked cpu's . It really put me back to the glory days of AMD.it brought a lot of old guys back to. I seen faces on here now that I haven't seen in years. Ryzen 2 feels special. It was AMD's come back but it also brought some of our old friends back. And the community is a big part of overclocking. And it brought people back.
I think we need to go back to our roots. Overclocking was never about getting clocks. It was about getting a little more out of your cpu. Very few people were going for pure clock speed and those people have pushed the second gen Ryzen to 5.8+ GHz. Overclocking is about getting more cpu for your money. I remember back in the day. My first system I bought and built my self. Sempron 2500+. Couldn't afford an Athlon. 1.75ghz and I was very happy hitting 2.2ghz. That's a 450mhz oc. I did it because I couldn't afford a better Athlon but wanted more cpu. Now today lol at the 3900x. Base clock of 3.8ghz and typically overclocking to 4.3 for people. That's 500mhz.
My 3900x made me feel like I was home. I been gone so long from AMD with this feeling of not having a super high oc but it was rewarding. It's fast and can beat higher clocked cpu's . It really put me back to the glory days of AMD.it brought a lot of old guys back to. I seen faces on here now that I haven't seen in years. Ryzen 2 feels special. It was AMD's come back but it also brought some of our old friends back. And the community is a big part of overclocking. And it brought people back.
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2008
When I first got into PCs, turbo wasn't a thing. You bought a clock, it ran at that clock. In those early days, you could never have enough CPU power. OC was a free and often substantial increase for tens of % improvement. For example, my early Celerons moving from a 66 MHz to 100 MHz bus, you got 50% there and then.
The 3900X, I wouldn't count the OC from base clock, as running stock, you wont be running base clock either. What's the all core boost? Considering that, we're probably looking at less than 10% OC. For a 24/7 OC, is it worth the effort for that small gain? For most, that answer is no. That leaves a smaller group of people who do it for the fun, the challenge, or just want to do something different. And here we are...
The 3900X, I wouldn't count the OC from base clock, as running stock, you wont be running base clock either. What's the all core boost? Considering that, we're probably looking at less than 10% OC. For a 24/7 OC, is it worth the effort for that small gain? For most, that answer is no. That leaves a smaller group of people who do it for the fun, the challenge, or just want to do something different. And here we are...
storm-chaser
Disabled
- Joined
- Sep 2, 2011
- Location
- Upstate NY
Overclocking practices will continue to evolve as we move forward with better and better tech.
The CPUs of today are finely tuned from the factory. The fact is overclocking one of them will do little to improve system performance relative to the end users perspective (I.e. seat of the pants), as the performance margins get slimmer and slimmer. Sure, you can see gains in synthetic benchmarks but in the real world these things are beasts and can handle anything you can throw at them, most of the time with ease. You can think of overclocking in the old days as hopping up a 350 cubic inch 250HP chevy small block engine. It has lots of potential and can make big power if you know what your doing. Fast forward to overclock today an its like trying to hop up a Corvette ZR1 that makes about 650HP right out of the box. Sure, its possible and still fun to fool around with, but the performance is already there for pretty much any scenario you can throw at it.
The CPUs of today are finely tuned from the factory. The fact is overclocking one of them will do little to improve system performance relative to the end users perspective (I.e. seat of the pants), as the performance margins get slimmer and slimmer. Sure, you can see gains in synthetic benchmarks but in the real world these things are beasts and can handle anything you can throw at them, most of the time with ease. You can think of overclocking in the old days as hopping up a 350 cubic inch 250HP chevy small block engine. It has lots of potential and can make big power if you know what your doing. Fast forward to overclock today an its like trying to hop up a Corvette ZR1 that makes about 650HP right out of the box. Sure, its possible and still fun to fool around with, but the performance is already there for pretty much any scenario you can throw at it.
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2000
You can improve the performance of a Corvette ZR1 tremendously! Unfortunately with today's high-end CPUs, you're mostly banging your head against a brick wall.
storm-chaser
Disabled
- Joined
- Sep 2, 2011
- Location
- Upstate NY
You can improve the performance of a Corvette ZR1 tremendously! Unfortunately with today's high-end CPUs, you're mostly banging your head against a brick wall.
Sure you can make well over 1000HP and beyond with a ZR1. But the point I was trying to make is there is ample performance for almost every scenario right out of the box. Hell, it does the Nürburgring in under 7 minutes! That's like a cinebench R15 score of 8400 cb, lol.
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2000
To speed junkies, enough is never enough. If you do it in 7 minutes, then someone else does it in 6:45, then you need to respond. Pretty soon you'll have to get to 1,000+ HP. Can't do that with high-end CPUs anymore since they're released at pretty much the top of their possibilities.
