Monday, February 13th 2017

AMD Ryzen XFR Frequencies Revealed

AMD's upcoming Ryzen processors are "unlocked," in that they feature unlocked base-clock multipliers that let you easily overclock them; yet a few of its variants feature a brand extension "X." As our older article details, the "X" refers to availability of the XFR (extended frequency range) feature. Think of it as a second stage boost that rewards good CPU cooling with higher CPU clocks set automatically. The Ryzen R7-1800X, R7-1700X, R5-1600X, R5-1400X, and R3-1200X feature this.

The R7-1800X features clock speeds of 3.60 GHz, with TurboCore frequencies of 4.00 GHz and XFR ranging beyond 4.00 GHz. That of the R7-1700X is set beyond 3.80 GHz, and the R7-1600X beyond 3.70 GHz, R5-1400X beyond 3.90 GHz, and the R3-1200X beyond 3.80 GHz. There are no fixed values as to how much higher these frequencies will go, probably because AMD doesn't want to advertise clock speed figures consumers hold it to account for. The TurboCore frequencies, on the other hand, are achievable on even the included stock cooling solutions, or coolers that meet the TDP ratings of these chips.
Source: WCCFTech
Add your own comment

74 Comments on AMD Ryzen XFR Frequencies Revealed

#1
cdawall
where the hell are my stars
I feel like this is missing something...
Posted on Reply
#2
R-T-B
cdawall said:
I feel like this is missing something...
It's rapidly coming together before our eyes lol.
Posted on Reply
#3
HossHuge
cdawall said:
I feel like this is missing something...
R-T-B said:
It's rapidly coming together before our eyes lol.
And now we're going to be the only three that knew what transpired here.
Posted on Reply
#4
R-T-B
HossHuge said:
And now we're going to be the only three that knew what here.
We're like explorers only we found... nothing. :(
Posted on Reply
#5
cdawall
where the hell are my stars
HossHuge said:
And now we're going to be the only three that knew what here.
People wont have a clue what we were talking about. I am ok with that we will know and we will know that no matter what they say we know more than them.

The other thing I notice is we appear to have learned nothing more than the prior post as the XFR range is "4.0+"....useless thread is useless...
Posted on Reply
#6
R-T-B
cdawall said:
People wont have a clue what we were talking about. I am ok with that we will know and we will know that no matter what they say we know more than them.

The other thing I notice is we appear to have learned nothing more than the prior post as the XFR range is "4.0+"....useless thread is useless...
4.0... plus? Does that mean...?

Posted on Reply
#7
cdawall
where the hell are my stars
R-T-B said:
4.0... plus? Does that mean...?


I am thinking at least 8ghz. Auto overclock.
Posted on Reply
#8
TheLaughingMan
I stick to my rumor that the PRO tag we saw before hand is going to be an AIO cooler included for +$50.
Posted on Reply
#9
Naito
Interesting times ahead...
Posted on Reply
#10
Bruno_O
How can a Ryzen 7 (8 cores) and a Ryzen 5 (4 cores) - with the same clock speed - have the same 65W TDP? My math doesn't accept that :p I'm building a HTPC and was hoping for something way lower than that, as you can get a i5 7500 using only 42W (65W TDP includes the iGPU).
EDIT: after reading (again) what TDP is on wikipedia, I've figured that these two will have very different power consumption, but are limited to the 65W design. So... the 4C one should overclock way higher =)
Posted on Reply
#11
Hood
I get the feeling that these CPUs will hit a wall at 4.2-4.3 GHz, because AMD is already pushing it to get to 4.0. Nothing has "leaked" about Zen's overclocking potential, and the lack of info tells us something (that overclocking on Zen probably sucks). This is only a guess - I have the same info as everyone else. Nothing, that is...
Posted on Reply
#13
Tsukiyomi91
hmm... still not gonna convince me turning to the red camp...
Posted on Reply
#15
RejZoR
Well, that's what's XFR. That's like predicting how far exactly NVIDIA Pascal GPU will boost. You can't. It's the same here. CPU has so many parameters involved in it you can't predict the final clocks. They can estimate from their internal tests, but that's about it. If you slam phase change on this CPU it might clock up to 5GHz if parameters and conditions for XFR will allow it. If you'll only have AiO, it might be just 4.3 GHz.
Bottom line is, Turbo boost is guaranteed if basic conditions are in check. XFR just means extended potential which is not guaranteed and heavily depends on conditions.
Posted on Reply
#16
TheLostSwede
Bruno_O said:
How can a Ryzen 7 (8 cores) and a Ryzen 5 (4 cores) - with the same clock speed - have the same 65W TDP? My math doesn't accept that :p I'm building a HTPC and was hoping for something way lower than that, as you can get a i5 7500 using only 42W (65W TDP includes the iGPU).
TDP ≠ power usage

TDP stands for Thermal Design Power and it's simply what the CPU manufacturers says will be the absolute maximum thermal output from a CPU when running at 100%. It's so you as a consumer can buy a matching cooling solution.

