Post your Cinebench R23 Score

[Space Lynx]

Very nice, I have never heard of anyone OC'ing like this though lol, my 5.1ghz never downlocks, so in CPU-Z it shows 5.1 at all times, you must have intel speed step on or something which is why it shows 799.

regardless, well done, and don't push it to hard, just enjoy.

i backed off my 5.2, at 5.1 24.7 no downclocking and not breaking 60 celsius in demanding games 8+ hours run (been testing while I sleep) so yeah pretty happy. I am done tinkering, leaving it at 5.1 24.7 and time to enjoy myself.

 

[jboydgolfer]

Very nice, I have never heard of anyone OC'ing like this though lol, my 5.1ghz never downlocks, so in CPU-Z it shows 5.1 at all times, you must have intel speed step on or something which is why it shows 799.

regardless, well done, and don't push it to hard, just enjoy.

i backed off my 5.2, at 5.1 24.7 no downclocking and not breaking 60 celsius in demanding games 8+ hours run (been testing while I sleep) so yeah pretty happy. I am done tinkering, leaving it at 5.1 24.7 and time to enjoy myself.

I never Overclock without allowing the CPU to drop Frequency when it isnt being stressed, its a habit i picked when overclocking for 24/7 . i apologize for taking the screenshot without ramping up the cpu 1st.

@lynx29 these cpuZ screens are from the same time when i ran the cinebench test.

 

[Anarchy0110]

This is getting ridiculous - the score went up again.
I guess when the temps are optimal, the chip can TB as high and stable - close to the Intel specs.
I don't know what to say about this, and I hope that this is the last time I'm gonna post something here.

 

[T4C Fantasy]

This is getting ridiculous - the score went up again.
I guess when the temps are optimal, the chip can TB as high and stable - close to the Intel specs.
I don't know what to say about this, and I hope that this is the last time I'm gonna post something here.

View attachment 99961

why isnt the score displayed

 

[Anarchy0110]

why isnt the score displayed

Sorry, I messed it up, should've taken the picture right away - I closed the app right after benchmarking is completed.
I just finished playing NFS Payback, will do a re-run immediately once the laptop is cooled down.

 

[T4C Fantasy]

Sorry, I messed it up, should've taken the picture right away - I closed the app right after benchmarking is completed.
I just finished playing NFS Payback, will do a re-run immediately once the laptop is cooled down.

i added the score anyways, 1065 but if you can beat it that be cool

 

[Anarchy0110]

i added the score anyways, 1065 but if you can beat it that be cool

And yet, it ran faster again.
This confuses the hell out of me.

 

[jboydgolfer]

I haven't really done any overclocking since my 2500K, but during the process of trying to beat the high score held by another member for my CPU ,I'm starting to re-learn the ins and outs ,and I've learned that this CPU has more than what I got out of it ,I'm confident that I could get it to 5300Mhz , and possibly higher. I essentially have what i would consider as almost no experience with overclocking, at least on an advanced level, I think I really hit the jackpot with this CPU ,because if someone who actually knew what they were doing could get their hands on it ,I think they could Really crank it up, 5.5Ghz IMO. It's just too bad, because I'll never overclock it more than the few minutes I do to run the benchmark ,and then it goes back to its stock frequency for the rest of its life time with me. It's like having a Ferrari & only driving it to the grocery store

 

[Space Lynx]

I haven't really done any overclocking since my 2500K, but during the process of trying to beat the high score held by another member for my CPU ,I'm starting to re-learn the ins and outs ,and I've learned that this CPU has more than what I got out of it ,I'm confident that I could get it to 5300Mhz , and possibly higher. I essentially have what i would consider as almost no experience with overclocking, at least on an advanced level, I think I really hit the jackpot with this CPU ,because if someone who actually knew what they were doing could get their hands on it ,I think they could Really crank it up, 5.5Ghz IMO. It's just too bad, because I'll never overclock it more than the few minutes I do to run the benchmark ,and then it goes back to its stock frequency for the rest of its life time with me. It's like having a Ferrari & only driving it to the grocery store

its silly to OC to high anyway. i intend to run my 8600k at 5.1 no downclocking 24.7 though, pc parts can take more of a beating then people think, especially when temp isn't a factor, and since i never break 60 celsius, im solid.

