Discussion AMD Ryzen MegaThread! FAQ and Resources

[jaymc]

Ryzen 5 review vs. Core i5: Ryzen 5 1600X wins for best mainstream power CPU
We test the best for $250, pitting the new Ryzen 5 1600X against Intel's vaunted Core i5-7600K.
"The problem is, people don’t want complicated answers. They want simple answers and they want you to pick for them. In that case, Ryzen 5 is the way to go. It burns Core i5 to the ground in multi-threaded applications performance and doesn’t give up much in single-threaded performance."
"It’s pretty hard to pass up the incredible performance the Ryzen 5 1600X offers, especially as we move into a world where more cores and more threads are expected to matter. For that new world, the Ryzen 5 1600X is easily the winner and just a hell of a deal for the overall performance you get."
http://www.pcworld.com/article/3186811/computers/ryzen-5-review-vs-core-i5-ryzen-5-1600x-wins-for-best-mainstream-power-cpu.html?page=4

Rise of the Tomb Raider really has issues with ryzen i even seen piledriver beat it, The game needs a patch its obviously not using ryzen correctly

It runs great with two rx480's

I was looking at that g-skill 3200mhz.. I'm wondering if their gonna bring out a 3600mhz model that's made to work with Ryzen out of the box.. I'd kinda like that fabric rocking along as fast as possible...!
I really like that Asrock Taichi ... I'd like to see the next BIOS update causing a wave of 3600mhz ram working out of the box with no problems, that be nice...

I'm sure there is more juice in tomb raider alright when it comes to Ryzen, for sure.. isn't it from a studio that favours nvidia ? Hopefully we will see a patch for it.

 

[goldstone77]

More stuttering with quad cores being reported, and 1070 video bench tests with the 1600. Also, it very interesting to note the game play quality of Ryzen in Crysis 3, which is a 4 year old game. I believe that is unreal engine 3. Might be worth looking at games with that gaming engine on Ryzen. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RWJh5GdKq50

 

[juanrga]

The thing is, if you think about it, because AMD wasn't competitive since the Phenom era, we've had dual and quad core CPUs as the entire gaming market since the Core 2 Duo/Quad and Phenom X2/X3/X4. Why would developers make their games use 8+ cores, when nobody had the resources? Sure, the i7 has SMT, but it's not really 8 cores, and the i3 is powerful, but it still handles 4 threads, right?

Now, people who would buy a 4-core CPU can buy an 8-core one for the same price. The bottom of the market will have 4-core CPUs in no time. Some games require an i5 or FX-8320 as minimum already.

I'm not saying Ryzen will magicaly be superior in gaming next month, but some people (even in this thread) are still using Phenoms and Sandy Bridges. Why recommend them to buy an i5 or i7, when they won't last as long as a capable 6 or 8 core Ryzen, which even can receive the next generation without replacing motherboard?

My advise to people is: will you upgrade again in the next 2 or 3 years, and only game? Get the Intel. Otherwise, get the Ryzen.

Let me be clear, I am not against getting a six core for gaming. I am well aware that a six core is better than an equivalent four core on some games like AoTs, F1 2016, Deus Ex, and Watch Dogs 2. By equivalent I mean that it has similar single thread performance. I believe that future CFL 6 core (6 threads) could be the new king for gaming and be the recommended chip by Tomshardware or PcGamer. It all depends on what clocks will be extracted from the 14++ node.

What I disagree completely is to the idea of getting now a six-core with lower single thread performance in the hope that all future games will use more threads and this will compensate for the single thread deficiency. This is the same failed idea since Bulldozer epoch, when certain people recommended the 8 core FX for gaming and wait for futures games to "catch up". The 8350 vs 2500k historical record by computerbase has demonstrated that the idea didn't work.

And why didn't it? It is not because only some few people had access to 8-core. It is because games aren't throughput-optimized workloads but latency-sensitive ones, and less but faster cores is better than more but slower cores. A game is not a collection of two dozen of nearly independent threads. A game is one or two master threads, which then can be assisted by helper threads. If the master thread is bottlenecked by a slow core, then the game performance drops no matter how many helper threads the chip can run at once. That is the reason why a SKL 4-core is able to beat a R7 even in games that scale to 8-cores.

Game developers know this very well. When the new consoles did start to develop. Sony requested game developers how many cores they want. I know a 16 core console was once in the menu, but it was quickly rejected by game developers

We quickly could tell that we should put either four or eight cores on the hardware. The consensus was that any more than eight, and special techniques would be needed to use them, to get efficiency.

