Overclock.net banner

21 - 39 of 39 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
883 Posts
Discussion Starter #21
Here is my bclk overclock with Ryzen 3300X at 103.5 FSB. I use every day with these settings, have found it rock stable. SSD also performs awesome, seems bclk has some good effect for everything.
Very nice results.

PCIe is set at Gen3/4 ?
 

·
Old to Overclock.net
Joined
·
1,564 Posts
I loved BCLK overclocking with my 3900X, gave great multi and single scores. I remember getting 218 (219) on CB15 single score. Loved undervolting, PBO, and bclk combo with that chip. However my 3950X hates it, it had different boosting behavior. Once I enable PBO it would try to hit an all core of 4.2 with only 1.1 volts causing weird instabilities. I would raise vcore to fix the issue but then single core would boost to 4.7 to 4.75 at the expense of 1.5volts. Add bclk to the mix and a whole crap bag of issues.

However the 3950x is great for all core/per ccx overclock and settled for a 4.40/4.45/4.3/4.25 with only 1.25vcore (1.19 under load) and with the ryzen balanced plan the cores and voltage still downclock.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
91 Posts
So with a higher BCLK you need to change PCIE to gen3 from 4 to get it to post? Gonna try that :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
883 Posts
Discussion Starter #24
So with a higher BCLK you need to change PCIE to gen3 from 4 to get it to post? Gonna try that :)
Or Gen 3 to 2

It depends on your hardware, I think mainly the VGA ..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
91 Posts
Or Gen 3 to 2

It depends on your hardware, I think mainly the VGA ..
Hmm okey, gonna try some BCLK and change PCIE to gen 3.
 

·
curmudgeon
Joined
·
5,930 Posts
Nothing to show, but this 1700 has been running at 3.925 ghz with 103.3 bclk for three years now. Never bothered to push it farther.


In win10 I set the power plan to "performance" and then in advanced settings I think it is, there is the option to set the power states. 100% is standard but if the minimum is set to 40% or so the cpu downclocks just fine.


This is a pic I took after a gaming session on a hot day 6 days ago.
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
883 Posts
Discussion Starter #28
Nothing to show, but this 1700 has been running at 3.925 ghz with 103.3 bclk for three years now. Never bothered to push it farther.


In win10 I set the power plan to "performance" and then in advanced settings I think it is, there is the option to set the power states. 100% is standard but if the minimum is set to 40% or so the cpu downclocks just fine.


This is a pic I took after a gaming session on a hot day 6 days ago.
Dont know how much more headroom you have left on your 1700.

The great thing about BCLK on the newer batches of 3600 is that these CPUs can handle the higher clocks, its just that they have been limited to their current frequencies due to product segmentation.

Using BCLK is allowing these CPUs to stretch their cramped legs

:D :D
 

·
Edgy & on the edge
Joined
·
1,539 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
354 Posts
Does playing with the BCLK effect M.2 drives?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
883 Posts
Discussion Starter #31
  • Rep+
Reactions: Solohuman

·
Registered
Joined
·
354 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
883 Posts
Discussion Starter #33
Ok, but if OS on them, will it not get corrupted like when SATA drives did.
No sign of corruption for my setup so far,

I am running my OS from the M2 drive in my sig and running BCLK of 107.5625 !

Please note I have to run PCIe Gen2 for this BCLK otherwise my VGA card does not like it.
 
  • Rep+
Reactions: Solohuman

·
Registered
Joined
·
354 Posts
No sign of corruption for my setup so far,

I am running my OS from the M2 drive in my sig and running BCLK of 107.5625 !

Please note I have to run PCIe Gen2 for this BCLK otherwise my VGA card does not like it.
That's interesting. I might up it & see what happens.
Is there a sliding scale or something when having to run at 107 + for PCIe v2?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
883 Posts
Discussion Starter #35
That's interesting. I might up it & see what happens.
Is there a sliding scale or something when having to run at 107 + for PCIe v2?
Unsure as to what you mean by "sliding scale"

I think I gather the gist of what are saying so will respond based on my understanding (which may bve incorrect).

Firstly, how BCLK acts is probably dependent on the motherboard.

My understanding is that some motherboard have a hardware component (seperate clock generator) for the BCLK while others are doing it through "software".

Now my motherboard does not have a seperate clock generator for BCLK so what I am about to describe may/will vary compared to other motherboards.

So.....

Initially I thought my motherboard could only go up to 101.7xx BCLK because anything higher would not post after applying the settings.

As I wasnt as familar with my motherboard with regards to BCLK as I could have been and as I was worried about "issues" it may cause I would simple reset the BIOS and accept that was the limit so never bothered using BCLK as at that time I had an 3600X CPU, importance in the "X"

Now when I sold that and bought a 3600 from the newer batches I knew the only real way to get the speeds up were through BCLK.

So this time, when going past the level of boot success, instead of shutting down and resetting the BIOS, I simply shutdown and then pressed the power button again and I found that it posted.

After this point (BCLK of over 101.7xx) it will successfully post each time up to my current 107.5625.

I stopped there as it gave me the 3800/1900 I was aiming for (using 3533/1767).

Now back to your reference to "scaling".

It seems to me that up to the 101.7xx "cut off" point is when the software alters something just as a clock generator would, hence the reason after this point I can use much higher BCLK.

Seems to be the software approach (having read others observation) is only handling the PCIe to CPU frequency divider not the PCIe to internal slots.