 

[T4C Fantasy]

I highly doubt ocing to the max that it lets you without increasing voltage will affect the life at all.

 

[Space Lynx]

I highly doubt ocing to the max that it lets you without increasing voltage will affect the life at all.

I had my 2500k at 4.9ghz 24.7 for 6 years and it still runs that solid. I am honestly not worried about it.

 

[FreedomEclipse]

I had my 2500k at 4.9ghz 24.7 for 6 years and it still runs that solid. I am honestly not worried about it.

What was your voltage?

 

[Johan45]

Here's the revised Ryzen 2700X in action
EDIT: thought I should add this was using a chilled loop. The chip will run 4.3 stable on ambient with an EK 360 predator

 

[Anarchy0110]

That's an insane score. Ryzen 2 seems to be really good I guess.
And again, my 8750H ran a bit faster. lol

 

[jboydgolfer]

its silly to OC to high anyway. i intend to run my 8600k at 5.1 no downclocking 24.7 though, pc parts can take more of a beating then people think, especially when temp isn't a factor, and since i never break 60 celsius, im solid.

So you mean ,you're gonna set the frequency to 5100MHz ,and whether the computer is @ idle, or under full load, it will be locked at 5100 MHz, 24/7?

That's not something I would do just based on the power consumption & the heat generated. Mine doesn't reach 60° either (if it does it barely reaches it), but the stock Frequency is powerful enough for me. I don't really run anything CPU intensive aside from world community grid , but now I have a dedicated computer for that ,so it's basically just a small amount of work, a small amount of gaming, and Internet browsing with Netflix and YouTube , none of which benefits from anything over stock speeds.

it looks like we both made out pretty well in regards to the silicone lottery

 

[Space Lynx]

So you mean ,you're gonna set the frequency to 5100MHz ,and whether the computer is @ idle, or under full load, it will be locked at 5100 MHz, 24/7?

That's not something I would do just based on the power consumption & the heat generated. Mine doesn't reach 60° either (if it does it barely reaches it), but the stock Frequency is powerful enough for me. I don't really run anything CPU intensive aside from world community grid , but now I have a dedicated computer for that ,so it's basically just a small amount of work, a small amount of gaming, and Internet browsing with Netflix and YouTube , none of which benefits from anything over stock speeds.

it looks like we both made out pretty well in regards to the silicone lottery

I don't think you fully understand having a no downclocking OC... yeah I am at 5.1 ghz 24.7 but cpu usage is like 1-3% 95% of the time, and its barely sipping any power at all, when I game yeah it goes to 100% and it handles it like a champ. I had my 2500k at 4.8ghz for 5-6 years, 0 issues.

maybe I don't fully understand, its possible, so if someone wants to explain to me? lol i just assumed how much power it is sucking is what really matters. if I was running it 100% 24/7.365 i might lower it a lot sure... but thats a rare case scenario, like a cruncher.

 

[T4C Fantasy]

updated scoreboard

Here's the revised Ryzen 2700X in action
EDIT: thought I should add this was using a chilled loop. The chip will run 4.3 stable on ambient with an EK 360 predator

View attachment 100020

nice first 2000 series submission!

 

[jboydgolfer]

I don't think you fully understand having a no downclocking OC... yeah I am at 5.1 ghz 24.7 but cpu usage is like 1-3% 95% of the time, and its barely sipping any power at all, when I game yeah it goes to 100% and it handles it like a champ. I had my 2500k at 4.8ghz for 5-6 years, 0 issues.

maybe I don't fully understand, its possible, so if someone wants to explain to me? lol i just assumed how much power it is sucking is what really matters. if I was running it 100% 24/7.365 i might lower it a lot sure... but thats a rare case scenario, like a cruncher.

No I understand. your frequency is locked at 5.1 GHz ,regardless if the CPU load is 2% or 100%. I just wouldnt see a reason for it, if (as you said) 95% of the time, your only utilizing 3% of your CPU.


the way i set My overclocks is, if the CPU reaches 100% of its stock frequency, it continues on , until it reaches the OC frequency (lets say for example 4800Mhz, & using it when it needs it, or when it makes sense). If it is only utilizing limited CPU power, for smaller tasks, and it only needs 2 cores, at 2Ghz, i let it do that.

it would be like running as fast as you can, even if your only taking 3 steps to the kitchen, or going into the bathroom. Theres no need to run as fast as you can into the kitchen or the bathroom, it isnt going to save you any real time, so people dont do it, i use the same methodology in my OC settings. Intel put a great deal of R&D into these CPU's, and i allow that hard work to be used, unless i need more Power, at which point my OC will be utilized by the CPU, otherwise, it runs what speed it requires.

