Question Are these overclocking results normal for my Ryzen 5 5600X system ?

[AceTeq]

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1WMOPSobCqcDZzqj4VPC-olbi1QdZY1W5/view?usp=drive_link

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1r2oBgs4sN8rhA3IdG79m-7U9NUKW3MqJ/view?usp=drive_link

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1CiCG91xNrj4KFTPUQmFffcw0XeMieZJM/view?usp=drive_link

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1O4NLMmXoymo9Frm3r60IbJ4yD2nN4AOZ/view?usp=drive_link

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1z_Jxjw17kODfhrAPvuJUjUmMC-mfCjlv/view?usp=drive_link

https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/9117901

https://valid.x86.fr/tcqi17

I have reached these conclusions after testing for a long time. Do you think it is enough for solid stability?

System Specs:
Mobo: ASUS TUF B550M-Plus
CPU: Ryzen 5 5600X CPU
GPU: RX 6700
RAM: 2 x 8GB CL 17 3800Mhz
CPU Cooler: Arctic Freezer 34 eSports DUO

Overclocking settings:
Negative Offset
Core 0: 17
Core 1: 12
Core 2: 17
Core 3: 30
Core 4: 30
Core 5: 30

PBO Limits: Manual
PPT: 135
TDC: 85
EDC: 150
Overdrive Scalar x10
CPU Clock Override +200
Throttle Limit 73°

 

[Aeacus]

Run CPU benches for long periods of time (at least 1 hour) to validate CPU and OC stability. Cinebench 2024, Prime95, AIDA64. Take your pick. (E.g PRIME95 has solid torture test in it.)

If CPU is stable, then OC is stable.

But i wouldn't call 100 Mhz over boost clocks an "OC". There are 0 real life differences that you can notice.
Modern CPUs are so fine tuned that they have little, if any OC headroom (frequencies over max turbo ratio). That much you can also see from your chip.

Back in the day, with older CPUs, CPU OC was worthwhile.
Now, if i'd take old chip, e.g like my i5-6600K which has 3.5 GHz base and 3.9 Ghz boost clocks. With CPU OC, i could get it 4.5 Ghz all core (increase of 600 Mhz over boost), or with delid, ~4.7 Ghz all core (800 Mhz over boost). And there have been some delidded i5-6600K CPUs, that can hold 5 Ghz all core.

500+Mhz over boost clocks is what i'd call "CPU OC".

 

[Roland Of Gilead]

Hey there,

I run a moderate OC on my 5600x. I get 4.7/4.75ghz all core, and 4.85ghz Single/Dual core.

Your scores are nearly identical to mine. All numbers look good. Temps are about the same too. I hit 73c with CB. Prime pushes temps up way high, but mine runs stable at about 83c in Prime95. I've a 240 AIO.

Why are you setting the throttle temps to 73c? You're leaving a little performance on the table by doing so. But, your scores say it's a good OC. Maybe 80c and that would get you a few more points in synth benches I'd expect.

 

[AceTeq]

Run CPU benches for long periods of time (at least 1 hour) to validate CPU and OC stability. Cinebench 2024, Prime95, AIDA64. Take your pick. (E.g PRIME95 has solid torture test in it.)

If CPU is stable, then OC is stable.

But i wouldn't call 100 Mhz over boost clocks an "OC". There are 0 real life differences that you can notice.
Modern CPUs are so fine tuned that they have little, if any OC headroom (frequencies over max turbo ratio). That much you can also see from your chip.

Back in the day, with older CPUs, CPU OC was worthwhile.
Now, if i'd take old chip, e.g like my i5-6600K which has 3.5 GHz base and 3.9 Ghz boost clocks. With CPU OC, i could get it 4.5 Ghz all core (increase of 600 Mhz over boost), or with delid, ~4.7 Ghz all core (800 Mhz over boost). And there have been some delidded i5-6600K CPUs, that can hold 5 Ghz all core.

500+Mhz over boost clocks is what i'd call "CPU OC".

The image I added shows the 17-hour Prime95-based Corecycler test result. Overclocking on older processors was more effective, I definitely agree with what you said.

 

[AceTeq]

Hey there,

I run a moderate OC on my 5600x. I get 4.7/4.75ghz all core, and 4.85ghz Single/Dual core.

Your scores are nearly identical to mine. All numbers look good. Temps are about the same too. I hit 73c with CB. Prime pushes temps up way high, but mine runs stable at about 83c in Prime95. I've a 240 AIO.

Why are you setting the throttle temps to 73c? You're leaving a little performance on the table by doing so. But, your scores say it's a good OC. Maybe 80c and that would get you a few more points in synth benches I'd expect.

Forcing all cores to a single frequency is not good for my silicon. I need to give a value like 1.45v for 4.6 GHz. I think I can get optimum performance with 73 degrees. When I removed the power limits and temperature limits, I got 12002 points in Cinebench R23 Multi Core, but the temperature goes up to 82-83 degrees. I don't want it to go over 85 degrees in long loads. Yes, the performance will decrease a little, but it's not a big deal. Thanks for your comment.

 

[Roland Of Gilead]

I need to give a value like 1.45v for 4.6 GHz

Ouch! That's not great. Pity. Have you tried pushing the LLC up to level two or medium (or whatever options your mobo has), this can help with vdroop and stability.

Still, mine has only been over 12k a few times. My temps are about 75c on CB multi. Mainly in and around the 11900 mark for points. So you've got a good OC going on. It's yielding results.

Also, a better cooler will give you some more thermal headroom.

 

[AceTeq]

Ouch! That's not great. Pity. Have you tried pushing the LLC up to level two or medium (or whatever options your mobo has), this can help with vdroop and stability.

Still, mine has only been over 12k a few times. My temps are about 75c on CB multi. Mainly in and around the 11900 mark for points. So you've got a good OC going on. It's yielding results.

Also, a better cooler will give you some more thermal headroom.

No matter what level I set Load Line Calibration to, it gives less results than the Auto option. My DGI+VRM settings are 130% and I'm using it as Extreme. I guess this is all I can do without better cooling.

 

[Roland Of Gilead]

Good luck with your build. Let us know how you get on!