[SOLVED] 3900x overclocking necessary?

[Oxicoi]

Recently watched a Jayztwocents video and saw that he would rather just let the Ryzen 9 3900x performance boost itself by expanding the thermal limitations to a higher number. The reason he said this was because when you manually overclock, the speeds get set to whatever you set it on all cores, which the max is 4.2GHz for most 3900x's.

Is there a way to keep that 4.7GHz single core boost while manually overclocking all cores to 4.2GHz or should I just let it boost itself?

What voltage is recommended for 4.2GHz all cores with 4.7GHz single core boost, if that is even possible? Should I just let everything on auto, letting voltage get higher than 1.4V? Should I set the voltage to something like 1.25V and let it go auto?

Let me know.

 

[Phaaze88]

Is there a way to keep that 4.7GHz single core boost while manually overclocking all cores to 4.2GHz or should I just let it boost itself?

For the first part: negative. For the second part: yes.

letting voltage get higher than 1.4V?

Even when it does, it's brief, and the vast majority of the threads are asleep. You and many others have been overreacting to this - it is fine.
You're welcome to try undervolting, but you still risk a loss in performance; undervolt too much, and the cpu doesn't boost as high.


The strongest point to take from this: These cpus can tune themselves better than the user can.
All the user need do is use a high end cooler and dual channel ram up to 3733mhz.

 

[Oxicoi]

For the first part: negative. For the second part: yes.


Even when it does, it's brief, and the vast majority of the threads are asleep. You and many others have been overreacting to this - it is fine.
You're welcome to try undervolting, but you still risk a loss in performance; undervolt too much, and the cpu doesn't boost as high.


The strongest point to take from this: These cpus can tune themselves better than the user can.
All the user need do is use a high end cooler and dual channel ram up to 3733mhz.

I have a 360mm radiator and temps never get up to 80 Celsius, specifically at 1.381250 Volts.

So would you consider just letting the CPU use PBO, put all cores to 4.2GHz and losing 4.6GHz single core (I meant 4.6GHz as I only have 3900x, not 3900XT), or do something like 4.5GHz-4.6GHz on the first set of 6 cores and then 4.2GHz-4.3GHz on the second set of 6 cores?

 

[Phaaze88]

So would you consider just letting the CPU use PBO, put all cores to 4.2GHz and losing 4.6GHz single core (I meant 4.6GHz as I only have 3900x, not 3900XT), or do something like 4.5GHz-4.6GHz on the first set of 6 cores and then 4.2GHz-4.3GHz on the second set of 6 cores?

I would run some benchmarks between stock and the different PBO levels. Leave manual alone.
The reason is because some of the boards have been tweaked out of the box to the point that stock can outperform some of the PBO levels. An extreme example of this is Asrock's X570 Taichi.
The above is just the usual vendor shenanigans of trying to one-up each other. Asus appears to be following the stock guidelines the closest out of them - but they're not completely innocent.

 

[Oxicoi]

I would run some benchmarks between stock and the different PBO levels. Leave manual alone.
The reason is because some of the boards have been tweaked out of the box to the point that stock can outperform some of the PBO levels. An extreme example of this is Asrock's X570 Taichi.
The above is just the usual vendor shenanigans of trying to one-up each other. Asus appears to be following the stock guidelines the closest out of them - but they're not completely innocent.

Well currently I am testing the CCD overclock, where the high performance CCD is set to 4.4GHz and the other is at 4.3GHz. This has been working good at 1.3250 Volts.

Is that 200MHz really worth it for single core? Is the 1.3250 Volts hurting the 3900x, even when temps are below 80 Celsius, below 60 Celsius on single core test?

With this new information, do you still recommend leaving it on stock?

 

[Phaaze88]

Is that 200MHz really worth it for single core?

Ask yourself this: does every task you do, or every task the OS does in the background, ONLY take advantage of the cpu's multi-core performance?
If the answer to this is no, would it not make sense to benefit from that extra 200mhz when it's needed most?
That same question can be turned right around towards your all core OC...

Is the 1.3250 Volts hurting the 3900x, even when temps are below 80 Celsius, below 60 Celsius on single core test?

Depends on how much current that cpu is drawing during high thread activity - no serious penalty during light activity. Normally, the cpu takes care of that itself. When you do it manually, it stops doing that... now, you're the one taking care of it.
It doesn't have to be running hot to be drawing excessive amounts of current.
If you want to leave it like that, give it a few months, and you'll find out...

With this new information, do you still recommend leaving it on stock?

Yep.
If you really want to tinker with all core OC, you should've gone Intel.
All core OC is less effective to simply using a beefy cooler + memory tweaking.

 

[Oxicoi]

Ask yourself this: does every task you do, or every task the OS does in the background, ONLY take advantage of the cpu's multi-core performance?
If the answer to this is no, would it not make sense to benefit from that extra 200mhz when it's needed most?
That same question can be turned right around towards your all core OC...


Depends on how much current that cpu is drawing during high thread activity - no serious penalty during light activity. Normally, the cpu takes care of that itself. When you do it manually, it stops doing that... now, you're the one taking care of it.
It doesn't have to be running hot to be drawing excessive amounts of current.
If you want to leave it like that, give it a few months, and you'll find out...


Yep.
If you really want to tinker with all core OC, you should've gone Intel.
All core OC is less effective to simply using a beefy cooler + memory tweaking.

Well going Intel would involve me costing more as I'd have to switch the motherboard as well and CPU, which easily can go up to $1,000 in platform switching (as I like to have the latest). Not to mention that Intel is vulnerable in its' hardware.

However, I'll go back to stock. The reason it concerned me was because of the high temps while idle. It did go down when under load during Cinebench though. I'm so used to old AMD processors and overclocking them to their max with safe voltage, but I guess in this instance it is safer to let the 3900x boost itself.

Thanks for the help and sorry for the very very late reply.