• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

AMD Updates Ryzen Product Pages to Elaborate on "Max Boost Clocks"

btarunr

Editor & Senior Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 9, 2007
Messages
37,217 (8.59/day)
Location
Hyderabad, India
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 2700X
Motherboard MSI B450 Gaming Pro Carbon AC
Cooling AMD Wraith Prism
Memory 2x 16GB Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4-3000
Video Card(s) Colorful iGame GTX 1070 Ti Vulcan X
Storage Western Digital Black NVMe 512GB
Display(s) Samsung U28D590 28-inch 4K UHD
Case Corsair Carbide 100R
Audio Device(s) Creative Sound Blaster Recon3D PCIe
Power Supply Antec EarthWatts Pro Gold 750W
Mouse Razer Abyssus
Keyboard Microsoft Sidewinder X4
Software Windows 10 Pro
AMD over the weekend updated the product-pages of its Ryzen processors on the company website to be very specific about what they mean by "Max Boost Clocks," that are advertised almost as extensively as the processor's main nominal clock-speeds. AMD describes it has "the maximum single-core frequency at which the processor is capable of operating under nominal conditions." We read into this as the highest boost-clock given to one of the cores on the processor.

If you've been reading the "clock-frequency and boost analysis" charts in our processor reviews, you'll know that AMD processors spread their boost frequency progressively across cores during a multi-threaded workload that scales across all cores. At any given time, only one of the cores is awarded the highest boost clock, and while the other cores too get boosted beyond the nominal clock-speeds, they are in slight decrements of 25-50 MHz. The graph below is from our Ryzen 7 3700X review. The second graph below is from our Core i9-9900K review, which too shows only one of the cores getting the max boost frequency, and the remaining cores getting lower boost clocks, although the graph looks flatter.



View at TechPowerUp Main Site
 
Joined
Sep 17, 2014
Messages
9,710 (5.40/day)
Location
Too Long to fit in a single line here.
Processor i7 8700k 4.7Ghz @ 1.26v
Motherboard AsRock Fatal1ty K6 Z370
Cooling beQuiet! Dark Rock Pro 3
Memory 16GB Corsair Vengeance LPX 3200/C16
Video Card(s) MSI GTX 1080 Gaming X @ 2100/5500
Storage Samsung 850 EVO 1TB + Samsung 830 256GB + Crucial BX100 250GB + Toshiba 1TB HDD
Display(s) Eizo Foris FG2421
Case Fractal Design Define C TG
Power Supply EVGA G2 750w
Mouse Logitech G502 Protheus Spectrum
Keyboard Sharkoon MK80 (Brown)
Software W10 x64
The 9900K graph 'looks flatter'... yeah, if you disregard the actual numbers they've used. Intel's turbo is an ancient piece of junk compared to XFR.

Intel 'looks flatter' ... with a 500mhz frequency gap versus AMD's 150 mhz.

So what they're saying then is that it's pretty much a BS number that you might never see, as it's a "nominal" number. There's not even a percentage figure of what the chance is to reach that "nominal" frequency. I would go as far as to call that false advertising or selling a product under a false pretense, as not a single customer would've read boost speeds as something you might never achieve.
I have a feeling this is going to backfire badly.
Good point, because if they advertise 4.4 Ghz and hit 4375, that is really under :D

I'll still take XFR any day of the week though...
 
Last edited:
Joined
Nov 11, 2004
Messages
3,658 (0.68/day)
Location
Formosa
System Name Overlord Mk MX
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 3800X
Motherboard X570 Aorus Master
Cooling Corsair H115i Pro
Memory Viper Steel DDR4 3733MHz 16-19-19
Video Card(s) Gigabyte RTX 2080 Gaming OC 8G
Storage 1TB WD Black NVMe (2018), 2TB Viper VPN100, 1TB WD Blue 3D NAND
Display(s) Asus PG27AQ
Case Corsair Carbide 275Q
Power Supply Corsair RM750
Mouse Logitech G500s
Keyboard Wooting Two
Software Windows 10
Benchmark Scores https://valid.x86.fr/ztiub6
So what they're saying then is that it's pretty much a BS number that you might never see, as it's a "nominal" number. There's not even a percentage figure of what the chance is to reach that "nominal" frequency. I would go as far as to call that false advertising or selling a product under a false pretense, as not a single customer would've read boost speeds as something you might never achieve.
I have a feeling this is going to backfire badly.
Also, what's nominal conditions?
 
