Are the current AMD chips outpacing Intel in terms of overclocking?

[jelloslug]

I have not been following the great cpu chase for a couple years. Traditionally going back to core 2 days, it seems Intel typically has a slight edge over the competition.

Long time AMD fan here, but I've been waiting for ryzen to mature before pulling the trigger on a new AMD build. I've been running Intel since the post phenom II days.

All that being said is AMD now able to compete on par with Intel? For example what clock speeds have you been hitting with the most recent AMD offerings? What about memory OC, can these new AMD chips hang with Intel in those terms?

 

[Onasi]

Depends on the sample one gets. Must be said that today the question of “how high can my all core frequency go” is moot. There is relatively little point - manual OC is dead except for XOC purposes since the boosting algorithms already wring out almost maximum from the chip. On Zen, manual all-core is almost completely replaced with PBO OCing for those who really is chasing that last bit. Can get better light-core workloads improved that way quite easily.
Memory is, again on AMD, more concerned with tuning timings rather than frequencies. Running 1:1 ratio at 6000/6200, maybe 6400 if you get decently lucky with newer Zen 5 offerings, is always better than chasing high freqs. That said, many consider Intel memory controller still to be superior for pure OC applications, so there’s that.

 

[ShrimpBrime]

Man, this is like comparing apples to your shoe.

Intel does really well on the memory/cache department. Usually higher memory frequencies are attainable and the cache overclock (aside feom core overclock) really improves the performance.

Since Intel neutered the 8 p-cores, eliminating the HT, it's just 8 P-cores. (Leaving out E-cores because AMD doesn't really have anything to compare with). So basically, AMD just has the upper hand retaining the SMT, and the 9800X3D is a great example of just a plain 8 core 16 thread horsepower cpu for a gaming desktop looks like.

As far as raw IPC per the watt, AMD took over on this front by Zen+. At the time, slower than Intel raw IPC, due to low frequency mostly, but way more power effecient. Work done per the watt, AMD is the go to.

Specifically concerning 3D benchmarking and say forceful overclocking, as mentioned above often times requires mods (de-lidding) and exceptional to chilled cooling methods (water chiller, dry ice, ln2, LHe) really help reduce leakage and allows for higher overclocks. Both platforms are power restricted and thermally challenged otherwise.

But what more to ask for than getting near 6ghz boxed processors?? This was a dream more than a decade ago. Remember when FX was the first 5ghz cpu? It wasn't fast despite that frequency.

I suppose the question is too basic to come to an actual conclusion.

But TLDR-
Actual OC frequency is nearly the same between AMD and Intel. 5.7ghz is a pretty sweet spot on both platforms.(IMO)