Thursday, April 13th 2017

AMD Ryzen 5 1600X Overclocked to 5.90 GHz

New processor launches are closely followed by clock-speed and benchmark records, and that applies to even AMD's Ryzen 5 1600X six-core processor. Professional overclocker Der8auer succeeded in overclocking the chip to 5905.64 MHz without having to disable any cores. The feat was possible due to liquid nitrogen (LN2) cooling. The clock was made possibly by running the chip with a base-clock of 129.79 MHz, and a multiplier of 45.5X. The core-voltage is unclear. The processor was paired with an ASUS Crosshair VI Hero motherboard, and G.Skill Trident Z memory.
Sources: CanardPC CPU-Z Validation, DigiWorthy
Add your own comment

32 Comments on AMD Ryzen 5 1600X Overclocked to 5.90 GHz

#2
NdMk2o1o
Why are people hitting hard walls at 4-4.2ghz under water when heat isnt a problem? is this a "special" bios? I personally think they are capable of more than this hard wall that everyone has hit and could have been hindered deliberately by AMD?? so they can release Ryzen + @4.5-5ghz when the time comes :confused:

Makes sense cause if they blew intel straight out of the water then intel would have just invested billions into developing their next "nehalem" chip that destroyed everything AMD came out with for the next 8 years and they'd be back inn the same boat as they were before. This way we get comparable intel performance whilst not beating them at everything allowing them to gain market share.... or maybe I just read into things too much :)
Posted on Reply
#3
medi01
"NdMk2o1o said:
is this a "special" bios?
My understanding is, it is a "special process", current leaks grow much faster than with "usual process".
Posted on Reply
#4
Vayra86
"NdMk2o1o said:
Why are people hitting hard walls at 4-4.2ghz under water when heat isnt a problem? is this a "special" bios? I personally think they are capable of more than this hard wall that everyone has hit and could have been hindered deliberately by AMD?? so they can release Ryzen + @4.5-5ghz when the time comes :confused:

Makes sense cause if they blew intel straight out of the water then intel would have just invested billions into developing their next "nehalem" chip that destroyed everything AMD came out with for the next 8 years and they'd be back inn the same boat as they were before. This way we get comparable intel performance whilst not beating them at everything allowing them to gain market share.... or maybe I just read into things too much :)
Yeah its all a big conspiracy, that vCore requirement magically skyrockets because AMD deliberately handicapped their halo product... And of course it is very easy to just pull a new, better architecture out of the hat in a year. That's why it took AMD five years to develop Zen.

As with most conspiracy fantasies, the sense of realism eludes me entirely.
Posted on Reply
#5
Th3pwn3r
"NdMk2o1o said:
Why are people hitting hard walls at 4-4.2ghz under water when heat isnt a problem? is this a "special" bios? I personally think they are capable of more than this hard wall that everyone has hit and could have been hindered deliberately by AMD?? so they can release Ryzen + @4.5-5ghz when the time comes :confused:

Makes sense cause if they blew intel straight out of the water then intel would have just invested billions into developing their next "nehalem" chip that destroyed everything AMD came out with for the next 8 years and they'd be back inn the same boat as they were before. This way we get comparable intel performance whilst not beating them at everything allowing them to gain market share.... or maybe I just read into things too much :)
What you've said actually makes a lot of sense. Fixed/controlled market in a way.
Posted on Reply
#6
Th3pwn3r
"Vayra86 said:
Yeah its all a big conspiracy, that vCore requirement magically skyrockets because AMD deliberately handicapped their halo product... And of course it is very easy to just pull a new, better architecture out of the hat in a year. That's why it took AMD five years to develop Zen.

