AMD issues statement on Ryzen 3000 boost clocks

We wrote earlier this week about overclocker Der8auer’s findings of low boost-clock speeds on AMD’s new Ryzen 3000 chips. Now, AMD has issued a statement about the boost clock speeds on its chips and is promising a BIOS update soon.

AMD’s statement says that it’s pleased with the momentum of the third generation of Ryzen processors, but also that it closely monitors the community for feedback.

AMD Ryzen 9 3000-series

“We understand that some 3rd gen AMD Ryzen users are reporting boost-clock speeds below the expected processor boost frequency,” the statement continues. “While processor boost frequency is dependent on many variables… we have closely reviewed feedback from our customers and have identified an issue in our firmware that reduces boost frequency in some situations.”

AMD has a BIOS update in the works

The company is prepping an update for AMD motherboards that will go out to motherboard manufacturers first. We can look forward to more information about the availability of the update on September 10. AMD’s statement is as conservative as expected from a large corporation; Der8auer’s findings showed as few as 5.6% of users reaching boost clocks, which is a far cry from “some users.” Even if those findings are way off, that still means a huge majority of users are seeing sub-optimal boost speeds.

While Der8auer’s report was certainly damning, his wasn’t the only one. Sites like Tom’s Hardware experienced difficulties with the chips as well. For example, AMD says only a single core on its Ryzen 3000 CPUs will hit the promised boost clock speed at a time.

Squeezing the full potential out of AMD’s 3rd Gen Ryzen CPUs does have a few other requirements, too. Along with having the latest BIOS and drivers, you also need to be using the latest version of Windows 10 to use the Ryzen scheduler if you want to hit those top boost-clock speeds.

Those of us who spent a pretty penny on AMD’s top-of-the-line CPUs should see the update helping us get the most out of our chips soon. And then it’ll be up to all the eagle-eyed enthusiasts out there to push the chip to its limits and see if the update does the trick or not.

avatar
4 Comment threads
14 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
9 Comment authors
VhalidictesetanaenixenigmaK-L-WasterKrogoth Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
enixenigma
Guest
enixenigma

I’m pretty lukewarm on this whole issue. While I agree with others who have said that this can be seen as false advertising, there are so many variables at play here. I was able to hit 4.5GHz at stock on my 3800x on my X470 board from day one, but not on my X570 board (both from Gigabyte). The situation didn’t get any better with subsequent BIOS updates. After some PBO tuning, however, I can now see as high as 4.5GHz on two cores and can reach max boost clock on two others. All that to say that the situation… Read more »

enixenigma
Guest
enixenigma

CORRECTION: I can now see as high as 4.55GHz on two cores after PBO tweaking. My previous post said 4.5GHz.

chuckula
Guest
chuckula

AMD is so amazing in the quick response to a problem that never existed and was only a fabrication by online paid shills!

derFunkenstein
Guest
derFunkenstein

“That’s right!”

-der8auer, coming to you live from IFA, also conveniently mentioned in Intel’s presentation about the i9-9900KS

derFunkenstein
Guest
derFunkenstein
DPete27
Guest
DPete27

AMD – “Oh, we actually never tested/checked our CPUs to see if they’d actually run at the frequencies we marketed them for…”

This, fresh on the heels of the Bulldozer settlement…wow.

Krogoth
Guest
Krogoth

They did test for maximum boost speeds, but it was ideal conditions and equipment. This has been going since inception of turbo speed/boosting.

The difference now is that silicon is now being push to its bleeding edge at stock/base speed. Intel is in the same camp with their laptop/server SKUs and a few of their desktop SKUs (9700K and 9900K). Don’t get started on the GPU side of things.

People got too spoiled back when silicon binning was ultra-conservative which made overclocking nearly effortless. We are now hitting physical and economical walls of silicon.

DPete27
Guest
DPete27

But this is in dangerous territory to be labeled false advertising.

Regardless of the scientific validity of Der8auer’s survey, it sounds like an overwhelming majority of buyers aren’t getting what was advertised to them, no matter what cooling they have.

Krogoth
Guest
Krogoth

It is not false advertising though. Boost/turbo speed has always been opportunistic since inception. People are just paying closer attention to monitoring tools and boost/turbo speeds are more dynamic. FYI, my own 9700K does not turbo up to alleged maximum turbo speed of 4.9Ghz (I’ve even forced to have one core active). It tops out at 4.7Ghz if left on its own. I’m forced to overclock if I want go beyond that point. There are similar stories with other 9700K and 9900K users. Nobody is making a fuss over it since it is easily remedied with some arm-chair overclocking. You… Read more »

K-L-Waster
Guest
K-L-Waster

So they can claim any old boost clock? Yeah, right…

Vhalidictes
Guest
Vhalidictes

This is dumb. This is also the reason that Intel doesn’t advertise their boost clocks.

Factory-based overclocking, is, by definition, still overclocking. Speeds can’t be guaranteed, nor should they be. Any number of things involving heat, voltage, and, yes, BIOS revisions could change the final numbers.

Krogoth
Guest
Krogoth

AMD is probably increasing the voltage on boost settings at the expense of thermals and power consumption. The update might cause issues on older AM4 boards which might not be up to the task.

DPete27
Guest
DPete27

From the sounds of it, the advertised max boost clock speeds are pretty lofty even for manual OCing.

MOSFET
Guest
MOSFET

[i]Some [/i]older AM4 boards are exactly the ones that [i]are[/i] up to the task.

MOSFET
Guest
MOSFET

Ugh. Right. The system is still….broken? Adapting? Rotting? not sure which

Krogoth255
Guest
Krogoth255

It uses standard HTML code like this

etana
Guest
etana

COOL

Vhalidictes
Guest
Vhalidictes

I’m a pretty big fan of the new reply system.

Now that I understand just how broken it is, I’m not upset anymore.

I’m biding my time until I see a good opportunity to reply on behalf of another well-known username.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This