Overclocking

The Overclocking process using a Ryzen 9 7950X is exactly the same as the previous Ryzen generations. However AMD has already tuned the turbo algorithm to the ceiling, very little room is left for manual overclocking. This is a good thing for those who have no desire to overclock, but this also leaves those who like the hobby somewhat unsatisfied. Gone are the days of heavy all-core overclocks being beneficial, what is left is AMD Ryzen Precision Boost Overdrive. When configured correctly, you can have similar performance to stock CPU setup, but with a lower power draw. In some cases upwards of 5% increases in CPU performance as well. It is worth taking the time to go through the settings and set it up correctly according to your hardware and use case.


If you are not keen on using the BIOS for CPU overclocking, AMD provides a piece of software called Ryzen Master. This is a all-in-one tool for overclocking on Ryzen platforms. You can also have the software try to auto optimize PBO. For a "quick" test, I selected to optimize per core. This resulted in nearly 3 hours of the system tuning itself. Unfortunately, after completing this task, the system becomes unresponsive. The "optimized" overclock, ended up using unstable values.

The next attempt was a brute force overclock. AMD says any, and all overclocking (including memory) will void the warranty. Lots of warnings in software are given as well. The question that comes up often is, can AMD tell if you overclocked the CPU if you don't inform them? Doubtful, but there is a chance the CPU RMA could be rejected, using a detection method unknown to the public. In any case, if you do plan on overclocking, a media-only overclocking guide suggested not to exceed 1.3 Vcore, and AMD says Tj.Max is 95 °C for the cores. The good news is that more than 1.3 Vcore will never be practical without first delidding the CPU, or going with an exotic, sub-ambient cooling solution. The bad news is, as you might have guessed, that the CPU temperatures can easily reach 95 °C with just 1.2 static Vcore, under load. A primitive overclocking session ended with a all-core overclock of 5.3 GHz at 1.25 V. just barely passing 95 °C in Cinebench R23. Not very exciting overclocking using this method. Cinebench R23 received a score of 39945. Just shy of 40K.

Post Review Update:

ASRock has provided TPU with a piece of software called Blazing Tuner. This has some of the same functions as the ASRock A-Tuner, but is mainly used for what can be considered quick and dirty overclocking. It is a great way to test out different PBO configurations without needing to be in the motherboard BIOS.

Following the guidance of ASRock, the software was configured with a CPU Frequency of 5200 MHz and a core voltage of 1.20. This gave a similar Cinebench R23 score, but actually 10°C lower. The next attempt was to raise the CPU by 100 MHz. This worked, but temperatures reach 98°C. A Final attempt was conducted at 5.4 GHz, which failed to render the scene in Cinebench R23 without more voltage applied.

Update: Blazing Tuner is not available to download from ASRock X670E Taichi Carrara webpage at time of publication.

HWInfo Sensors

HWInfo Sensors have been requested. Here you go folks!

Memory Overclock

Post Launch Update 09/27/22: Using BIOS 1.08 (Beta), two DDR5-6400 memory kits (FF3D532G6400HC40BDC01 / F5-6400J3239G16GA2-TZ5RK) were tested for compatibility that is on the QVL list. These booted into windows, but was not stable, resulting in a BSOD. Consulting with ASRock previous, it is believed to be an AMD issue and unrelated to the motherboard itself. Given AMD history of sub-par memory support, I agree with ASRock. Future AGESA (AMD Generic Encapsulated Software Architecture) BIOS updates will be needed to increase overall DRAM compatibility. It should also be stated for anyone unaware, that any memory running beyond the official specifications set by AMD (DDR5-5200) is never guaranteed to function. The Ryzen CPU memory controller plays a role in overall compatibility as well and thus unrelated to the motherboard. Now back to the review!



Memory overclocking can be strictly just tweaking the sub-timings while staying at stock frequencies, but the term can typically be used when aiming for the highest possible frequency as well. Using the 1.07 BIOS, the current limit of DDR5 memory has been noted above. DDR5-6200 Single-Ranked memory reached 6200 MT/s stable. 6400 MT/s would boot into windows, but failed all stability tests even with a bit of extra voltage on the IMC and SoC. 6600 MT/s refused to boot at all, and requiring a clear CMOS step after getting stuck.

Next was dual-rank and four single-rank DIMMs. Surprisingly, four DIMMs worked fine on auto settings, but dual-rank was unstable in windows at the same frequency. Another attempt to bump the voltages at bit, didn't yield better results. Still unstable.


DDR5 timings from Intel do not directly translate. For instance the tRFC and tFAW cannot go as low on Ryzen. Setting the tRFC on the Intel Z690 platform to 350, passed all stability tests. Using the ASRock X670E Taichi Carrara, the lowest value was tRFC 481 before it stopped posting. Overall the primary timings are the same, which makes basic tuning a fairly painless transition from Intel.

Playing around with all four DIMM slots, a few benchmark runs were attempted. With so many different configurations, it was hard to keep track of what actually worked, and with what voltages. The HWBot score is the last valid one, so far. Results are promising and beats my personal Intel 12900K (16X) record easily.