I can't seem to get a stable OC pass 3.8Ghz on my 1700x

[paco301]

I'd like to preface this by saying I'm on my phone and I've never overclocked before. I wanted to overclock my CPU because a game I enjoy only seems to use one core but I don't know how to do do a per core OC or if it's even possible for my cpu.

I started off using AMD Ryzen Master and cinebench to quickly see how far I could push my clock speed before running into trouble. I was able to get 3.87Ghz @ 1.4v until it crashed after a few runs. Using AIDA 64 I could only get a stable OC of 3.8GHz at 1.35v (an hour in @74 according to Ryzen Master) anything higher would crash after a few minutes with temps in the low 70s. I feel like I could get a higher OC if knew what I was doing. I heard some people mention SOC and LLC but I dont know how they work or what they are for

I'm using the following hardware

Asus B350-F (maybe needs a bios update?)

Ryzen 7 1700x with a hyper 212evo

Corsair Vengeance LPX 16GB 3000MHz (currently at 2933 I think)

GTX 1080

Samsung SSD and HDD

A 500w PSU (looking to buy 750w or 850w so I don't have to spend money on another further down the line)

Could my PSU be preventing me from getting a higher OC? If I were to buy a higher watt PSU and still not get a higher OC what steps could I take to push it?

 

[Darkbreeze]

What is the model number of your current power supply?

How many watts it is probably isn't the most important factor right now. Quality is. If it's a low end PSU it may not even be capable of doing 250w steadily.

More likely though is that it's simply a silicon lottery thing. Plenty of users are unable to get past 3.8Ghz on Ryzen chips. You are not unique in this regard.

Just because one guy with a 1700x can does not me the next guy can. Every CPU is going to have it's own potential characteristics and some are just better than others. Also, overclocking by utility is a poor way to do it. Any overclocking should be done from the bios.

There is a specific method that should be used that gradually increases until you find the spot where stability is outweighed by thermal compliance.

Further, low end motherboards generally complicate the problem as much as anything. And yes, updating the bios would be a very good, in fact, essential, place to start.

It's all a waste of time though if you have a low quality or mediocre power supply.

 

[paco301]

Im not sure of the exact model number buts its a corsair CX500 i bought it maybe 4 years ago.

I was looking it up some more and 3.8 seems very reasonable now. I was able to hold 3.875Ghz while running my games but i think i'll keep it at 3.8

I updated my Bios and quickly did some quick tests but i would still crash after a 10 min AIDA 64 stress test if i went any higher. My bios uses offset mode so if i offset it +0.025 or +0.05 to 1.4v ryzen master still ends up reading 1.35v. Im not sure if thats a big deal. when i push to 1.4v in ryzen master it still crashes if my clockspeed it too high

Is there a detailed guide you would recommend that can go over the basics as well as more advanced overclocking. I havent done too much research but it would be nice if i could run a lower clockspeed for quiet fans when im not doing anything demanding

 

[Darkbreeze]

AIDA is the wrong test to be using if you want to check for stability and thermal compliance. You want to use Prime95 version 26.6 and ONLY version 26.6.

Download Prime95 version 26.6


Run the Small FFT option. Not Blend mode. Not Large FFT. ONLY small FFT. Small FFT gives you a steady state workload. Here's why that is important and why AIDA is not well recommended as a primary utility for stress and thermal testing.

Run for 15 minutes to verify thermal compliance after any multiplier or voltage change.
Run for 10 minutes to verify BASIC stability between adjustments. For full stability testing it is recommended that once you are fairly satisfied you can go no higher based on error related issues, run Prime95 26.6 for no less than 14hrs on Small FFT. 24hrs is recommended for determining true stability, although, errors COULD happen, with any utility, at any extended time. Just because it is stable for 14 or 24hrs does not mean it couldn't still error out at 30 or 42hrs. However, after 14hrs it's a lot less probably that there will be any instability issues significant enough to cause issues and after 24hrs you've mostly eliminated the probability of there being any micro errors introduced into the system incrementally.


As explained by Computronix, the author of the Intel temperature guide, found here:

http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/id-1800828/intel-temperature-guide.html



This pretty well sums things up and is equally relevant whether working with an Intel or an AMD system.

I can think of several reasons why x264 encoding or AVX / AVX2 / FMA3 apps won't work as a unilateral metric for thermal testing.

(1) A steady-state workload gives steady-state temperatures; encoding does not.

(2) Simplicity in methodology; most users would find encoding apps unfamiliar and cumbersome to accomplish a simple task.

(3) Most users such as gamers never run any apps which use AVX / FMA, so adaptive or manual voltage aside, it makes no sense to downgrade your overclock to accommodate those loads and temps.

(4) Standardization; Prime95 has been around since 1996; many users are familiar with it.

For the minority of users who routinely run AVX / FMA apps, then P95 v28.5 can be a useful tool for tweaking BIOS for thermal and stability testing.


Regardless of architecture. P95 v26.6 works equally well across all platforms. Steady-state is the key. How can anyone extrapolate accurate Core temperatures from workloads that fluctuate like a bad day on the Stock Market?

I'm aware of 5 utilities with steady-state workloads. In order of load level they are:

(1) P95 v26.6 - Small FFT's
(2) HeavyLoad - Stress CPU
(3) FurMark - CPU Burner
(4) Intel Processor Diagnostic Tool - CPU Load
(5) AIDA64 - Tools - System Stability Test - Stress CPU

AIDA64's Stress CPU fails to load any overclocked / overvolted CPU to get anywhere TDP, and is therefore useless, except for giving naive users a sense of false security because their temps are so low.

HeavyLoad is the closest alternative. Temps and watts are within 3% of Small FFT's.