As with most conspiracy fantasies, the sense of realism eludes me entirely.
Would you so quickly dismiss the idea? I mean, c'mon they gimp/water down their GPUs all the time.
Posted on Reply
#7
Nihilus
"NdMk2o1o said:
Why are people hitting hard walls at 4-4.2ghz under water when heat isnt a problem? is this a "special" bios...
I was wondering this too. Almost all of the R5 and R7 models hit that wall despite the heat and power. So why is this CPU able to hit nearly 5.9 GHz?
Posted on Reply
#8
Vayra86
"Nihilus said:
I was wondering this too. Almost all of the R5 and R7 models hit that wall despite the heat and power. So why is this CPU able to hit nearly 5.9 GHz?
LN2... A bench on LN2 is done under entirely different circumstances, and an 'overclocked to' in this space means 'I could take a screenshot before it crashed'.

You guys need to stop mixing lack of knowledge with drawing conclusions. Next thing in line is the I in Intel refers to the Illuminati or something...

It is extremely obvious that Ryzen is optimized around its TDP budget and that going beyond that is very costly. Don't forget that Ryzen offers an 8c/16t within a 95W TDP budget, where Intel needs 140w budget for that. Effectively the perf/watt of Ryzen UP TO 4 GHZ is better than Intel. That is a huge feat, and obviously one that has drawbacks, one of them being the vCore increase to go beyond 4 Ghz. It's an architectural feature, AMD built Ryzen around a performance target and made the most efficient CPU on that premise.

Meanwhile, Intel has built all Core CPUs with headroom: they have aggressively improved Speedstep across the generations and they drop some extra volts on top 'to be safe' for example during AVX instructions. Intel could build it like this and 'improve from there' because when Core released, every competing CPU was much less efficient. Ryzen doesn't have that luxury, and it also doesn't have the luxury of an extremely optimized process and the best fabs.
Posted on Reply
#9
Taloken
"NdMk2o1o said:
Why are people hitting hard walls at 4-4.2ghz under water when heat isnt a problem? is this a "special" bios? I personally think they are capable of more than this hard wall that everyone has hit and could have been hindered deliberately by AMD?? so they can release Ryzen + @4.5-5ghz when the time comes :confused:

Makes sense cause if they blew intel straight out of the water then intel would have just invested billions into developing their next "nehalem" chip that destroyed everything AMD came out with for the next 8 years and they'd be back inn the same boat as they were before. This way we get comparable intel performance whilst not beating them at everything allowing them to gain market share.... or maybe I just read into things too much :)
LN2 is a whole different world.
You can't compare with daily water cooling OC, science happen at these temperatures.
Posted on Reply
#10
R0H1T
"NdMk2o1o said:
Why are people hitting hard walls at 4-4.2ghz under water when heat isnt a problem? is this a "special" bios? I personally think they are capable of more than this hard wall that everyone has hit and could have been hindered deliberately by AMD?? so they can release Ryzen + @4.5-5ghz when the time comes :confused:

Makes sense cause if they blew intel straight out of the water then intel would have just invested billions into developing their next "nehalem" chip that destroyed everything AMD came out with for the next 8 years and they'd be back inn the same boat as they were before. This way we get comparable intel performance whilst not beating them at everything allowing them to gain market share.... or maybe I just read into things too much :)
This is likely GF's process limitation (remember Polaris?) & we'll likely see better clocks in the future. AMD might just go with LPP or IBM's process for Zen+ as they've done with Polaris refresh, IIRC the last Cinebench R15 world record was also on an 8 core Zen, the above just shows that getting high(er) speeds on all (six) cores is possible. This is just all round good news for Zen & AMD.
Posted on Reply
#11
IvanP91v
You also gotta win the binning "lottery" don't you?

As in, just how high is the quality of the CPU/SoC.

Lower quality, less overclock
Higher quality, higher overclock

Maybe this is why this particular sample clocked so high?
Posted on Reply
#12
Boosnie
"Th3pwn3r said:
What you've said actually makes a lot of sense. Fixed/controlled market in a way.
What he sayd is BS.
Watch the actual OC video.
<div class="youtube-embed" data-id="CZ0SxpGzbw0"><img src="https://i.ytimg.com/vi/CZ0SxpGzbw0/hqdefault.jpg" /><div class="youtube-play"></div><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CZ0SxpGzbw0" target="_blank" class="youtube-title"></a></div>
Posted on Reply
#13
NdMk2o1o
"Vayra86 said:
Yeah its all a big conspiracy, that vCore requirement magically skyrockets because AMD deliberately handicapped their halo product... And of course it is very easy to just pull a new, better architecture out of the hat in a year. That's why it took AMD five years to develop Zen.