Joined
Apr 30, 2008
Messages
4,349 (1.05/day)
Location
Multidimensional
System Name Jill-Sandwich
Processor AMD Ryzen 5 3600 + PBO/Auto OC on
Motherboard Gigabyte X570 I Aorus Pro Wifi
Cooling Stock AMD Stealth Cooler / 3x 120mm Slim Silverstone fans
Memory 32GB Corsair Vengeance LP DDR4 3200Mhz
Video Card(s) Gigabyte Windforce RTX 2080 8GB
Storage 512GB Adata XPG SX8200 Pro M.2 NVMe / 2TB Samsung 2.5in HDD
Display(s) Hisense 1080p Smart LED HDTV 40inch
Case Silverstone Raven RVZ03 RGB Case
Audio Device(s) Realtek HD Audio / HDMI Audio Via GPU
Power Supply Corsair SFX 600W Gold Rated PSU
Mouse Cheap Wireless Microsoft Mouse
Keyboard Cheap Wireless Microsoft Keyboard
Software Windows 10 Home 64bit
Benchmark Scores Don't do em anymore. :(
Not to be a negative nancy but false advertising anyone orrrr...... am I overreacting? :wtf:
 
Joined
Mar 23, 2016
Messages
2,498 (2.01/day)
Processor Ryzen 5 3600
Motherboard MSI B350M Gaming Pro
Cooling Scythe Kotetsu with AM4 bracket
Memory PNY Anarchy-X XLR8 Red DDR4 3200 MHz C15-17-17-17-35
Video Card(s) MSI GeForce RTX 2060 GAMING Z 6G
Storage Samsung 970 EVO NVMe M.2 500 GB, SanDisk Ultra II 480 GB
Display(s) Samsung SyncMaster C27H711 OC refresh rate 110Hz
Case Phantek Eclipse P400S (PH-EC416PS)
Audio Device(s) On-board dead - Creative Labs Sound Blaster Audigy Rx
Power Supply EVGA 850 BQ
Mouse SteelSeries Rival 310
Keyboard Logitech G G413 Silver
Software Windows 10 Professional 64-bit v1903
Joined
Nov 11, 2004
Messages
3,658 (0.68/day)
Location
Formosa
System Name Overlord Mk MX
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 3800X
Motherboard X570 Aorus Master
Cooling Corsair H115i Pro
Memory Viper Steel DDR4 3733MHz 16-19-19
Video Card(s) Gigabyte RTX 2080 Gaming OC 8G
Storage 1TB WD Black NVMe (2018), 2TB Viper VPN100, 1TB WD Blue 3D NAND
Display(s) Asus PG27AQ
Case Corsair Carbide 275Q
Power Supply Corsair RM750
Mouse Logitech G500s
Keyboard Wooting Two
Software Windows 10
Benchmark Scores https://valid.x86.fr/ztiub6
I'm curious, why is the other note about EPYC, when it's on the Ryzen pages?

129074


Temperature, voltage, power consumption, and motherboard limits would be my best guess.
Yes, but maybe AMD should provide an example then? As they can't just pull something like this, without providing a reference point, no?
At this point, I really feel AMD cheated me out of extra money for nothing.
This doesn't even start to take their PBO video into account, where they claim we could expect an extra 200MHz boost as long as the motherboard could deliver more power.
 
Joined
May 11, 2018
Messages
35 (0.08/day)
They should state what are the conditions for achieving boost clock.

A lot of people don't achieve anything near with single core load (like Cinebench single core, SuperPi single core...) , and processor only boosts close to stated boost speed with very light single core loads for a very short periods of time.

Should the processors be able to sustain boost clock with single core load, proper motherboard and enough cooling? Or does hovering near for a milisecond in idle count as achieving stated frequency, don't look at frequencies during load?

Will AMD also disclose what happened to the PBO + Overclock, and rasing boost clocks up to 200 MHz with good enough motherboard and cooling? Or is that a forgotten marketing push that wasn't really based on anything achievable?
 