It's highly likely that the Ryzen 5 will draw a lot less power than the Ryzen 7, but it it's the same processor with parts of the chip disabled to make it a different SKU, then the power draw might not be half. We don't know how well AMD has succeeded in disabling the unused parts and there might be some power leakage here. Even so, AMD didn't design these to be the most power efficient parts in its lineup and it's likely we'll see more power efficient parts in the future, much like Intel's T-series of processors.
Posted on Reply
#17
lilunxm12
Bruno_O said:
How can a Ryzen 7 (8 cores) and a Ryzen 5 (4 cores) - with the same clock speed - have the same 65W TDP? My math doesn't accept that :p I'm building a HTPC and was hoping for something way lower than that, as you can get a i5 7500 using only 42W (65W TDP includes the iGPU).
TDP doesn't nessessarily reflect actual power consumption, it's the reference for required cooling capacity. They may put whatever number they want, as long as your system doesn't get unstable/fried with the cooling system meets that number. They may just overrated the 6-core R5 like a bunch of intel celerons/pentiums or underrated the 8-core r7, as turbo boost by definition is an overclock and comes with power consumption increase.
My router has similar situation. It comes with a 30w charger but I seriously doubt it can ever reach 15w at peak.
Posted on Reply
#18
Bruno_O
TheLostSwede said:
TDP ≠ power usage

TDP stands for Thermal Design Power and it's simply what the CPU manufacturers says will be the absolute maximum thermal output from a CPU when running at 100%. It's so you as a consumer can buy a matching cooling solution.

It's highly likely that the Ryzen 5 will draw a lot less power than the Ryzen 7, but it it's the same processor with parts of the chip disabled to make it a different SKU, then the power draw might not be half. We don't know how well AMD has succeeded in disabling the unused parts and there might be some power leakage here. Even so, AMD didn't design these to be the most power efficient parts in its lineup and it's likely we'll see more power efficient parts in the future, much like Intel's T-series of processors.
Tks man, I was just doing some research on this. So if both have up to 65W of headroom, I suppose that the 4C one should overclock higher. Well, if R5 4C uses less than 50W on stock I'm sold anyway =)
Posted on Reply
#19
Xzibit
RejZoR said:
Well, that's what's XFR. That's like predicting how far exactly NVIDIA Pascal GPU will boost. You can't. It's the same here. CPU has so many parameters involved in it you can't predict the final clocks. They can estimate from their internal tests, but that's about it. If you slam phase change on this CPU it might clock up to 5GHz if parameters and conditions for XFR will allow it. If you'll only have AiO, it might be just 4.3 GHz.
Bottom line is, Turbo boost is guaranteed if basic conditions are in check. XFR just means extended potential which is not guaranteed and heavily depends on conditions.
How dare you bring reasoning to these threads

Posted on Reply
#20
Patriot
Tsukiyomi91 said:
hmm... still not gonna convince me turning to the red camp...
Less money, less power, more performance. K
Intel has stagnated, AMD has caught up... don't ignore their lead again or the cycle will continue.
Posted on Reply
#21
coolernoob
and now just give me a review where Rayzen 5 1400X 4C/8T 3.5-3.9Ghz beats everything from intel's i7-7700 and below and call it a day. (it should be right - because IPC, core count and frequency is up there)
Posted on Reply
#22
Patriot
coolernoob said:
and now just give me a review where Rayzen 5 1400X 4C/8T 3.5-3.9Ghz beats everything from intel's i7-7700 and below and call it a day. (it should be right - because IPC, core count and frequency is up there)
So long as the cpu driver for SMT and proper turbo is installed (should get pushed through a windows 10 update) It should definitely be quite competitive. The AMD demos have shown slightly better than broadwell IPC, and skylake/kaby is not far beyond that.
Posted on Reply
#23
suraswami
want a 3.5 ghz 45w chip x4 chip.

:toast:
Posted on Reply
#24
TheLostSwede
lilunxm12 said:
My router has similar situation. It comes with a 30w charger but I seriously doubt it can ever reach 15w at peak.
Until you plug in a USB hub and two 2.5" bus powered hard drives into it...
Posted on Reply
#25
Manu_PT
Patriot said:
Less money, less power, more performance. K
Intel has stagnated, AMD has caught up... don't ignore their lead again or the cycle will continue.
Biased much? We don't know half of what you said lmao. Better wait for them, unless you want to cry like we did with bulldozer.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment