AMD Zen Discussion Thread

My CPU is still idling at 1.4v most of the time. I'm not sure they've totally fixed the issue. Anyone else the same?

Edit : I think it's iCUE that's the culprit.

.G.

[Deleted User] wrote: »

My CPU is still idling at 1.4v most of the time. I'm not sure they've totally fixed the issue. Anyone else the same?

Edit : I think it's iCUE that's the culprit.

Yeah they haven't but it is iCUE, told my son to stop using it until they fix it.

z0oT

z0oT wrote: »

Not quite sure what I was doing earlier, but the BIOS being unusable with the M.2 installed is solved by disabling CSM! The CPU downclocking to 800MHz was also caused by a setting in the BIOS being ticked while the interface was going crazy.

Problem is though, the default setting is CSM enabled. It means if the BIOS is ever reset to defaults, I have to power down, remove the M.2, power up, go into the BIOS, disable CSM, power down, and only then can I install the M.2 drive.

I get the same issue with the Samsung 970 aswell in the BIOS with CSM enabled.

However, I have found a workaround - If the M.2 drive is installed and CSM is enabled. It'll allow me to disable CSM with the keyboard, save and reboot. It's okay as long as I don't use the mouse at all. At least now I don't have to tear everything apart the next time the BIOS is reset to default.

Also I've found the Wraith cooler can be tamed with a custom fan curve. I've made it very quite now, and with Prime 95 running as I'm typing this the CPU is hovering around 79-82C. Happy with that as I can hardly hear the fan at all now.

The heatsinks on the board get very hot too. Good sign as they're doing their job.

wotzgoingon

Which heat sinks? And VERY hot?

Depending on which heat sinks that not that great. Yes it's great they are doing their job but they could do with air flow if VERY hot.

z0oT

The chipset heatsink mainly.

The Aorus drive runs very hot, it really does benefit from the fan. The way this board is setup, the fan is for the M.2 drive, not the chipset ironically.

K.O.Kiki

Ah here AMD, what are you doing?

jonerkinsella

All at stock with ram tuned.
https://valid.x86.fr/jmz46c

shootermacg

K.O.Kiki wrote: »

Ah here AMD, what are you doing?

They saved money and performance is close enough. It's still a good cooler and lets be honest, most of you lads throw it away.

On a related note, there are some pros to having the fan blow down on the boards like their coolers do, they remove heat from the VRAM as well.

Skerries

briany

If you have a Ryzen CPU with a base clock of 3.6 and a boost of 4.3, and you overclock the CPU to 3.9, will it still be able to hit the boost of 4.3 at any time?

Cuddlesworth

briany wrote: »

If you have a Ryzen CPU with a base clock of 3.6 and a boost of 4.3, and you overclock the CPU to 3.9, will it still be able to hit the boost of 4.3 at any time?

If its 2nd gen, its not really worth overclocking it. To the point where the pre-binning community is bothered with them.

M00lers

Just ordered a 3700x to pair with my MSI B450 Carbon Pro AC board... probably looking for trouble but fingers crossed I won't run into too many issues.

Subcomandante Marcos

moolers2000 wrote: »

Just ordered a 3700x to pair with my MSI B450 Carbon Pro AC board... probably looking for trouble but fingers crossed I won't run into too many issues.

It will be absolutely fine if you just update the bios.

moolers2000

moolers2000 wrote: »

Just ordered a 3700x to pair with my MSI B450 Carbon Pro AC board... probably looking for trouble but fingers crossed I won't run into too many issues.

Hopefully the BIOS has been fixed on that board. I had to send mine back as i could only get it to POST once.

Simi

moolers2000 wrote: »

Just ordered a 3700x to pair with my MSI B450 Carbon Pro AC board... probably looking for trouble but fingers crossed I won't run into too many issues.

I'm building a 3600 system with that motherboard. Just need to pick up a few more bits before I start putting it all together. Let us know how you get on

M00lers

Subcomandante Marcos wrote: »

It will be absolutely fine if you just update the bios.

I've read about issues but I'm hoping for the best.

M00lers

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Hopefully the BIOS has been fixed on that board. I had to send mine back as i could only get it to POST once.

Pity. What CPU were you using?

z0oT

I put together a system with a 3700X recently. I'd considered going for an X470 board, but in the end I decided the price premium for the X570 board was worth it just because of some of the BIOS issues reported.

Is there a particular reason you're looking at getting a B450 board? Cost is the obvious one of course...

M00lers

z0oT wrote: »

I put together a system with a 3700X recently. I'd considered going for an X470 board, but in the end I decided the price premium for the X570 board was worth it just because of some of the BIOS issues reported.

Is there a particular reason you're looking at getting a B450 board? Cost is the obvious one of course...

Cost mainly, but the feature set of the board was also a factor. Also I couldn't stomach the x570 pricing. TBH, I had bought the board and was switching between 2700x or 3700x but decided to chance the 3700x. Time will tell if I got away with it.

M00lers

Flashed latest BIOS on my B450 motherboard last night and installed the 3700x.