Joined
Oct 27, 2009
Messages
689 (0.19/day)
Location
Republic of Texas
System Name [H]arbringer
Processor 4x 61XX ES @3.5Ghz (48cores)
Motherboard SM GL
Cooling 3x xspc rx360, rx240, 4x DT G34 snipers, D5 pump.
Memory 16x gskill DDR3 1600 cas6 2gb
Video Card(s) blah bigadv folder no gfx needed
Storage 32GB Sammy SSD
Display(s) headless
Case Xigmatek Elysium (whats left of it)
Audio Device(s) yawn
Power Supply Antec 1200w HCP
Software Ubuntu 10.10
Benchmark Scores http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=1780855 http://www.hwbot.org/submission/2158678 http://ww
They should state what are the conditions for achieving boost clock.

A lot of people don't achieve anything near with single core load (like Cinebench single core, SuperPi single core...) , and processor only boosts close to stated boost speed with very light single core loads for a very short periods of time.

Should the processors be able to sustain boost clock with single core load, proper motherboard and enough cooling? Or does hovering near for a milisecond in idle count as achieving stated frequency, don't look at frequencies during load?

Will AMD also disclose what happened to the PBO + Overclock, and rasing boost clocks up to 200 MHz with good enough motherboard and cooling? Or is that a forgotten marketing push that wasn't really based on anything achievable?
Yeah, they wrote 4.7Ghz and talked about how XFR was as many cores as can boost vs intel is single core.
 
Joined
Apr 12, 2019
Messages
30 (0.23/day)
Processor AMD Ryzen 3700X
Motherboard Asus X570 TUF Gaming Plus
Cooling NZXT Kraken X62
Memory G.Skill 2x8GB 3600CL16
Video Card(s) Asus Strix RTX 2070
Storage Samsung 850 SSD 512GB
Display(s) Acer Predator XB271HU
Case NZXT S340 Elite
the graph for 3700X doesnt seems right, in CB R20 all core I can see 3,92Ghz max.
the graph shows 16 threads 4,2Ghz-4,25ghz.
if this would be right you would see much more higher scores at auto clock.
when I manually OC to 4,2Ghz all core the scores are higher then auto.
 
Joined
Oct 17, 2014
Messages
3,158 (1.79/day)
Location
USA
I'm wondering if I should have done i5-9600k and 5.1ghz all 6 cores no downclocking now... a full 1ghz faster than AMD... :/ too late now, I can't return my CPU I don't think
 
Joined
Jan 27, 2019
Messages
48 (0.23/day)
Most people dont even know that only a few cores can even reach the max clocks in Ryzen 3000 series haha. In my 3900x The second chaplet cores dont even hit 4.5ghz, let alone 4.6. They mostly topout at 4.3 to 4.4Ghz.



Only CCX0 and CCX1 are good enough to reach 4.6Ghz.

Also funny that people thought a 12 core cpu would reach 4.6Ghz on all cores...
 
Joined
Nov 11, 2004
Messages
3,658 (0.68/day)
Location
Formosa
System Name Overlord Mk MX
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 3800X
Motherboard X570 Aorus Master
Cooling Corsair H115i Pro
Memory Viper Steel DDR4 3733MHz 16-19-19
Video Card(s) Gigabyte RTX 2080 Gaming OC 8G
Storage 1TB WD Black NVMe (2018), 2TB Viper VPN100, 1TB WD Blue 3D NAND
Display(s) Asus PG27AQ
Case Corsair Carbide 275Q
Power Supply Corsair RM750
Mouse Logitech G500s
Keyboard Wooting Two
Software Windows 10
Benchmark Scores https://valid.x86.fr/ztiub6
the graph for 3700X doesnt seems right, in CB R20 all core I can see 3,92Ghz max.
the graph shows 16 threads 4,2Ghz-4,25ghz.
if this would be right you would see much more higher scores at auto clock.
when I manually OC to 4,2Ghz all core the scores are higher then auto.
This is the problem, for some people it works, for others, it doesn't.
The clocks are all over the place and this is why people are upset...

Most people dont even know that only a few cores can even reach the max clocks in Ryzen 3000 series haha. In my 3900x The second chaplet cores dont even hit 4.5ghz, let alone 4.6. They mostly topout at 4.3 to 4.4Ghz.

