ASRock Uses External Clock Generators to Circumvent Intel non-K BClk OC Limits

[Rauelius]

yeah pretty much what @Aquinus is saying

Yeah, you can OC all AMD chips, but when a Max overclocked FX-9590 can barely match an i3-6100 at stock, then overclocking on AMD is at best a pyrrhic victory.

 

[buildzoid]

Anything that doesn't have a unlocked multiplier on FM2/AM1 has the same limitation as Intel. Yes you can technically overclock them by raising the BCLK, but you can technically overclock any Intel in the same way. However, you won't get very far before things like the PCI-E Bus or SATA ports start to get unstable.



The K chips were just an answer to the small niche market of people that overclock. Integrating the northbridge onto the CPU and running both off a single clock generator meant good overclocking by raising the BCLK was no longer possible. AMD faced the same problem with their designs when they integrated the northbridge completely. AM3+ was the last platform to have an external northbridge, and the last platform that could seriously be overclocked by adjusting the FSB/BCLK.



AMD does have a lot more unlocked CPUs, but that is kind of their marketing gimmick. The entire FX line is unlocked but ironically that are the only ones that didn't need to be. And I wouldn't say the BCLK headroom on AMD's APUs is that much more than on Intel, a small amount maybe, but not a lot.

you can run the FM2 chips with 120BCLK just fine. I didn't run into any major problems until I was trying to go over 130mhz on a Kaveri chip.

 

[GhostRyder]

Hmm, interesting Asrock. Might have to give it a try sometime on a low end i5 with the H170 board. Would be interesting to see how far I could push it!

 

[EarthDog]

More than likely how the external clock generator is wired to the CPU.

That would be a complete motherboard rework though... and this fast (fast as in, they just put up microcode to stop this a month or so ago)???

 

[natr0n]

Asrock's always innovating.

 

[hojnikb]

you can run the FM2 chips with 120BCLK just fine. I didn't run into any major problems until I was trying to go over 130mhz on a Kaveri chip.

without ahci though..

 

[Ubersonic]

No you cannot. That is not and has not been the case since Ivy Bridge.

I know, I was talking about Ivy Bridge.

 

[newtekie1]

That would be a complete motherboard rework though... and this fast (fast as in, they just put up microcode to stop this a month or so ago)???

It would be naive to think AsRock wasn't working on an alternative knowing Intel would try to stop BCLK overclocking the traditional way AsRock figured out.

you can run the FM2 chips with 120BCLK just fine. I didn't run into any major problems until I was trying to go over 130mhz on a Kaveri chip.

With AHCI I've never gotten much past 105MHz, maybe 110MHz. If and I have a graphics card plugged into the PCI-E slot, forget going over 105MHz even without AHCI.

 

[EarthDog]

Biting the hand that feeds you is NEVER a good idea.... There is a reason all the GPU MFG comply with NVIDIA... same here with Intel...

I hear you, but, knowing what I(we) know about how that works, I guess I must live in that naive camp on this one.

 

[newtekie1]

Biting the hand that feeds you is NEVER a good idea.... There is a reason all the GPU MFG comply with NVIDIA... same here with Intel...

I hear you, but, knowing what I(we) know about how that works, I guess I must live in that naive camp on this one.

I think Intel won't really take notice since it is something AsRock is only doing on a couple niche boards. If AsRock was doing it on all their non-Z170 boards, and publishing how to do it so others can copy it, I think Intel would be a little more pissed.

 

[Basard]

I think the point is that AMD CPUs need to be overclocked to match stock Intel ones, because AMD are now 4-5 gens behind Intel there is no need for Intel to compete right now hence their overclocking being tied up and their "improvements" getting less and less with each generation.

The sad thing is if AMD do ever manage to catch up Intel can just stop dragging their feet and jump into the lead again so it's unlikely this cycle will ever break unless Intel end up with another design failure like the Pentium 4.

Come on, you know that AMD's gonna come back with Zen and spank Intel.

Intel's been on on i7's for ages... Yeah the i7's are good but they only thing they really have on AMD is 14nm--in my opinion. An FX chip at 14nm would have like a gazillion cores.

Why don't they just put one or two i7 and 16 FX cores onto a single chip. I think that's what next. hmm.... I'm sick of all this integrated graphics bullshit lol.