 

[jaymc]

I understand where your coming from Juan I do.. but I think most of us are happy to see another player in the game..

After saying that I really do think the times are changing, this time around... When it comes to more cores that is.. An Async Compute is becoming a bigger deal by the day. We have rumours now that Volta is being moved forward.. may not be true but still, my first taught was have they figured out their Async Compute problems.

It's happening in the consoles right now with scorpio and I'm sure the PS5 will have plenty more cores too, maybe even more than scorpio will or does should I say.. An Vulken support as well sure why not !
We also have Linux an Steam all supporting more cores and vulken too.


It's actually happening right now on front of our very eye's, an dev's will definitely be programming for more cores an threads !
We have Scorpio & Windows & Linux & Vulken..
Valve with steam and steam OS have helped to set the stage too. Actually Linux & Steam & Vulken could make windows a free OS down the road an have opened up a hole new market for games an dev's.. It's not just AMD anymore that's pushing this, it's literally everyone. AMD were just well ahead of the possy with parralel computing. An still are, their Async Compute is streets ahead right now anyway. An their SMT is supposedly better than HT...
That still doesn't mean that they will survive of coarse...

MS have skin in the game too with Dx12 and with Xbox Scorpio dev's will be getting very family with Async Compute an more CPU threads to code for, an all these games will be getting ported to windows also.

This years Dx12 title's are forecast to triple according to AMD..an I can see it happening..

More core's & more thread's & Async Compute seem to be this years specialty for sure. It's actually looking like the only meal on the menu from where I'm sitting right now.. We shall see, I guess this too shall pass. But It looks like nothing is gonna stop it from happening at this point to me ! As you say yourself we have been hitting an IPC wall anyway so...

AMD's Q1 results will be out on May 1st an we will see if people are buying Ryzen (with 4 weeks of sales)... hopefully they are because the wagons are circling around AMD that's for sure..will people invest their money to keep competition alive... People are well aware of the alternative at this point. An Hopefully the IPC is good enough.
Because if it's not were all in trouble. Everyone wants them to do well but will they chip in an put their money where their mouth's are.. That too remains to be seen.

They have my endorsement anyway and they will be getting my money too. I hope all these things combined are enough to keep them in the game, for all our sake's that is

Jay

 

[salgado18]

Spoiler

The thing is, if you think about it, because AMD wasn't competitive since the Phenom era, we've had dual and quad core CPUs as the entire gaming market since the Core 2 Duo/Quad and Phenom X2/X3/X4. Why would developers make their games use 8+ cores, when nobody had the resources? Sure, the i7 has SMT, but it's not really 8 cores, and the i3 is powerful, but it still handles 4 threads, right?

Now, people who would buy a 4-core CPU can buy an 8-core one for the same price. The bottom of the market will have 4-core CPUs in no time. Some games require an i5 or FX-8320 as minimum already.

I'm not saying Ryzen will magicaly be superior in gaming next month, but some people (even in this thread) are still using Phenoms and Sandy Bridges. Why recommend them to buy an i5 or i7, when they won't last as long as a capable 6 or 8 core Ryzen, which even can receive the next generation without replacing motherboard?

My advise to people is: will you upgrade again in the next 2 or 3 years, and only game? Get the Intel. Otherwise, get the Ryzen.

Let me be clear, I am not against getting a six core for gaming. I am well aware that a six core is better than an equivalent four core on some games like AoTs, F1 2016, Deus Ex, and Watch Dogs 2. By equivalent I mean that it has similar single thread performance. I believe that future CFL 6 core (6 threads) could be the new king for gaming and be the recommended chip by Tomshardware or PcGamer. It all depends on what clocks will be extracted from the 14++ node.

What I disagree completely is to the idea of getting now a six-core with lower single thread performance in the hope that all future games will use more threads and this will compensate for the single thread deficiency. This is the same failed idea since Bulldozer epoch, when certain people recommended the 8 core FX for gaming and wait for futures games to "catch up". The 8350 vs 2500k historical record by computerbase has demonstrated that the idea didn't work.