Only CCX0 and CCX1 are good enough to reach 4.6Ghz.

Also funny that people thought a 12 core cpu would reach 4.6Ghz on all cores...
I never expected that, as it was boost speed. However, I do think people expected a more consistent behaviour, as it's really quite different from CPU to CPU, not by 25-50MHz, but by 200-300MHz in some cases.
 
Joined
May 11, 2018
Messages
35 (0.08/day)
Some people are now waiting for a special bios that would enable their (for example) 3900X go from 4.4 GHz that they are achieving now in single core loads to 4.6, with possibility to overclock it to 4.8 GHz.

That would indeed be some Fine Wine.

AMD has to say sooner or later what are the real specifications of Ryzen 3000 processors, and if those promisses were simply false advertising.
 
Joined
Mar 23, 2016
Messages
2,498 (2.01/day)
Processor Ryzen 5 3600
Motherboard MSI B350M Gaming Pro
Cooling Scythe Kotetsu with AM4 bracket
Memory PNY Anarchy-X XLR8 Red DDR4 3200 MHz C15-17-17-17-35
Video Card(s) MSI GeForce RTX 2060 GAMING Z 6G
Storage Samsung 970 EVO NVMe M.2 500 GB, SanDisk Ultra II 480 GB
Display(s) Samsung SyncMaster C27H711 OC refresh rate 110Hz
Case Phantek Eclipse P400S (PH-EC416PS)
Audio Device(s) On-board dead - Creative Labs Sound Blaster Audigy Rx
Power Supply EVGA 850 BQ
Mouse SteelSeries Rival 310
Keyboard Logitech G G413 Silver
Software Windows 10 Professional 64-bit v1903
I'm wondering if I should have done i5-9600k and 5.1ghz all 6 cores no downclocking now... a full 1ghz faster than AMD... :/ too late now, I can't return my CPU I don't think
Don't know if it matters but I did consider the i5-9600K with an overclock since I spend most of my time playing games. Outside of games the 3600 out runs the i5-9600K with an overclock though.
 
Joined
Oct 17, 2014
Messages
3,158 (1.79/day)
Location
USA
Don't know if it matters but I did consider the i5-9600K with an overclock since I spend most of my time playing games. Outside of games the 3600 out runs the i5-9600K with an overclock though.
all I do is game as well. I just checked and can't return my 3700x. oh well, no big deal. I am still impressed with what AMD has accomplished, my 5700 XT only gets 10 fps slower at 1440p in sekiro shadows die twice vs RTX 2080 SUPER... at almost half the price... AMD is not getting enough love at the moment so I am fine with supporting them this round.
 
Joined
Aug 6, 2017
Messages
4,493 (6.05/day)
Location
Poland
Processor i7 5775c @4.3GHz/1.385v/EDRAM @2GHz
Motherboard Z97X Gaming 5
Cooling Noctua D15S
Memory Crucial Ballistix Tactical LP 1600 CL8 @2133 CL8
Video Card(s) RTX 2070 Super Gaming X Trio
Storage SU900 128 (OS)/850 PRO 256+256+ 512,860 EVO 500,XPG SX950U 480,M9Pe(Y) 512 (games)/4TB HDDs (3+1)
Display(s) Acer XB241YU+Dell S2716DG dual monitor setup
Case Full tower
Audio Device(s) W830BT headphones
Power Supply Superflower Leadex Gold 850W
Mouse G403 wireless + Steelseries DeX + Roccat rest
Keyboard Razer Deathstalker
Software Windows 10
Benchmark Scores A LOT
percentage-wise,at full load 3700x is much closer to max boost clock (96%) than 9900k (89%).
 
Joined
Oct 17, 2014
Messages
3,158 (1.79/day)
Location
USA
percentage-wise,at full load 3700x is much closer to max boost clock (96%) than 9900k (89%).
3700x is still a great buy imo, I don't regret it. I especially love the native Linux support, I don't have to install drivers on my clean install of latest version of Linux Mint. also Intel is getting security issues (major ones) almost on a bi-weekly basis, before its all said and done intel will be patched so many damn times the 3700x will surpass even 9900k in gaming. also security is important for me, so i'd rather have 5-10 fps slower in games than risk it.
 
Joined
Aug 6, 2017
Messages
4,493 (6.05/day)
Location
Poland
Processor i7 5775c @4.3GHz/1.385v/EDRAM @2GHz
Motherboard Z97X Gaming 5
Cooling Noctua D15S
Memory Crucial Ballistix Tactical LP 1600 CL8 @2133 CL8
Video Card(s) RTX 2070 Super Gaming X Trio
Storage SU900 128 (OS)/850 PRO 256+256+ 512,860 EVO 500,XPG SX950U 480,M9Pe(Y) 512 (games)/4TB HDDs (3+1)
Display(s) Acer XB241YU+Dell S2716DG dual monitor setup
Case Full tower
Audio Device(s) W830BT headphones
Power Supply Superflower Leadex Gold 850W
Mouse G403 wireless + Steelseries DeX + Roccat rest
Keyboard Razer Deathstalker
Software Windows 10
Benchmark Scores A LOT
3700x is still a great buy imo, I don't regret it. I especially love the native Linux support, I don't have to install drivers on my clean install of latest version of Linux Mint. also Intel is getting security issues (major ones) almost on a bi-weekly basis, before its all said and done intel will be patched so many damn times the 3700x will surpass even 9900k in gaming. also security is important for me, so i'd rather have 5-10 fps slower in games than risk it.
well if you're concerned about security (or not) 3700x is a good choice ragardless,but can we please stop the patched pefrormance penalty misinformation or at least limit it to red trolls ? I mean we've heard it a thousand times before zen 2 launch but in the end old ass 8700k still leaves any zen 2 behind.go on gamersnexus review and see how big the gap actually is.

it's nice xfr works better than turbo boost,but still zen 2 overclocks like a turd compared to intel's ridiculed 14++++++++++++
 
Joined
Apr 12, 2019
Messages
30 (0.23/day)
Processor AMD Ryzen 3700X
Motherboard Asus X570 TUF Gaming Plus
Cooling NZXT Kraken X62
Memory G.Skill 2x8GB 3600CL16
Video Card(s) Asus Strix RTX 2070
Storage Samsung 850 SSD 512GB
Display(s) Acer Predator XB271HU
Case NZXT S340 Elite
This is the problem, for some people it works, for others, it doesn't.
The clocks are all over the place and this is why people are upset...
But the CB R20 scores and performance across some popular benchmarks is on point with the major reviews out there. I was checking the clock speeds in the newest Ryzen Master, they did not go higher then 4,05Ghz all core so its a mystery for me. This is pointing to a measurement error of the software.
 
Joined
Oct 17, 2014
Messages
3,158 (1.79/day)
Location
USA
well if you're concerned about security (or not) 3700x is a good choice ragardless,but can we please stop the patched pefrormance penalty misinformation or at least limit it to red trolls ? I mean we've heard it a thousand times before zen 2 launch but in the end old ass 8700k still leaves any zen 2 behind.go on gamersnexus review and see how big the gap actually is.

it's nice xfr works better than turbo boost,but still zen 2 overclocks like a turd compared to intel's ridiculed 14++++++++++++
While performance was only affected 1% or so of meltdown and spectre patches, keep in mind there are still loads of unpatched security issues with Intel, the last major Intel security issue was reported last week and is just as dangerous as Meltdown/Spectre was, and that's not including the several others... or Intel recommending users disable HT... it's just too much imo...

even the games a 9900k beats 3700x in at 1440p, its only by 5 fps or so a lot of the times. and at 4k its tied.
 

bug

Joined
May 22, 2015
Messages
6,339 (4.09/day)
Processor Intel i5-6600k
Motherboard ASRock Z170 Extreme7+
Cooling Arctic Cooling Freezer i11
Memory 2x8GB DDR4 2400 G.Skill
Video Card(s) EVGA GTX 1060 SC
Storage 128 and 256GB OCZ Vertex4, 500GB Samsung 850 EVO, 1TB Crucial MX300 and 3TB Seagate
Display(s) HP ZR24w
Case Chieftec BX01
Power Supply Seasonic 620W M12
Mouse Logitech G502 Proteus Core
Keyboard G.Skill KM780R
Also, what's nominal conditions?
I have a feeling defining that would require AMD to spell out you also have to get lucky enough that your CPU will include a "good bin" CCX.
That doesn't detract from Zen's value per se, but it looks like it unnecessarily exposes AMD to a class action lawsuit (we all know there's a lawyer somewhere with some time to kill).
 