As with most conspiracy fantasies, the sense of realism eludes me entirely.
No ones talking about a conspiracy you moron... :rolleyes: I am talking about limiting performance of a certain product to bring out another SKU based off the same design with greater performance, something AMD/Intel and NV do all the time...... :slap: nice troll attempt though :toast:
Posted on Reply
#14
infrared
"Nihilus said:
So why is this CPU able to hit nearly 5.9 GHz?
Because it's at -150c or less with 1.9+V... Ambient temps are very limiting, LN2 is a totally different ball game to water. Semiconductors become almost superconductive at such low temperatures which is why such high clock speeds are attainable.

"IvanP91v said:
You also gotta win the binning "lottery" don't you?

As in, just how high is the quality of the CPU/SoC.

Lower quality, less overclock
Higher quality, higher overclock

Maybe this is why this particular sample clocked so high?
That's part of it, you'd always want to start off with a good chip, but you could get a substantial overclock on even the worst chip with extreme low temperatures. :)

Disclaimer: I haven't had the pleasure of trying ln2 yet, this is all what I've learned from watching others and being interested.
Posted on Reply
#15
Vayra86
"NdMk2o1o said:
No ones talking about a conspiracy you moron... :rolleyes: I am talking about limiting performance of a certain product to bring out another SKU based off the same design with greater performance, something AMD/Intel and NV do all the time...... :slap: nice troll attempt though :toast:
If anything Nvidia proved with Pascal that they don't do it all the time, instead they upgrade products when the technology is ready to market. Examples in abundance: Nvidia GPUs clock over 500mhz higher than AMD's; Nvidia releases 11GBps memory on existing cards as it became available. The only thing both companies do is STALL a product launch to see what the other company puts out first. Ryzen is not like that, and Intel's Core is also not like that - Sandy Bridge could also clock to 5 Ghz for example.
Posted on Reply
#16
thesmokingman
"NdMk2o1o said:
No ones talking about a conspiracy you moron... :rolleyes: I am talking about limiting performance of a certain product to bring out another SKU based off the same design with greater performance, something AMD/Intel and NV do all the time...... :slap: nice troll attempt though :toast:
Yea, they limited it to just run 6ghz on LN2... seriously? Ignoring the fact of LN2 use by a pro overclocker much got nothing to do with fantastical skus? smh

On topic, this is one hell of a feat to do this w/o disabling cores and SMT. Der8auer at it again! Whatever the case, Zen can do shit fully enabled!
Posted on Reply
#17
quilciri
"Vayra86 said:

You guys need to stop mixing lack of knowledge with drawing conclusions.
I'm going to have this embroidered in calligraphy and framed.
Posted on Reply
#18
NdMk2o1o
"thesmokingman said:
Yea, they limited it to just run 6ghz on LN2... seriously? Ignoring the fact of LN2 use by a pro overclocker much got nothing to do with fantastical skus? smh

On topic, this is one hell of a feat to do this w/o disabling cores and SMT. Der8auer at it again! Whatever the case, Zen can do shit fully enabled!
Where did I say you should be able to do 6ghz on air or water? They are obviously capable of a lot more than 4ghz before heat becomes an issue was my point....
Posted on Reply
#19
Dbiggs9
back in the C2D days almost all chips hit 4gz. This killed the higher end chip market for Intel. So why buy a high end chip when the cheaper one would hit the same OC.

Ryzen is limited to OC based on the internal thermal being set 20c higher then the chip is running stopping OC to 4.4-4.8Ghz. This leaves room to relese higher clocked chips later if they didn't do this everyone would buy a 1700 and OC to and beyond 1800x levels costing them profits. This is just a rumor but it makes sense also based on some facts.