I say this as the first thing I see when using GEN3 with high BCLK is that the PC will post and boot into windows, but anything to do with graphics is so slow, i.e. mouse mover really slow, start menu open really slow, windows open really slow, everything is real laggy and than often a bluescreen will present itself.

Going down to GEN2, stops this issue.

It could just be that the VGA cant handle the higher BCLK, but that does not explain to me how dropping to GEN2 "fixes" this issue.

I must point out that my current 107.5625 is probably at the limit as I get 1 WHEA error when stress testing memory when using 107.5625 which I dont get when its at default, however to make things more clouded, this only started happening on Windows 2004, not earlier versions, but the fact it does not happen at all when using default 100 tells that no need to push further.

:)
 
  • Rep+
Reactions: Solohuman

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,309 Posts
I no longer have the hardware but I did 131.0 BCLK on Ryzen 1700 + X470 motherboard when I was testing it out.
I have to say gen 1 Ryzen had no benefit from it, they just run hotter for no increase in performance, just do a regular OC instead.

X570 just doesn't allow it due to SATA issues. (you need to stay on only m.2 there)
I hear B550 does allow for SATA to be used even with BCLK.

X470 was limited to ports 4-5 SATA to be used, you could not use 1-4 as far as I knew. (you would be severely limited otherwise)
Your VGA will have limits on what they accept. My RX 480 just would not give a display above 131.0BCLK and that was my limit.
2458510
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
883 Posts
Discussion Starter #37
I no longer have the hardware but I did 131.0 BCLK on Ryzen 1700 + X470 motherboard when I was testing it out.
I have to say gen 1 Ryzen had no benefit from it, they just run hotter for no increase in performance, just do a regular OC instead.

X570 just doesn't allow it due to SATA issues. (you need to stay on only m.2 there)
I hear B550 does allow for SATA to be used even with BCLK.

X470 was limited to ports 4-5 SATA to be used, you could not use 1-4 as far as I knew. (you would be severely limited otherwise)
Your VGA will have limits on what they accept. My RX 480 just would not give a display above 131.0BCLK and that was my limit.
What motherboard was that for the 131 BCLK, that is a stupendous frequency, for sure the motherboard must have had dedicated clock generator for PCIe
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
354 Posts
Unsure as to what you mean by "sliding scale"

I think I gather the gist of what are saying so will respond based on my understanding (which may bve incorrect).

Firstly, how BCLK acts is probably dependent on the motherboard.

My understanding is that some motherboard have a hardware component (seperate clock generator) for the BCLK while others are doing it through "software".

Now my motherboard does not have a seperate clock generator for BCLK so what I am about to describe may/will vary compared to other motherboards.

So.....

Initially I thought my motherboard could only go up to 101.7xx BCLK because anything higher would not post after applying the settings.

As I wasnt as familar with my motherboard with regards to BCLK as I could have been and as I was worried about "issues" it may cause I would simple reset the BIOS and accept that was the limit so never bothered using BCLK as at that time I had an 3600X CPU, importance in the "X"

Now when I sold that and bought a 3600 from the newer batches I knew the only real way to get the speeds up were through BCLK.

So this time, when going past the level of boot success, instead of shutting down and resetting the BIOS, I simply shutdown and then pressed the power button again and I found that it posted.

After this point (BCLK of over 101.7xx) it will successfully post each time up to my current 107.5625.

I stopped there as it gave me the 3800/1900 I was aiming for (using 3533/1767).

Now back to your reference to "scaling".

It seems to me that up to the 101.7xx "cut off" point is when the software alters something just as a clock generator would, hence the reason after this point I can use much higher BCLK.

Seems to be the software approach (having read others observation) is only handling the PCIe to CPU frequency divider not the PCIe to internal slots.

I say this as the first thing I see when using GEN3 with high BCLK is that the PC will post and boot into windows, but anything to do with graphics is so slow, i.e. mouse mover really slow, start menu open really slow, windows open really slow, everything is real laggy and than often a bluescreen will present itself.

Going down to GEN2, stops this issue.

It could just be that the VGA cant handle the higher BCLK, but that does not explain to me how dropping to GEN2 "fixes" this issue.

I must point out that my current 107.5625 is probably at the limit as I get 1 WHEA error when stress testing memory when using 107.5625 which I dont get when its at default, however to make things more clouded, this only started happening on Windows 2004, not earlier versions, but the fact it does not happen at all when using default 100 tells that no need to push further.

:)
Thanks for the reply, was going to answer earlier but forum updates...
Atm, I'm trying to get the secondary timings on my ram nice n' tight 1st then I'll dabble into BCLK experiments on my X570.
However if I have to pull back PCIe speed from v3 to v2, just before it will probably be the sweet spot imo.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,309 Posts
What motherboard was that for the 131 BCLK, that is a stupendous frequency, for sure the motherboard must have had dedicated clock generator for PCIe
A Biostar X470GT8. Not a board I recommend though. There are other issues that drag it down to the dumps. Why I in the end gave it away.
It's was a "cheap" high-end board.

The way to do BCLK was to use SATA ports 4-5 and not the others. The same applies to other X470 boards as well.
More SATA the lower limit you had available. And I think gen2 was used for PCIE speed, though can't verify now but might have been OK on gen3 even.
 
21 - 39 of 39 Posts
Top