And why didn't it? It is not because only some few people had access to 8-core. It is because games aren't throughput-optimized workloads but latency-sensitive ones, and less but faster cores is better than more but slower cores. A game is not a collection of two dozen of nearly independent threads. A game is one or two master threads, which then can be assisted by helper threads. If the master thread is bottlenecked by a slow core, then the game performance drops no matter how many helper threads the chip can run at once. That is the reason why a SKL 4-core is able to beat a R7 even in games that scale to 8-cores.

Game developers know this very well. When the new consoles did start to develop. Sony requested game developers how many cores they want. I know a 16 core console was once in the menu, but it was quickly rejected by game developers

We quickly could tell that we should put either four or eight cores on the hardware. The consensus was that any more than eight, and special techniques would be needed to use them, to get efficiency.

You crush my dreams with your truth...

... but it is still true. As a game dev, I'm always hopeful that they will start using more cores, with things like graphics, AI, pathfinding, etc. But I also know that it's not that simple, and games must compute everything in under 16ms, all using one single master thread. Faster cores really are better than many cores, in this case.

I'll still recommend Ryzen, though, because it is very capable (even at 10% IPC deficit), can do anything else better than the Intel quads, is cheap, and will keep AMD afloat. Having red-colored glasses is hard, you know

 

[DMinion]

Found a couple good articles on compatible RAM for Ryzen! 2 and 4 Dimm configurations.
http://www.legitreviews.com/amd-ryzen-single-rank-versus-dual-rank-ddr4-memory-performance_192960/5
http://www.legitreviews.com/ddr4-memory-scaling-amd-am4-platform-best-memory-kit-amd-ryzen-cpus_192259/6
Update 03-14-2017: AMD said that they have internally observed good results from 2933, 3200, and 3500 MT/s rates with 16GB kits based on Samsung “B-die” memory chips. Potential kits include:
Geil EVO X – GEX416GB3200C16DC [16-16-16-36 @ 1.35v]
G.Skill Trident Z RGB Series- F4-3200C16D-16GTZR [16-18-18-36 @ 1.35v] ($189.99 shipped)
Corsair CMK16GX4M2B3200C16 VERSION 5.39 [16-18-18-36 @ 1.35v] ($129.99 shipped)
Also,
Many YouTube Bench Testers use ASRock X370 Taichi AM4 Motherboard to get the higher CPU and Memory clocks.
G.SKILL Flare X Series 16GB (2 x 8GB) 288-Pin DDR4 SDRAM DDR4 3200 also seems to be the memory of choice.
https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820232530

I just got the G.Skill Flare X and I can happily report it works as advertised at 3200 on Asus Crosshair VI Hero Bios 1002.... the Flare X is just darn pricey compared to some of the other options. I'm only running at 3.7Ghz with the stock cooler at the moment as I'm waiting for my AM4 bracket from Corsair but pretty pleased so far.

 

[goldstone77]

Found a couple good articles on compatible RAM for Ryzen! 2 and 4 Dimm configurations.
http://www.legitreviews.com/amd-ryzen-single-rank-versus-dual-rank-ddr4-memory-performance_192960/5
http://www.legitreviews.com/ddr4-memory-scaling-amd-am4-platform-best-memory-kit-amd-ryzen-cpus_192259/6
Update 03-14-2017: AMD said that they have internally observed good results from 2933, 3200, and 3500 MT/s rates with 16GB kits based on Samsung “B-die” memory chips. Potential kits include:
Geil EVO X – GEX416GB3200C16DC [16-16-16-36 @ 1.35v]
G.Skill Trident Z RGB Series- F4-3200C16D-16GTZR [16-18-18-36 @ 1.35v] ($189.99 shipped)
Corsair CMK16GX4M2B3200C16 VERSION 5.39 [16-18-18-36 @ 1.35v] ($129.99 shipped)
Also,
Many YouTube Bench Testers use ASRock X370 Taichi AM4 Motherboard to get the higher CPU and Memory clocks.
G.SKILL Flare X Series 16GB (2 x 8GB) 288-Pin DDR4 SDRAM DDR4 3200 also seems to be the memory of choice.
https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820232530

I just got the G.Skill Flare X and I can happily report it works as advertised at 3200 on Asus Crosshair VI Hero Bios 1002.... the Flare X is just darn pricey compared to some of the other options. I'm only running at 3.7Ghz with the stock cooler at the moment as I'm waiting for my AM4 bracket from Corsair but pretty pleased so far.

Congratulations! Success! Please keep me updated with your progress!