Joined
Aug 6, 2017
Messages
4,493 (6.05/day)
Location
Poland
Processor i7 5775c @4.3GHz/1.385v/EDRAM @2GHz
Motherboard Z97X Gaming 5
Cooling Noctua D15S
Memory Crucial Ballistix Tactical LP 1600 CL8 @2133 CL8
Video Card(s) RTX 2070 Super Gaming X Trio
Storage SU900 128 (OS)/850 PRO 256+256+ 512,860 EVO 500,XPG SX950U 480,M9Pe(Y) 512 (games)/4TB HDDs (3+1)
Display(s) Acer XB241YU+Dell S2716DG dual monitor setup
Case Full tower
Audio Device(s) W830BT headphones
Power Supply Superflower Leadex Gold 850W
Mouse G403 wireless + Steelseries DeX + Roccat rest
Keyboard Razer Deathstalker
Software Windows 10
Benchmark Scores A LOT
While performance was only affected 1% or so of meltdown and spectre patches, keep in mind there are still loads of unpatched security issues with Intel, the last major Intel security issue was reported last week and is just as dangerous as Meltdown/Spectre was, and that's not including the several others... or Intel recommending users disable HT... it's just too much imo...

even the games a 9900k beats 3700x in at 1440p, its only by 5 fps or so a lot of the times. and at 4k its tied.
well specter and meltdown weren't dangerous for a home user to begin with,same as the one with ht.but if you feel like it's too much for you then it's fine.

when you compare mostly gpu-bound scenarios then even a 9400f will match 3700x so those kind of comparisons aren't really going anywhere.
 
Joined
Feb 3, 2017
Messages
1,588 (1.71/day)
Processor i5-8400
Motherboard ASUS ROG STRIX Z370-I GAMING
Cooling CRYORIG C7 Cu
Memory 2*16GB DDR4-3200 CL16
Video Card(s) Gainward GeForce RTX 2080 Phoenix
Storage 1TB Samsung 970 Pro, 1TB Samsung 850 EVO, 1TB Crucial MX500
Display(s) ASUS PG279Q, Eizo EV2736W
Case Dan Cases A4-SFX
Power Supply Corsair SF600
Mouse Logitech G700
Keyboard Corsair K60
even the games a 9900k beats 3700x in at 1440p, its only by 5 fps or so a lot of the times. and at 4k its tied.
At 4K (and largely at 1440p) you are fine with 3600 or 9400F.
 
Joined
Mar 23, 2016
Messages
2,498 (2.01/day)
Processor Ryzen 5 3600
Motherboard MSI B350M Gaming Pro
Cooling Scythe Kotetsu with AM4 bracket
Memory PNY Anarchy-X XLR8 Red DDR4 3200 MHz C15-17-17-17-35
Video Card(s) MSI GeForce RTX 2060 GAMING Z 6G
Storage Samsung 970 EVO NVMe M.2 500 GB, SanDisk Ultra II 480 GB
Display(s) Samsung SyncMaster C27H711 OC refresh rate 110Hz
Case Phantek Eclipse P400S (PH-EC416PS)
Audio Device(s) On-board dead - Creative Labs Sound Blaster Audigy Rx
Power Supply EVGA 850 BQ
Mouse SteelSeries Rival 310
Keyboard Logitech G G413 Silver
Software Windows 10 Professional 64-bit v1903
but still zen 2 overclocks like a turd compared to intel's ridiculed 14++++++++++++
Zen2 does overclock like a turd but the IPC improvement from Zen/Zen+ neutralizes the clockspeed difference going from Intel's high clocked Skylake core design unless you move to the Sunny Cove cores re-design. I have a feeling Sunny Cove isn't expected to clock as high on 10nm+ as Skylake on 14+++. Zen2 clocks the same as Sunny Cove.
 
Top