 

[EarthDog]

If cores where the only thing that matters.....

 

[Steven B]

AMD platforms still rely on external clock-gen chips. Even Intel used them, until they integrated it to the CPU die with Sandy Bridge.

BTW, it's in the PCH now, and Intel offers the ability for manufacturers to add a secondary clock generator for higher margins (over 200MHz). Most Z170 motherboards have the external clock generator for higher margins.

It is true ASRock is really the only one to offer it on H and B series boards, but if you ask me, its presence on this board could also be mentioned: http://www.asrock.com/mb/Intel/Fatal1ty E3V5 Performance GamingOC/

 

[Tom_]

I simply bought a Z-Board with K-CPU.

 

[EarthDog]

I simply bought a Z-Board with K-CPU.

That... that isn't the point Tom_.

 

[medi01]

but they only thing they really have on AMD is 14nm

Can you name AMD CPU that beats my BLOODY ANCIENT i5 750 which was BUILT ON 45 NM TECH in:
1) Single threaded performance
2) Perf/Watt

?
=/

 

[Caring1]

Can you name AMD CPU that beats my BLOODY ANCIENT i5 750 which was BUILT ON 45 NM TECH in:
1) Single threaded performance
2) Perf/Watt

?
=/

This isn't a pissing contest, take it somewhere else.

 

[AsRock]

Hmm... looks fine to me...

I wonder if they wont be slapped by daddy Intel for borking their market.

Yeah might make Intel have a cry baby incident.

With the SATA plugs like they are i would not buy this my self, not into the branding either.

so when will intel finally cave in and just make overclocking free for everybody like it used to?

Intel have always been hostile about overclocking, even more so when they did not want you to do it.

 

[Adam Krazispeed]

I think the point is that AMD CPUs need to be overclocked to match stock Intel ones, because AMD are now 4-5 gens behind Intel there is no need for Intel to compete right now hence their overclocking being tied up and their "improvements" getting less and less with each generation.

The sad thing is if AMD do ever manage to catch up Intel can just stop dragging their feet and jump into the lead again so it's unlikely this cycle will ever break unless Intel end up with another design failure like the Pentium 4.

BIG INTEL vs small amd = not fiar fight/// intel always hits below the belt against amd,

 

[Adam Krazispeed]

but this year i hope will be different with amd bringing ZEN, DDR4 amd support, real gen 3 pcie , at 16/14nm finfet, unless intel jumps to 10nm somehow???

 

[Basard]

Can you name AMD CPU that beats my BLOODY ANCIENT i5 750 which was BUILT ON 45 NM TECH in:
1) Single threaded performance
2) Perf/Watt

?
=/

No, but can you name an unlocked Intel CPU that costs 160 bucks and has 8 threads?

If one wants to crunch Super Pi all day, fine. Have fun. The 90's called, they want their single threaded performance back.

And, the only time I care about performance per watt is when I'm using a cell phone or laptop.

 

[EarthDog]

No, but can you name an unlocked Intel CPU that costs 160 bucks and has 8 threads?

If one wants to crunch Super Pi all day, fine. Have fun. The 90's called, they want their single threaded performance back.

And, the only time I care about performance per watt is when I'm using a cell phone or laptop.

lolololol

 

[medi01]

No, but can you name an unlocked Intel CPU that costs 160 bucks and has 8 threads?

If one wants to crunch Super Pi all day, fine. Have fun. The 90's called, they want their single threaded performance back.

And, the only time I care about performance per watt is when I'm using a cell phone or laptop.

That was not my point though.
The worst part of the picture is that superior (4 bloody core) i5 750 is on 45nm.
It's not only process advantage, something else is messed up big time.

 

[Basard]

That was not my point though.
The worst part of the picture is that superior (4 bloody core) i5 750 is on 45nm.
It's not only process advantage, something else is messed up big time.

Ha! Superiority is relative.

We can argue all day. In the end I know I'm right. And you probably know you're right.

I'll pay 160 for my CPU and spend leftovers on candy.

 

[EarthDog]

Ha! Superiority is relative.

We can argue all day. In the end I know I'm right. And you probably know you're right.

I'll pay 160 for my CPU and spend leftovers on candy.

I will spend a bit more, still have money left over, and have more time to do things because my work finishes faster on less cores... yeah, IPC doesn't matter... good call.