Im not saying You shouldnt do what you feel is right, im just clarifying why i set my OC like i do. I think You'll find many folks do it similarly.

 

[mouacyk]

Usually people who lock their frequencies are going for the lowest DPC latency. Allowing the CPU to adjust its clock dynamically, can affect the DPC latency.

 

[Space Lynx]

No I understand. your frequency is locked at 5.1 GHz ,regardless if the CPU load is 2% or 100%. I just wouldnt see a reason for it, if (as you said) 95% of the time, your only utilizing 3% of your CPU.


the way i set My overclocks is, if the CPU reaches 100% of its stock frequency, it continues on , until it reaches the OC frequency (lets say for example 4800Mhz, & using it when it needs it, or when it makes sense). If it is only utilizing limited CPU power, for smaller tasks, and it only needs 2 cores, at 2Ghz, i let it do that.

it would be like running as fast as you can, even if your only taking 3 steps to the kitchen, or going into the bathroom. Theres no need to run as fast as you can into the kitchen or the bathroom, it isnt going to save you any real time, so people dont do it, i use the same methodology in my OC settings. Intel put a great deal of R&D into these CPU's, and i allow that hard work to be used, unless i need more Power, at which point my OC will be utilized by the CPU, otherwise, it runs what speed it requires.

Im not saying You shouldnt do what you feel is right, im just clarifying why i set my OC like i do. I think You'll find many folks do it similarly.

I'm not sure we are communicating well mate, because the way I see it is, its not stressing the CPU at all until I do have a 100% work load, even then, I am not entirely sure I believe 1.415v is stressing it. I think people worry to much about hardware, I have never heard of a single CPU ever dying honestly, LinusTechTips hasn't either and he goes through hundreds of CPU's a year. My 2500k at 4.8ghz 24/7 for 6 years is also proof, I intend to sell it someday for like $40-60 or something, and I fully expect it will still hit its 4.8 number 24/7.

Power savings? Even if something small does need 2 cores at 100% its probably not sucking that much juice at all.

 

[jboydgolfer]

I am not entirely sure I believe 1.415v is stressing it

i never said it was stressing (not sure either way TBH) just that it isnt IMO making a difference at low CPU usage & im not saying your way is wrong. I replied to explain why I did it my way is all. You mentioned not ever hearing someone doing it the way i do, i explained why and how, thats all.

i dont have a high opinion of that little tech guy, so i cant comment on what he does, i was just responding to your reply regarding my settigns.

 

[Space Lynx]

i never said it was stressing (not sure either way TBH) just that it isnt IMO making a difference at low CPU usage & im not saying your way is wrong. I replied to explain why I did it my way is all. You mentioned not ever hearing someone doing it the way i do, i explained why and how, thats all.

i dont have a high opinion of that little tech guy, so i cant comment on what he does, i was just responding to your reply regarding my settigns.

lol Linus isn't to bad but yeah he isn't my favorite either haha.

I'm honestly not worried about it though, your way is also fine. if I didn't have such a high level power supply / highly rated for ripple and voltage regulation I probably wouldn't it run it the way I do, but I honestly have no worry at all, and my Z370 mobo the Tomahawk was one of the best rated VRM cooling z370's money can buy, and it only cost me $99 after rebate (can't say that about any AMD board or even some high end Gigabyte / Asus Z370's) MSI uses a new chip for its VRM, its very nice

 

[jboydgolfer]

VRM, its very nice

10 power phase right??

is the 5200Mhz the highest your able to get that Board/Chip?

 

[T4C Fantasy]

I want to see more 2600 2600X 2700 2700X scores

 

[Psychoholic]

2700X Default clocks, haven't touched anything except set memory to xmp profile (3200)

All core boost @ a little over 4ghz, 2-4 core boost 4.2-4.3 I probably wont even overclock it, just leave it as it is.. pretty damn snappy.