Ryzen 3000: AMD deliberately limited Boost behavior in favor of longevity, says Asus staff
Click here to post a comment for Ryzen 3000: AMD deliberately limited Boost behavior in favor of longevity, says Asus staff on our message forum
Undying
I would trade logevity for performance any day. Isnt that overclocking is for?
sverek
Boost is automatic overclocking, it does work out of the box. Basically AMD is already overclocking CPU for us, no much gain by overclocking it manually.
Still, would be awesome to have an option to "disable" this safe feature and go for higher clocks.
Clanger
Stock clocks only, keep within tdp. I tried clocking in 100mhz steps from 3.1 to 4.3ghz, there was a 2-3 second difference rendering audio. Never bothered again.
asturur
if they lower the maximum boost they need to respec the cpu and marketing material.
Provably they will just boost for less time?
dmity84
You go to the car dealer, there are 120hp and 140hp models, they can give you a better discount for the 140hp one so you buy it as it's kinda worth the extra.
After the first 1000km service they have to remap the car to 125-130hp, so the engine will last for 250.000km and you drive home with a little less horsepower, around the same as if you bought the 120hp model for 1000€ less. But that's ok, that one lost 10hp too 🙂
https://fluffykittenparty.files.wordpress.com/2016/04/this-is-fine.jpg
Netherwind
The gain would be stable clocks if that's something one is after.
For example, if I play AC:Odyssey I typically get an average of ~4325MHz boost (with PBO but honestly I don't think it does anything at all) with clocks fluctuating between 4275-4350 but if I OC my CPU to 4400MHz, that's what I get regardless of what's happening in the game or with the temps. The performance difference (+75MHz) is probably very small but I liked seeing a constant frequency with my old 6700K and it's possible to get the same here.
magiQx
what would this mean in years of longevity?
Alan Stables
Sounds like damage control from ASUS as in boosts tests their boards were the worst, other manufactures such as msi and giga and ASRock hitting advertised boost on some (not all).
fantaskarsef
I wonder what they mean in terms of longevity. Will the CPU die withing 2 years with the more aggressive boost? Within 5? Hard to know if one wants the higher clocks or not with not knowing the facts or at least, the expectations AMD puts into this.
Netherwind
In a way, I'm hoping you are right and that we get better AGESA (like 1.0.0.2) which boosted better.
Even if there is a hard cap, I'm not sure AMD would want to make a statement about it 🙂 Imagine what would happen then.
Alan Stables
Also it comes from an Intel enthusias (ASUS employee)t, lst time i remember shammy with amd was back in a64 days before core series ; Take this with a massive grain of Intel PR saltyness, don't believe me do your own research.
fantaskarsef
Sure, you're 100% right.
Just imagine, what a sensible user could make of that, a choice, an educated decision... 😱:D
Francesco
All the evidence say that AMD pushed the new Ryzens near to their limits, in order to get the best reception possible.
Look also at the X570 chipset, they really wanted to put in all the features needed to get an edge over Intel, pushing the chipset to the point it needs active cooling.
All of this is ok, I just hope longevity will not suffer much.
I have no flag, owned many Athlons in the past, switched to Intel when AMD cpus started to suck, owned a bunch of I5s since then and all of them served me very well and lasted many years of hard usage.
Recently I switched back to AMD (3600) since I got pissed by how every new intel CPU was just a refresh of the previous ones, I wanted to reward innovation.
Kudos to AMD, but if the new Ryzen will not prove to be reliable CPUs they will hardly have a second chance to strike the sleeping giant.
Glottiz
I ran Intel CPUs overclocked 24/7 for the last 20 years or so and never ever had a problem. Worth mentioning that each CPU I used at a minimum of 4 years.
Loophole35
Just gonna say. Could you imagine the outcry if the other company did this?
Edited because it was early and I didn’t proof read.
MegaFalloutFan
Time to sue AMD for fake advertising.
Evildead666
Go for it, see how far you get.
Which Ryzen 3000 cpu did you get ?
Evildead666
The X570 chipset wasn't designed.
If you read a bit more, you would know that it is just the IO chip from the Ryzen chips themselves, because ASMedia didn't have the actual chipsets ready in time...
Nothing was "squeezed in" to the chipset, it just doesn't have any power saving states, as it wasn't meant to be a motherboard chipset....so it runs pretty fast and hot.
Denial
3900x and I've yet to see boost clocks or even similar clocks to what the reviewers were getting on initial bios.
Do I care that much? Not really - chip still performs well and better than my 7820x - should AMD be called out on it though? Absolutely. The larger point here is exactly what loophole said - if any other company had done this people would be losing their shit but AMD does it and half the community just handwaves it away, some people trying to make it out as a good thing. As I said in the other thread it sets a precedent for AMD to get away with things like this as they have for years now.
Evildead666
As long as it says "Up to" that's it.
Internet bandwidth from ISP's. "Up to 100Mbit Internet".
They guarantee the base clock, and then the boost clock is "Up to".
No one would have a leg to stand on.
I'm happy with my 3800X.
I also believe that we are still a way away from the Final Bios versions, for any AM4 Motherboard.
What we have today, is still not the final clocks etc.
As for the "Review Bios", you'd have to prove that they deliberately held back the "proper" Bios, and I don't think that is going to be done either.
I suppose when you don't have the deep pockets of Intel, you can't have the same sort of CPU launch.