With current CPUs, it's more like hitting a wall and trying to pass it what is not possible in 95% cases. Current Ryzen is still based on what was designed as low power processors and is scaling really bad at a higher voltage. We can actually see that lower process gave a bit but not so much comparing to 1/2 gen. The same is with Intel, CPUs are reaching thermal max and simply won't OC past that. For competitive benching can use LN2 but for 24/7 work not really and most users simply can't OC these chips. Most users of new and high AMD/Intel chips are limited to "OC" to max turbo clock or a bit below that.
OC practices are not evolving for good 15 years. There is nothing new. Simply bump voltage and try to keep reasonable temps. If you are not taking a part in competitive benchmarking then nothing else is helping. Some years ago various additional settings were helping much more. All these VTT, PLL and other voltages were giving significant gains. Now when you reach max clock at some voltage/temps then there is not much more you can do. This is also the reason why so many "pro overclockers" with good access to LN2 and total lack of knowledge appeared in last years. Simply pour LN2 and bump CPU clock/voltage.
All that is causing that overclocking is dying. Rankings like hwbot are losing more users than are gaining. Even when there are new overclockers then they get bored quick and leave. You can see how OCF team looks like. Out of 500+ members on the list are maybe 20 more or less active. In real the most popular OC hardware ranking (and the only one in this scale) has maybe 300 active members and maybe 100 of them are trying to compete. 50% of those active are sponsored and work more as a marketing tools than regular enthusiasts.
OC practices are not evolving for good 15 years. There is nothing new. Simply bump voltage and try to keep reasonable temps. If you are not taking a part in competitive benchmarking then nothing else is helping. Some years ago various additional settings were helping much more. All these VTT, PLL and other voltages were giving significant gains. Now when you reach max clock at some voltage/temps then there is not much more you can do. This is also the reason why so many "pro overclockers" with good access to LN2 and total lack of knowledge appeared in last years. Simply pour LN2 and bump CPU clock/voltage.
All that is causing that overclocking is dying. Rankings like hwbot are losing more users than are gaining. Even when there are new overclockers then they get bored quick and leave. You can see how OCF team looks like. Out of 500+ members on the list are maybe 20 more or less active. In real the most popular OC hardware ranking (and the only one in this scale) has maybe 300 active members and maybe 100 of them are trying to compete. 50% of those active are sponsored and work more as a marketing tools than regular enthusiasts.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Apr 12, 2014
Wow !!!!
Here I thought everyone started overclocking so they could run Crysis ...............
Here I thought everyone started overclocking so they could run Crysis ...............
storm-chaser
Disabled
- Joined
- Sep 2, 2011
- Location
- Upstate NY
Well said Woomack, I agree with those sentiments 100%.
And I should say, there will always be a group of enthusiasts who continue to embrace overclocking, regardless of the fact that the performance margins are getting slimmer and slimmer.
And I should say, there will always be a group of enthusiasts who continue to embrace overclocking, regardless of the fact that the performance margins are getting slimmer and slimmer.
They are 1%'ers in the market.
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2012
Really depends on the perception of it all.
With AMD and Intel with automatic "Boosting" .... EVERYONE is an overclocker. They just don't know it. Cpu and board does it all for them.
__
Now overclockers, one of the reasons of joining a forum like this one, was to actually manually or statically overclock our rigs.
The current overclockers... that call themselves that, while using PBO XFR settings and changing them, are in a sense only tweaking an already placed overclock.
__
My perception is stupid but bare with me.....
If you can't beat the ALL core boost PBO offers, you aren't overclocking. lol.
In example: My 2700X boosts all cores at 4ghz. I run a static OC of 4.1ghz. I beat the PBO by a mere 100mhz. lol. Dumb as hell I know....
But yea, overclocking isn't really dead for say... it's just nobody knows they are doing it, it's done for them.
With AMD and Intel with automatic "Boosting" .... EVERYONE is an overclocker. They just don't know it. Cpu and board does it all for them.
__
Now overclockers, one of the reasons of joining a forum like this one, was to actually manually or statically overclock our rigs.
The current overclockers... that call themselves that, while using PBO XFR settings and changing them, are in a sense only tweaking an already placed overclock.
__
My perception is stupid but bare with me.....
If you can't beat the ALL core boost PBO offers, you aren't overclocking. lol.
In example: My 2700X boosts all cores at 4ghz. I run a static OC of 4.1ghz. I beat the PBO by a mere 100mhz. lol. Dumb as hell I know....
But yea, overclocking isn't really dead for say... it's just nobody knows they are doing it, it's done for them.
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2012
I found the base clock of my 2700X to be much more efficient than overclocking or using thr PBO features. I figured that out by F@H if not a slight underclock from that and even lower voltage. Runs a lot cooler I may add.
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2008
Your perception isn't Intel's perception. They had stated it isn't overclocking if you don't flip the overclocking flag inside the CPU, which then lets you fiddle with more stuff. Basically, if you run a CPU as supplied, turbo and all, it isn't overclocking in their eyes. Also, without looking at the range, I think there are still many recent if not current CPUs that don't boost at all. They're fixed clock (apart from dropping for power save of course).
