[ad_1]
Everything is going pretty well for AMD with its new Ryzen 3000 processors, but there is a significant point of negativity: processors do not achieve the promised startup speeds – a problem compounded by a new investigation.
This comes from the well-known overclocker Der8auer, which compiled a survey of just over 2,700 users who described in detail the performance of their third-generation Ryzen processors, with surprising results.
Of the disturbing revelations, only 5.6% of Ryzen 9 3900X owners reported that their processor was reaching its nominal amplifier. It's only one in 20.
And as reported by Tom's Hardware, while AMD had previously confirmed that a single core on a given processor would reach the advertised amplified clock speed, according to the results of this survey, many components will not reach the AMD rated increase speed. at all – on any kernel.
And of course, even the chips that reach the promised boost can only do so briefly, peaking at this speed from time to time.
The majority of respondents (40%) owned a Ryzen 7 3700X, 26% had the aforementioned 3900X and 21% of those surveyed a Ryzen 5 3600 in their PC. As you can see, these three tokens accounted for the vast majority of respondents.
Thus, taking the results of the Ryzen 7 3700X, the most common processor of the survey, Der8auer observed that only 14.7% of the chips reached the announced recall speed of 4.4 GHz or more (only 1.8% of respondents processor). Of course, this means that the vast majority – 85.3% – never reach the announced boost rate on any kernel.
As we have already mentioned, the Ryzen 9 3900X has painted an even darker picture with only 5.6% chips, the promised boosting speed of 4.6 GHz or more.
The results obtained with the Ryzen 5 3600 showed that 49.8% of respondents reached the announced recall speed of 4.2 GHz or higher – the vast majority, just over 45.2%, reaching this exact speed, a small numbers managing to slip (and up to 4.3%). GHz in the best case).
Overall, therefore, this does not seem very good for AMD and, according to these statistics, there is a lot of Ryzen third-generation silicon that simply does not reach the promised growth rate.
Many people may have become very close, but as Der8auer points out, he does not consider it sufficient. Simply because they are top speeds that will not be maintained. Even if a processor manages to stay within 0.025 GHz, it will not work at a speed close to that announced.
We would also argue that the advertised boost speed should be achieved simply because is The advertised speed, and almost is not really enough if we consider a low-in-black-and-white processor specification.
Poll surveys?
Can there be something wrong with the survey? Der8auer details his methodology in his YouTube video (above), and he certainly seems to have thought about and set up backups to get rid of troll results, or PCs with inappropriate setups for some reason (users with PBO or Precision Boost Overdrive enabled, for example).
Speeds were recorded by performing the Cinebench R15 single-threaded test, which was an AMD recommendation, he adds.
Everything is not perfect here, however, as the overclocker recognizes it itself. Obviously, these results were extracted from different systems and it is also hard to know which versions of Windows 10 were running on PCs – on which AMD draws attention as potentially making a difference.
Der8auer, however, argues that if this is the case, AMD must point out any performance difference if you are not running a specific version of Windows 10 (or if you are not running Windows 10 at all).
The biggest potential stumbling block here, as AMD and Der8auer point out again, is the fact that owners of disgruntled processors from Ryzen 3000 are more likely to have responded to the survey, while simply because they bought their product and their management increased. .
One could argue that this could therefore skew the results in favor of underperforming chips, hence the rather bullish percentages that make eyebrows here. And that's a good point, really, although Der8auer raises another point of view, as AMD fans may be just as eager to get positive results.
But let's face it, unsatisfied people are more likely to counterbalance AMD fans when it comes to putting their two sous
It should be interesting to see if AMD has an answer to this last apparent blow on the boosted front, although we have to finish this song while Der8auer ends his video.
And this is a reminder that the new AMD Ryzen 3000 processors must not be devalued in terms of performance, which users actually get from these chips, regardless of the boost rate of the boost rate.
Der8auer notes that these are still "very economical" processors and that, of course, Ryzen's 3rd generation offerings have stunned us. In summary, remember that the apparent problems with overclocking clocks or disappointing overclocking perspectives certainly do not mean that you should not consider a Ryzen 3000 model as your next processor.
Moreover, clock speeds are not everything, of course, and Zen 2's architectural improvements are certainly substantial – but the whole issue of the boosted clock remains a noticeable black spot on Ryzen's otherwise brilliant canvas. 3000.
- Here are the details you need to know about AMD Zen 2
[ad_2]
Source link