 

[jdwii]

Well just ordered my 1700 and expensive freaking memory AH but i got it on sale for 115$(16GB of G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series 3200Mhz). Guys i heard prices are not going down anytime soon on memory go buy some now if you need some. Looking hard for a board probably gonna go with MSI as always if not Asrock(Edit decided on the MSI B350 Tomahawk).

Just hoping switching platforms my gaming doesn't go down to much from my haswell chip can't wait to test Ryzen out for myself.

 

[goldstone77]

Well just ordered my 1700 and expensive freaking memory AH but i got it on sale for 115$(16GB of G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series 3200Mhz). Guys i heard prices are not going down anytime soon on memory go buy some now if you need some. Looking hard for a board probably gonna go with MSI as always if not Asrock(Edit decided on the MSI B350 Tomahawk).

Just hoping switching platforms my gaming doesn't go down to much from my haswell chip can't wait to test Ryzen out for myself.

JayzTwoCents used his 1800x for 30 days and couldn't tell the difference between it and the 6900k he was using. The one comment he did make about game play is that it felt really smooth. I'm interested to hear your take on the 1700. I'm looking to upgrade at that price point as well!

 

[Embra]

Well just ordered my 1700 and expensive freaking memory AH but i got it on sale for 115$(16GB of G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series 3200Mhz). Guys i heard prices are not going down anytime soon on memory go buy some now if you need some. Looking hard for a board probably gonna go with MSI as always if not Asrock(Edit decided on the MSI B350 Tomahawk).

Just hoping switching platforms my gaming doesn't go down to much from my haswell chip can't wait to test Ryzen out for myself.

JayzTwoCents used his 1800x for 30 days and couldn't tell the difference between it and the 6900k he was using. The one comment he did make about game play is that it felt really smooth. I'm interested to hear your take on the 1700. I'm looking to upgrade at that price point as well!

I would recommend that you make sure you are getting single rank memory @jdwii.
I agree that gaming is very smooth. High fps a tad lower/high depending on games. I find the min fps to be high adding to the smoothness.

 

[jaymc]

Well just ordered my 1700 and expensive freaking memory AH but i got it on sale for 115$(16GB of G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series 3200Mhz). Guys i heard prices are not going down anytime soon on memory go buy some now if you need some. Looking hard for a board probably gonna go with MSI as always if not Asrock(Edit decided on the MSI B350 Tomahawk).

Just hoping switching platforms my gaming doesn't go down to much from my haswell chip can't wait to test Ryzen out for myself.

Great stuff congrats.. Can't wait to hear what you have to have say about it... what made you go with the 1700 over the 1700x.. do ya not think the 'x' is worth the xtra.. parden the pun ?
A friend of mine is thinkin about pulling the trigger on a 1700x.. just curious to see what you based your decision on..

 

[Gon Freecss]

@juanrga;

Can you post the Ryzen vs Intel benchmarks you've been posting on this thread? I've been looking for them, but I can't seem to find them.

 

[goldstone77]

Well just ordered my 1700 and expensive freaking memory AH but i got it on sale for 115$(16GB of G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series 3200Mhz). Guys i heard prices are not going down anytime soon on memory go buy some now if you need some. Looking hard for a board probably gonna go with MSI as always if not Asrock(Edit decided on the MSI B350 Tomahawk).

Just hoping switching platforms my gaming doesn't go down to much from my haswell chip can't wait to test Ryzen out for myself.

Great stuff congrats.. Can't wait to hear what you have to have say about it... what made you go with the 1700 over the 1700x.. do ya not think the 'x' is worth the xtra.. parden the pun ?
A friend of mine is thinkin about pulling the trigger on a 1700x.. just curious to see what you based your decision on..

Looks like overclocking and hitting highest possible clocks is hit and miss regardless of the X across the board for all Ryzen. So there is no reason to buy the X verses non X if you don't mind changing settings in the bios. If you can't do that buy X will give you higher clock speed out of the box. 1600@$219 comes with a cooler that is capable of overclocking out of the box, but will run hot trying to hit 3.9-4.1GHz 88-89C. 1700@$319 comes with a cooler as well and will run hot at the highest clocks. Evo 212@$29 will cut those temps by 20C.

 

[juanrga]

Which ones?

 

[Gon Freecss]

Which ones?

Err, the ones that measure its IPC.

 

[jdwii]

Well just ordered my 1700 and expensive freaking memory AH but i got it on sale for 115$(16GB of G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series 3200Mhz). Guys i heard prices are not going down anytime soon on memory go buy some now if you need some. Looking hard for a board probably gonna go with MSI as always if not Asrock(Edit decided on the MSI B350 Tomahawk).