Only had a quick look but after installing Windows 10 and installing updates everything seemed fine. Everything left at stock settings. (RAM set to 3000MHz for now while testing).

Early days though. Will monitor temps and voltages but not up to speed on PBO and power management settings etc.

ZeitgeistGlee

Lads does anyone know if there's any truth to the rumours of a non-X version of the 3700 coming?

I want to do a new build in the next while but while the 3600 seems to be a great little CPU I'm a bit concerned that six-cores might get outdated pretty quick with next gen consoles being based on 8-core CPUs. On the other hand there's a 150ish euro jump from the 3600 to the 3700X which makes means cutting back elsewhere on the build.

K.O.Kiki

ZeitgeistGlee wrote: »

Lads does anyone know if there's any truth to the rumours of a non-X version of the 3700 coming?

I want to do a new build in the next while but while the 3600 seems to be a great little CPU I'm a bit concerned that six-cores might get outdated pretty quick with next gen consoles being based on 8-core CPUs. On the other hand there's a 150ish euro jump from the 3600 to the 3700X which makes means cutting back elsewhere on the build.

The consoles having 8 cores won't automatically render all 4/6 core desktop CPUs obsolete :rolleyes:

Don't forget that PC cores run faster & boost longer.
Buy the 3600, stick a decent cooler on it, and spend extra on the GPU.

Aren't the current consoles eight core anyway?

wotzgoingon

Deleted User wrote: »

Aren't the current consoles eight core anyway?

Yes but not true 8 cores. AMD recently settled trough the courts a good few million to be paid out to people who bought their 8 cores as they were not true 8 cores. But they are not that bad. As hyperthreading or SMT just makes new cores out of nothing where as AMD's 8 cores back then were like hyperthreading but out of real cores. I didn't explain it too good but if you google it you will understand.

ZeitgeistGlee

K.O.Kiki wrote: »

The consoles having 8 cores won't automatically render all 4/6 core desktop CPUs obsolete :rolleyes:

I phrased it poorly admittedly, I build in about six year cycles without big upgrades in between (using an FX6300 atm) so I was/am more so concerned that if eight-core CPUs become the standard for general game development that in 4-5 years it comparatively won't be as easy to just dial back my settings to low-medium and still have a pretty playable experience given the lack of two full cores.

Simi

ZeitgeistGlee wrote: »

I phrased it poorly admittedly, I build in about six year cycles without big upgrades in between (using an FX6300 atm) so I was/am more so concerned that if eight-core CPUs become the standard for general game development that in 4-5 years it comparatively won't be as easy to just dial back my settings to low-medium and still have a pretty playable experience given the lack of two full cores.

It's hard to say how quickly developers are going to utilise more cores in the future. The quad core i5 7600k has started to fall behind in the likes of battlefield 5 which runs noticeably better on 6 or 8 core CPUs https://static.techspot.com/articles-info/1754/images/2018-11-25-image-2.png

I wouldn't be too worried about this happening the 3600 though. It is an SMT enabled part, and I seriously doubt any developer is going to require a minimum of 8 cores any time soon given that it would make every Intel processor from the 9th gen i7 and i9 down obsolete.

Personally I went with the 3600, noting that for the most part it is faster than the 2700x

z0oT

Take away is that his survey results show the vast majority of Ryzen 3000 don't hit the advertised boost frequency, although the vast majority are within 25-50MHz of it though.

I see this doing the rounds on the net, and it's typical of the reviewing community making a big deal about nothing yet again. My 3700X is reporting 4392MHz on 1 or 2 cores after a few hours of gaming. The BCLK is reported as 99.8MHz, and 44 x 99.8MHz is 4392MHz. If the BCLK had an extra 200kHz added, the boost would be correctly reported as 4.4GHz even.

My 6700k used to do the same thing. I don't think it ever reported 4.2GHz or 4GHz, rather like 4180MHz and 3990MHz.

M00lers

Disable Spread Spectrum and you'll get some of the "missing" clocks back.

deceit

z0oT wrote: »

He was never going to be interested in Ryzen as it doesn't overclock.
He does have a valid reason to point it out though if it doesn't hit advertised speeds.
For me its less of an issue once I see the parts are performing really well.

BloodBath

Simi wrote: »

It's hard to say how quickly developers are going to utilise more cores in the future. The quad core i5 7600k has started to fall behind in the likes of battlefield 5 which runs noticeably better on 6 or 8 core CPUs https://static.techspot.com/articles-info/1754/images/2018-11-25-image-2.png

I wouldn't be too worried about this happening the 3600 though. It is an SMT enabled part, and I seriously doubt any developer is going to require a minimum of 8 cores any time soon given that it would make every Intel processor from the 9th gen i7 and i9 down obsolete.

Personally I went with the 3600, noting that for the most part it is faster than the 2700x

They are already making use of them now. I would say in time the 2700 will outperform the 3600 but for now the 3600 makes more sense.

You can always upgrade to a 8 core or higher down the line.