Tuesday, September 3rd 2019
AMD Issues Statement on Low Ryzen 3000 Boost Clocks, BIOS Update Soon
After AMD's Ryzen 3rd generation launch many users have reported that they are not seeing the advertised boost clocks that AMD promises in their specifications. This has been an ongoing issue, with various tweaks tried, with limited success. This lead to serious allegations about "false advertising", and all AMD had to say up to this point was that these clocks are "up to".
AMD has now issued a statement regarding these lower than expected clock frequencies on Zen 2 processors, and it looks like there is indeed an underlying BIOS issue that's responsible. Let's hope that this new firmware gets released quickly and is able to restore faith in AMD's otherwise excellent track-record.
AMD has now issued a statement regarding these lower than expected clock frequencies on Zen 2 processors, and it looks like there is indeed an underlying BIOS issue that's responsible. Let's hope that this new firmware gets released quickly and is able to restore faith in AMD's otherwise excellent track-record.
AMD is pleased with the strong momentum of 3rd Gen AMD Ryzen processors in the PC enthusiast and gaming communities. We closely monitor community feedback on our products and understand that some 3rd Gen AMD Ryzen users are reporting boost clock speeds below the expected processor boost frequency. While processor boost frequency is dependent on many variables including workload, system design, and cooling solution, we have closely reviewed the feedback from our customers and have identified an issue in our firmware that reduces boost frequency in some situations. We are in the process of preparing a BIOS update for our motherboard partners that addresses that issue and includes additional boost performance optimizations. We will provide an update on September 10 to the community regarding the availability of the BIOS.Our resident Ryzen memory overclocking guru 1usmus is reporting the same on his Twitter account:
SMU FW 46.44.00 will improve the boost of processors of the Zen 2 generation, very soon in all BIOSes. ETA: 10 September
86 Comments on AMD Issues Statement on Low Ryzen 3000 Boost Clocks, BIOS Update Soon
And yes it's so sad to see AMD getting sued for making a horrible CPU like Bulldozer while Intel gets away with fooling the people with fake cores that even four or eight of them can't give a performance of a real core
Furthermore the boost clock works the same way for both companies, neither of them advertise all core boost at least not anymore and I can see the logic behind it, it's mainly to avoid the average Joes that find out eventually that single threaded applications tend to load x number of cores and if said Joe sees that only 1 or 2 cores boosts to let's say 4.7 while the rest being baseclock, well, that's a lawsuit waiting to happen. Intel ain't getting away with murder, they've done scummy things yes, but all those scummy things are approved by regulators and guess what that doesn't break any laws. What makes sense for you as an end user doesn't have to make sense for the entities running a business, that's why we have rules that won't apply to us plebs but they apply to the company and vice-versa. You as an end user get exactly what you pay for, it's not AMD nor Intel's job to educate you on how to google a CPU that you're interested in. IF company X offers you a product at a cheaper price than company Y that would imply that they can still rake in a profit and grab market share, they're not doing it out of the goodness of their hearts and they shouldn't as it's a business not a charity.
All of those dozens of pages of people complaining just want to see the clock speed, it seems to me, well there it is. This is a visual thing more than everything else, measuring performance between 4.550 Ghz and 4.6 Ghz is within margin of error.
This fix will likely not affect anything with regards to the end user experience, it'll be a cosmetic change.
Issue being, AFAIK, Intel hasn't lied about boost clocks yet. Unsure what you are trying to show me here, but that isn't Intel making those claims. If Intel advertises base clocks clearly and indicates that 5Gh is single core boost (they do) then those people need to read the box. You can't blame Intel there.