Just hoping switching platforms my gaming doesn't go down to much from my haswell chip can't wait to test Ryzen out for myself.

JayzTwoCents used his 1800x for 30 days and couldn't tell the difference between it and the 6900k he was using. The one comment he did make about game play is that it felt really smooth. I'm interested to hear your take on the 1700. I'm looking to upgrade at that price point as well!

I would recommend that you make sure you are getting single rank memory @jdwii.
I agree that gaming is very smooth. High fps a tad lower/high depending on games. I find the min fps to be high adding to the smoothness.

I read the comments on the memory and people got it to work at the rated speeds on ryzen hoping i do to.

 

[jdwii]

Well just ordered my 1700 and expensive freaking memory AH but i got it on sale for 115$(16GB of G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series 3200Mhz). Guys i heard prices are not going down anytime soon on memory go buy some now if you need some. Looking hard for a board probably gonna go with MSI as always if not Asrock(Edit decided on the MSI B350 Tomahawk).

Just hoping switching platforms my gaming doesn't go down to much from my haswell chip can't wait to test Ryzen out for myself.

Great stuff congrats.. Can't wait to hear what you have to have say about it... what made you go with the 1700 over the 1700x.. do ya not think the 'x' is worth the xtra.. parden the pun ?
A friend of mine is thinkin about pulling the trigger on a 1700x.. just curious to see what you based your decision on..

With ram prices were they are i'd simply think its a waste of money if you plan to overclock the most the 1700X or 1800X for that manner will be able to OC is 300mhz more and that is at best and it will do it with less voltage to probably.

Its pretty much a given that one can OC the 1700 to 3.7-3.8Ghz using the stock cooler let alone something like my Kraken X61 which i have to get a bracket for.

 

[goldstone77]

I found some benchmarks on Crysis 3 with Ryzen. It's a 4 year old title, but it certainly like Ryzen!
http://techreport.com/r.x/2017_04_11_AMD_s_Ryzen_5_1600X_and_Ryzen_5_1500X_CPUs_reviewed_part_one/Crysis_3_AvgFPS.png
What I also found interesting is how close the 2500k@4.9GHz compared to New Intel.
http://techreport.com/review/31724/amd-ryzen-5-1600x-and-ryzen-5-1500x-cpus-reviewed-part-one/5

 

[jaymc]

@jdwii thanks for that...

@goldstone 6 fps in the diff between it an the new i5.. hardly worth the upgrade is it.. ? An Ryzen 5 comes out the better of both chips.

 

[randomizer]

what made you go with the 1700 over the 1700x.. do ya not think the 'x' is worth the xtra.. parden the pun ?

It performs almost the same and requires you to buy a heatsink as well. That doesn't sound worth it to me.

 

[goldstone77]

@jdwii thanks for that...

@goldstone 6 fps in the diff between it an the new i5.. hardly worth the upgrade is it.. ? An Ryzen 5 comes out the better of both chips.

That isn't the first bench mark that I found this type of performance verses Intel. Mind Blank has used the same video game in his bench marks. His video was what made me want to look around and see if anyone else had the same performance with Ryzen in this title. I'm using a i5 2500k@4.5GHz, and I don't have any problems gaming 1080p on Ultra settings. The controversy with Ryzen in gaming is mostly laughable with the exception of a few titles that are/were broken. I do like that this gaming bench mark showed noticeable stuttering/jittery gameplay with the 4 core processors with the exception of the overclocked i7 7700k@5GHz. It does lead one to believe the more cores can offset single threaded performance in some games!

 

[jdwii]

@jdwii thanks for that...

@goldstone 6 fps in the diff between it an the new i5.. hardly worth the upgrade is it.. ? An Ryzen 5 comes out the better of both chips.

When i get Ryzen i'm going to benchmark it like crazy as well as play with no numbers above to see if i can tell any difference between my haswell chip and my Ryzen chip, of course i will then use OSD afterwards.

Gonna for fun run a quick handbrake test on my current rig and then do the same on Ryzen at stock and at 3.7-3.9 not gonna go past 1.325V as i did just get a budget board unless i can tell my board is running cool enough during stress tests.

Mainly got Ryzen for a fun processor to test around maybe i'll also try older titles that my 8350FX used to lag in.

Been looking at benchmarks like crazy and i still see no major reason to get a I5 over a R5 processor however i will say i can't compare Ryzen to skylake/kabylake I7 as i never used one.


http://www.dsogaming.com/news/id-software-is-already-working-on-the-next-generation-of-id-tech-engine-will-be-more-parallel-than-id-tech-6/

“We’re working on the next-generation of id Tech right now, and we’re definitely going to optimize, you know, fully for Ryzen. The new engine tech that we’re working on is far more parallel than id Tech 6 was. We plan to really consume all the CPU that Ryzen can offer.”

Lets see how it goes.

 

[goldstone77]

@jdwii thanks for that...

@goldstone 6 fps in the diff between it an the new i5.. hardly worth the upgrade is it.. ? An Ryzen 5 comes out the better of both chips.

When i get Ryzen i'm going to benchmark it like crazy as well as play with no numbers above to see if i can tell any difference between my haswell chip and my Ryzen chip, of course i will then use OSD afterwards.

Gonna for fun run a quick handbrake test on my current rig and then do the same on Ryzen at stock and at 3.7-3.9 not gonna go past 1.325V as i did just get a budget board unless i can tell my board is running cool enough during stress tests.

Mainly got Ryzen for a fun processor to test around maybe i'll also try older titles that my 8350FX used to lag in.

Been looking at benchmarks like crazy and i still see no major reason to get a I5 over a R5 processor however i will say i can't compare Ryzen to skylake/kabylake I7 as i never used one.


http://www.dsogaming.com/news/id-software-is-already-working-on-the-next-generation-of-id-tech-engine-will-be-more-parallel-than-id-tech-6/

“We’re working on the next-generation of id Tech right now, and we’re definitely going to optimize, you know, fully for Ryzen. The new engine tech that we’re working on is far more parallel than id Tech 6 was. We plan to really consume all the CPU that Ryzen can offer.”

Lets see how it goes.

Ryzen is so good that I don't think game makers can ignore it. It's clear that some gaming engines can optimize for Ryzen 6 and 8 core, and improve it's FPS in games to be very close too or beat some intel quad core chips.

 

[8350rocks]

@jdwii thanks for that...

@goldstone 6 fps in the diff between it an the new i5.. hardly worth the upgrade is it.. ? An Ryzen 5 comes out the better of both chips.

When i get Ryzen i'm going to benchmark it like crazy as well as play with no numbers above to see if i can tell any difference between my haswell chip and my Ryzen chip, of course i will then use OSD afterwards.

Gonna for fun run a quick handbrake test on my current rig and then do the same on Ryzen at stock and at 3.7-3.9 not gonna go past 1.325V as i did just get a budget board unless i can tell my board is running cool enough during stress tests.

Mainly got Ryzen for a fun processor to test around maybe i'll also try older titles that my 8350FX used to lag in.

Been looking at benchmarks like crazy and i still see no major reason to get a I5 over a R5 processor however i will say i can't compare Ryzen to skylake/kabylake I7 as i never used one.


http://www.dsogaming.com/news/id-software-is-already-working-on-the-next-generation-of-id-tech-engine-will-be-more-parallel-than-id-tech-6/

“We’re working on the next-generation of id Tech right now, and we’re definitely going to optimize, you know, fully for Ryzen. The new engine tech that we’re working on is far more parallel than id Tech 6 was. We plan to really consume all the CPU that Ryzen can offer.”

Lets see how it goes.

The Tomahawk B350 and Mortar B350 from MSI both seem to be proficient for overclocking. Many people are getting 3.9-4.0 on those boards. May be silicon lottery, may be luck, may be the boards are sufficient. Though, there was a post on reddit a few days ago about someone got an 1800X to do 4.2 @ 1.38vcore on ASRock X370 taichi, and they had it stable after benchmarks. They were using an alphacool AIO cooler on it as well.

It may be that newer chips will be capable of an extra 100-200 MHz as we progress due to process maturity. If that is the case, then a 4.3 GHz Ryzen would certainly be quite a monster.

 

[juanrga]

Which ones?

Err, the ones that measure its IPC.

This?

http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/forum/id-3327589/amd-ryzen-megathread-faq-resources/page-30.html#19583313
http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/forum/id-3327589/amd-ryzen-megathread-faq-resources/page-31.html#19596517
http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/forum/id-3327589/amd-ryzen-megathread-faq-resources/page-28.html#19554824