I don't think reviewers will tell us much along those lines...it will be the overclockers who do. If it's like it has been for Zen1, 1.5 and 2 the launch reviewers, the ones who get review kits, have to follow a 'script'.Yes you're jumping the gun, that information hasn't been reviewed or published yet. You'll have to wait till reviewers get their hands on the chips and show us what they're truly capable of.
I don't think reviewers will tell us much along those lines...it will be the overclockers who do. If it's like it has been for Zen1, 1.5 and 2 the launch reviewers, the ones who get review kits, have to follow a 'script'.
Of course we'll get crazy reports from the internet...like the youtuber who undervolted Zen2, just looked at clocks and never realized how he was killing performance. A few days or weeks later the gold will start to dribble in. After the overclockers have bought their own samples and start squeezing it under LN2 to see what it will do.
I predict it will be like Zen2...only maybe even more so. No all-core headroom to speak of and it kills lightly threaded performance so badly when you do it can also kill it for gaming.
We'll just have to wait and see. Though these next releases are still looking promising nonetheless, if the leaks of AMD's CPU and GPU performance are as people say they are then it'd be really impressive for AMD to take a strong foothold against two major fronts.
That's a bit disingenuous because it only hits maximum turbo clocks on one single core at a time anway. So it doesn't really matter if it's only doing it on 6 of 8 cores (as my bronze 3700X does) as there's always one of the six available to take the boost for the next thread that needs it....highly binned that not even all of the cores were capable of reaching the maximum turbo clocks. ...
As everybody says: it's too soon to say until reviewers at least have reported on their experiences. I'd watch for GamersNexus in particular as Steve always gives a very complete analysis, especially of 'overclock-ability'. GN's also likely to buy one so they can set aside any concerns with cherry picking of reviewer samples.thanks all. just trying to make up my mind on which 5000 series to upgrade to, current is 2700x, and weather its going to be even worth setting the core clocks or as with some of the 3000 series leaving the PBO to do the work.
That's a bit disingenuous because it only hits maximum turbo clocks on one single core at a time anway. So it doesn't really matter if it's only doing it on 6 of 8 cores (as my bronze 3700X does) as there's always one of the six available to take the boost for the next thread that needs it.
The real performance of Zen2 comes from the mid-range clocks it can hold with all cores, not the max single core turbo clocks anyway. Just tweak PBO and give it good cooling to watch it rock. That's where seeing how Zen3 works will be the most interesting. Too bad I'm not going to get one.
And I'm pretty sure the 4.9-5Ghz clocks are just that: one single core in a turbo boost. Those aren't the leaks of interest; it's the Passmark scores that bedazzle. Especially single thread results. With such a dynamic processor and boost algorithm you can't really look at clocks to gauge performance.
Only way it will stay stable for FAH at 4.4G is to raise voltage up to the 1.375-1.4 range...that's SVI2 TFN core voltage. I'm not interested in exploring early degradation phenomenon, so no thanks to that. Especially since it makes zero difference in gaming benches and insignificant difference in FAH TPF's, with thermals through the roof even under a 240mm AIO.You can try manually forcing each core to see if each of your cores is stable at the highest boost clock. ...
Only way it will stay stable for FAH at 4.4G is to raise voltage up to the 1.375-1.4 range...that's SVI2 TFN core voltage. I'm not interested in exploring early degradation phenomenon, so no thanks to that. Especially since it makes zero difference in gaming benches and insignificant difference in FAH TPF's, with thermals through the roof even under a 240mm AIO.
Only way it will stay stable for FAH at 4.4G is to raise voltage up to the 1.375-1.4 range...that's SVI2 TFN core voltage. I'm not interested in exploring early degradation phenomenon, so no thanks to that. Especially since it makes zero difference in gaming benches and insignificant difference in FAH TPF's, with thermals through the roof even under a 240mm AIO.
I tried that, didn't see the point in it. Also disabling SMT can make a major difference. In the end I'm more interested in all-around performance more than just seeing big clocks. For all the problems and risk of early degrading that comes with overclocking, the payoff just wasn't enough compared to an aggressive PBO. The best performing overclock loses too much single core performance with only a minor gain in multithreaded performance in some scenarios...mainly those that really heat up the CPU like Handbrake video encodes.You don't have to test all of the cores for stability at once. You can temporaily disable the ones you are not testing.
I tried that, didn't see the point in it. Also disabling SMT can make a major difference. In the end I'm more interested in all-around performance more than just seeing big clocks. For all the problems and risk of early degrading that comes with overclocking, the payoff just wasn't enough compared to an aggressive PBO. The best performing overclock loses too much single core performance with only a minor gain in multithreaded performance in some scenarios...mainly those that really heat up the CPU like Handbrake video encodes.
So you do or you don't know if all of your cores can actually hit the highest boost clock? I'm not surprised you can't keep it cool. Those fisher price AIOs really need a huge reservoir to be effective.
oh yes i do...i know 3 of my cores are boosting 25mhz over max, 3 more are hitting right on boost and the other two rarely if ever hit 25 under. It falls in line with the core ranking displayed in HWInfo. HWinfo, btw, not only shows the silicon quality ranking AMD gives the cores during binning but also the core preference order the scheduler uses when prioritizing work load to threads. The core preference order is determined not only on ranking but shared resources, e.g., caches.So you do or you don't know if all of your cores can actually hit the highest boost clock? I'm not surprised you can't keep it cool. Those fisher price AIOs really need a huge reservoir to be effective.
oh yes i do...i know 3 of my cores are boosting 25mhz over max, 3 more are hitting right on boost and the other two rarely if ever hit 25 under. It falls in line with the core ranking displayed in HWInfo. HWinfo, btw, not only shows the silicon quality ranking AMD gives the cores during binning but also the core preference order the scheduler uses when prioritizing work load to threads. The core preference order is determined not only on ranking but shared resources, e.g., caches.
i can't expect much...my processor is overall graded 'bronze' by CTR. I got it in August of last year so it definitely not one of the gold and platinum processors that are so common now coming off a mature process.
...
So for the trouble and expense of a CCL I MAY get few dozen more points in multi-thread performance and the pleasure of watching ST performance decline and micro-stuttering return, or worsen, when gaming. That's simply not a bargain I can rationalize.