And ultimately that only amounts to a 5% overclock. So, as is typical for high-end CPUs today, overclocking isn't going to improve performance to a noticeable degree, and probably isn't worth bothering with. And in the case of this CPU, if AMD went through the trouble of specifically disabling overclocking, I would be concerned about potential damage to the processor in the long-term.However, the CPU was able to achieve an absolute maximum core frequency of 4.74GHz under ideal conditions -- presumably under single-core workloads. This is a 240MHz frequency advantage over the 5800X3D's maximum default boost frequency of 4.5GHz.
There should be some improvement but i dont think it will be alot.But how does it change its performance in games, since that's the only reason you'd select this chip, and only then if you play at 1920x1080.
No, the most stupid thing they did was to disable overclocking and not just overvolting since the test shows it is able to do much higher clocks using significantly less than 1.35v, which has been a common theme since Ryzen debuted. Even my 3700X with PBO, XFR, and all limits removed can only do a little under 4.1ghz all core at north of 1.35v whereas I can manually set it to 4.2ghz all core at 1.2v.There should be some improvement but i dont think it will be alot.
The most stupid thing is that amd disabled overclocking for this cpu. At this price i rather go for 12600KF and oc it to well over 5ghz.
I've already seen evidence online that the 5800X3D helps noticeably with 1440p gaming, and I'm sure this will continue to be the case as more and more games are tested at 1440p.But how does it change its performance in games, since that's the only reason you'd select this chip, and only then if you play at 1920x1080.