I will try to find the engineering statement on the XFR senser stopping you from higher OC.
Posted on Reply
#20
infrared
"Dbiggs9 said:
back in the C2D days almost all chips hit 4gz. This killed the higher end chip market for Intel. So why buy a high end chip when the cheaper one would hit the same OC.

Ryzen is limited to OC based on the internal thermal being set 20c higher then the chip is running stopping OC to 4.4-4.8Ghz. This leaves room to relese higher clocked chips later if they didn't do this everyone would buy a 1700 and OC to and beyond 1800x levels costing them profits. This is just a rumor but it makes sense also based on some facts.

I will try to find the engineering statement on the XFR senser stopping you from higher OC.
With manual overclocking you're bypassing any temp sensor related limits. Short of throttling there is nothing holding the chip back. Sorry but your theory isn't correct.

You can't expect to entirely different cpu designs to clock the same, it just happens it's not far off, which is why people are getting caught up on this I think.. They could clock wildly differently and still perform the same and in that case you wouldn't be thinking along these lines.

Edit:

Someone above said that it wasn't thermals holding these chips back. Sure 60c at load isn't what we'd consider 'too hot', but it is in fact 'too hot to go faster than Xmhz at Xv'. If you drop the temperature 100c you'd be able to gain quite a lot more mhz, drop the temp another 100c and you might (if you're a good overclocker) end up near 5.9ghz. See what I mean? So on this particular architecture 4.1ish happens to be the limit at ambient temperature. No weird limiting trickery, just quirks of this design.

My 1800x can just about manage cinebench at 4.1ghz on a decent custom water loop... With the coolant chilled to 13c it completed a cinebench run at 4.17ghz... So there isn't an artificial limit, just the design at it's upper limit for ambient temperatures.
Posted on Reply
#21
[XC] Oj101
The ignorance in this thread is rather shocking.
Posted on Reply
#22
Aenra
How much would you pay to get a Ryzen running at this frequency, but on air? Right now? :)
That's a poll i'd like to see someday..
I bet you a lot of people outside the 'enthusiast' segment would be willing to part with serious amounts of money for this; myself included.
Posted on Reply
#23
Nosada
"[XC
Oj101, post: 3637954, member: 102321"]The ignorance in this thread is rather shocking.
Haven't you heard? Nerfing your product to make your competitor look better is the new craze, all the cool capitalistic corporations are doing it! Who needs market domination when you can look incompetent and be the underdog.
Posted on Reply
#24
medi01
Despite having higher avg and min (99th percentile or whatever) 7700k has 100ms+ FPS hikes, unlike Ryzen in GTA5.
It would be major news, had it been vice versa:

<div class="youtube-embed" data-id="11NfsMykyAk"><img src="https://i.ytimg.com/vi/11NfsMykyAk/hqdefault.jpg" /><div class="youtube-play"></div><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=11NfsMykyAk" target="_blank" class="youtube-title"></a></div>
Posted on Reply
#25
Vayra86
"medi01 said:
Despite having higher avg and min (99th percentile or whatever) 7700k has 100ms+ FPS hikes, unlike Ryzen in GTA5.
It would be major news, had it been vice versa:

<div class="youtube-embed" data-id="11NfsMykyAk"><img src="https://i.ytimg.com/vi/11NfsMykyAk/hqdefault.jpg" /><div class="youtube-play"></div><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=11NfsMykyAk" target="_blank" class="youtube-title"></a></div>
Actually, he's saying that he can barely notice the difference above everything else... so it really isn't news, there is some hitching that he cannot really put his finger on and he is throwing out a few theories to discuss. He also clearly points out it could be any number of other factors besides Ryzen - which is 100% on the money as we ALSO know that Nvidia + Ryzen has some sort of perf penalty compared to for example the Fury he put in on a test bench (which he says pushed comparable FPS to a 1080ti (!)). Most likely, this is a frame pacing related issue originating from the GPU, not so much the CPU, and the combination of other components with that GPU, of which Ryzen vs the 7700K are the two he suspects.

'There is really no difference' is what dominates this video. It's a nice insight, but not something to draw any conclusions from...
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment