Skip to main content

AMD Ryzen Overclocking Guide: Get More from Your CPU

(Image credit: Shutterstock)

No matter what AMD Ryzen CPU you have -- from first-gen Ryzen all the way up to the top-of-the-line Ryzen 3950X, there’s always an opportunity to squeeze a few more MHz out of the chip by overclocking it. Unlike Intel, which limits overclocking to its most-expensive CPUs and motherboards, AMD allows you to overclock any Ryzen processor with all of their chipsets except for A320 (it works with B350, B450, X370, X470, X570).

Modern processors automatically adjust their own clock speeds based on temperature and workload, so one might wonder why overclocking is necessary. The answer comes down to the silicon lottery. Even amongst CPUs of the same model, made at the same time at the same factory, there are subtle differences in how much additional voltage and frequency the chips can leverage. AMD configures all of its Ryzen CPUs of a given model number for the same boost clock speed, but the piece of silicon in your PC might be capable of offering more, if you just tweak its settings.

While there are some nearly fool-proof, automated methods for overclocking your AMD Ryzen CPU, it’s important to note that pushing anything beyond its normal operating point has inherent risks that range from system instability to the unfortunate early failure of components. And, if you break your CPU by overclocking, it will not be covered by warranty.

AMD Ryzen Overclocking: What You Need 

Though even a low-end AMD Ryzen CPU with the stock fan can be overclocked, you’ll have more success with a higher-end processor, motherboard and thermal solution. Like all processors, Ryzen CPUs are designed to throttle performance when they reach a certain temperature so, if you want them to run fast, you have to keep them cool. 

(Image credit: Noctua)

Before we start, let’s make sure to match our expectations to the components we plan to use.  Overclocking stresses the electrical performance of the processor, memory, and motherboard, and produces excessive amounts of heat in the process. As such, make sure to pick a processor that will provide enough overclocked performance, a motherboard that has the capability to overclock as desired, and a thermal solution that can handle the increased thermal load better than the stock cooler. 

(Image credit: Aorus)

If you’re shopping for an AMD Ryzen CPU and want one with the most overclocking potential, consider buying at least a mid-tiered processor (3600, 3700X), a motherboard (B450, X470, X570) with sufficient VRM cooling potential, and either an oversized air cooler or 240mm AIO liquid cooler.  And don’t forget to budget for a solid power supply from a reliable vendor.  Quality manufacturers provide a steady supply of current to the board and devices, which is critical.  Also, make sure to account for the increased CPU wattage that will come from increased power; we’ve seen 105W Ryzen processors start to pull upwards of ~220W in extreme situations. 

AMD Ryzen Overclocking Methods 

There are two main methods for overclocking your AMD Ryzen CPU: Precision traditional, “all core” overclocking and Precision Boost Overdrive (PBO). The former is more of a manual process that provides potentially more reward while the latter is more fool-proof.

With a traditional all-core overclock, the tweaker's objective is to elevate the processor’s operating frequency and underlying features to a fixed setting that enables higher operating frequencies at the cost of bypassing the hardware’s normal voltage and temperature controls. The benefit for this approach is ‘What You See is What You Get,’ and deviations from expected results are typically due to the thermal, voltage, or current limitations of the processor or motherboard. In some cases, these types of overclocks lead to higher overall all-core performance over more extended periods, but come at the cost of bypassing power-saving features inherent to Ryzen processors.

(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)

Precision Boost Overdrive (PBO), in contrast, automatically increases the voltage, power, and temperature limits defined by the chip and motherboard firmware. So instead of limiting a processor to 110 amps of current draw, for example, our motherboard now enables the regulators to provide 250 amps of current while maintaining other operating conditions. This method is a very simple and easy way for users to unlock untapped potential in their components while still leveraging many of the power efficiency technologies provided by the AGESA (BIOS) and OS software stacks. The downside is that PBO is just that: Potential. If, at any time, the system violates any of the three specifications, the firmware dials back the settings, which in some cases brings the system back to stock performance! Of course, users (and manufacturers) can modify these settings to extreme levels, and without proper knowledge and implementation, this can significantly impact the overall result. 

Ryzen Overclocking Goals: What’s Your Purpose? 

An overclock is only as good as its stability, and for that, we need to talk about testing. There are three basic genres of overclocks: competitive, performance, and daily-driver.

For competitive overclocks, processors are tuned to specific settings to reach maximum performance for an individual workload. If you browse around hwbot.org, a site that tracks competitive results, you'll see many examples of records that have obscene results and others that seem much tamer. In these instances, tuners typically only test stability for the benchmark at hand and often use advanced motherboard features and save motherboard presets for when they begin running their benchmarks.

Performance overclocks, on the other hand, cover a range of applications but might not be safe for all workloads. Most times, a gamut of benchmarks are run at a single overclock setting to validate stability, such as an x264 Handbrake encode followed by a 30 minute Blender render. These use cases verify that less-than-mission-critical work completes faster than normal while not risking too much in terms of stability.

(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)

The daily driver overclocks are typically the most conservative of tweaks that aim for 100% uptime within specific “safe” operating parameters. Here, tests like Prime95, Realbench, AIDA64, and Memtest variants stress the system to the max and provide high confidence that standard applications do not exceed the tested limits.  

Regardless of the type of overclock, understanding workload performance is important.  AVX based workloads are going to hammer a Ryzen processor both thermally and electrically, which will tend to result in very conservative overclocks.  AVX-based tasks include Prime95, Blender, x264/x265 encoding, various security protocols and scientific workloads.  If the end goal is to run these applications under extreme overclock, make sure to invest in a solid cooling solution.

Ryzen Overclocking 101: Settings, Measurements, Tools 

Every setting you tweak to overclock is in your system’s BIOS (aka UEFI) interface (you can usually enter the BIOS by hitting Del at boot). Before you get started overclocking your AMD Ryzen CPU, make sure you install the latest “good” version of your motherboard’s BIOS firmware.  The reason we emphasize "good" is that sometimes manufacturers release software that isn't stable or locks features out. Browse your motherboard’s support page and read the release notes. More often than not, the latest version is typically the one to get.  But if you’re using an older-gen Ryzen processor, check the update notes, because some newer BIOS versions lock out older processors. 

(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)

Before you change any settings, it’s important to know how your processor and motherboard work out of the box. Install and launch HWiNFO64, a free app that measures voltage, temperature and clock speeds. Then run an app you wish to test with. Each motherboard is different, but we look at each processor's voltage, thermals, and VRM temperatures, which usually look at VID (processor voltage), Tdie (temperature), and VRM_MOS (motherboard VRM temperature), respectively. When in doubt, stop by our forum and ask for some help before changing any settings! 

Next, let's talk about our most often used settings. Caution: READ THE MANUAL!

(Image credit: MSI)

Not all BIOSes are created equal, and manufacturers like to put their spin on some of the options (we're looking at you, Asus). If you're going the auto-overclocking Precision Boost Overdrive route, simply find the setting (sometimes under AMD CBS), select Enable, and you're done! 

Traditional overclocks are a bit more complicated, but are straight forward. In the CPU overclocking tab/menus, find the area that mentions "multiplier," and toggle manual control. From there, adjust the multiplier (MULT) up or down to increase/decrease the effective clock speed. The base clock (BCLK) is also in this area, and it impacts the effective clock speed as such:

Effective Clock = BCLK * MULT ( 3927 = 102 * 38.50 )

(Image credit: MSI)

However, we tend to leave BCLK alone because other devices (memory and PCIe) also rely on this clock, and deviating too far from expected values can drastically impact those interfaces' stability. These two settings alone can provide quick and dirty settings to get you started. 

(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)

Now, reboot the machine and hopefully it POSTs (boots up)! If so, relaunch HWiNFO64, enable logging, clear the history, and run the application you’re testing. If you are just looking for general stability not related to a particular piece of software, using a stress-testing app like Prime95 will get the job done.

With any luck, the app runs in its entirety and the results will match your expectations. If the workload fails, restore the original working settings, and open up the previous HWiNFO64 log. We do this to diagnose if we hit a hardware condition that would cause a crash, such as high temperatures, low voltages, or excessive power. With that information in hand, we can make some adjustments.

Ryzen Overclocking 102: Voltage and Temperature 

(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)

If your system isn’t stable after you turn up the clock speed, the CPU just might not be getting enough voltage to operate at that speed. If you turn up the VCORE, the voltage going to the processor, it may have enough power to deliver those extra MHz. But more voltage also generates more heat and too much voltage can damage your processor. 

(Image credit: Gigabyte)

When it comes to adjusting the voltage on your Ryzen motherboard, the options vary based on the make and model. Many vendors place voltage controls within the overclocking or CPU frequency menus behind an additional voltage menu.  To maintain consistency, we tend to stick with manual controls where possible so we can specify the exact voltage we want to set.  

This voltage might not reflect the actual measured voltage, so take it slow (5 to 10mV steps) and measure how the change impacts the sensor readings.  Keep in mind, increasing voltage will also increase CPU temperatures.

Image 1 of 2

(Image credit: MSI)
Image 2 of 2

(Image credit: MSI)

Of course, we are just scratching the surface, and many other factors account for voltage and power draw. BIOSes offer several methods of adjusting the voltage and modifying current draw (to an extent), so pick a method and see how it works. Also, check out some of our stress testing guides and motherboard articles to get a feel for how the different settings impact overclocking results, too. Your mileage may vary.

Safety is a highly contentious subject, and it is challenging to get people to agree on "safe" CPU voltage conditions for Ryzen processors. We can't trust all numbers thrown out on the internet because sometimes "1.35V" has no qualifiers, and we can't just throw that into our UEFI and expect things to work as intended. In general, we compare the reported VID from HWiNFO to the CPU Core reported in the UEFI and make the best guess on what the appropriate UEFI value should be. Advertised "maximum safe" values on the internet are 1.375V for Ryzen 1000 and 2000, while Ryzen 3000 tends to be 1.325V under load. We recommend running experiments with small steps up in voltage to get a sense of comfort with what a setting voltage translates into an operating voltage in the reporting software. Of course, external test equipment can reduce guesswork if you have access to that luxury.

The System-on-Chip (SoC) voltage is very important for Ryzen processors as it impacts the memory controller as well as other internal fabric voltages on the chip.  Similar to why we don’t adjust BCLK too much, this rail can impact system stability overall and should be a last ditch effort when tweaking memory speeds or fabric speeds.  For us, a general safe limit is 1.2V and the average overclocker should not deviate from the specification.

(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)

Temperatures are a bit less controversial, and by default, the Ryzen 1000 and 2000 series like to run around 67C. Generally, AMD processors don't like to run as hot as Intel processors, so its best to keep them to a maximum temperature of 85 degrees Celsius  under load. 

Overclocking your Ryzen’s RAM 

After making some changes, it's time to relaunch our monitoring software, log the metrics , and execute our application. Hopefully, the adjustments correlate with the values shown in the log, and there's still room for more performance! Head back into the BIOS and continue through this tweak, test, tweak, test cycle until YOUR safe thresholds or performance criteria are met. We went ahead and created a flow chart to help guide you through the journey. 

(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)

Once an acceptable processor frequency is reached, we turn our attention to our memory. Most DDR4 kits sold these days come with an eXtreme Memory Profile (XMP), and our first step is to enable that free performance. Just move over to the overclocking or memory menus in the BIOS and find the section for XMP (or DOCP) and load the default values. 

(Image credit: Gigabyte)

Try to reboot the machine, but beware that the RAM might not come up on the first try. If the system boots, run a Memtest-style test (I use AIDA64's memory stress test, but there are many options) and run it as long as necessary. If the boot or test fails, proceed back to the BIOS and either select a different data rate and increase the DRAM timings, or both. 

Tweaking the memory interface isn't the primary goal of the article, but following the same trial and error procedure should find settings that work better than stock.  If XMP doesn’t quite satisfy the overclocking itch, with Ryzen 3000 processors, users can manipulate the fabric clock (FCLK). This feature can shift the system from a synchronous to asynchronous mode that could push the data rates even further at the expense of increased internal memory latency.

(Image credit: ASRock)

Also, FCLK multipliers can be adjusted to compensate for this change, though be warned system instability likely follows.  Lastly, lowering memory timings is a great way to improve performance without changing voltage or frequency.  However, timings are very tightly coupled and adjusting one usually requires the adjustment of others. 

Bottom Line

As a rule, AMD Ryzen processors don’t have as much overclocking headroom as Intel models, but squeezing out that extra performance is a rewarding experience.  If you need more help, remember to check out our overclocking forum where the community is full of people who’ve overclocked Ryzen CPUs of their own. 

  • Alvar "Miles" Udell
    Long time TH reader, first time commenter.

    I have an X370 motherboard, the ASUS Crosshair VI Hero Wi-Fi AC, and I bought a new Ryzen 7 3700X to replace my 1800X. Being an X370 board, things like core sleeping and PBO do not work right, as PBO was only able to reach on 1-2 cores 4.3ghz at 1.45v. Using P-state overclocking, I'm able to get program, game, and AIDA64 stable of 4.3ghz all cores at 1.175v.

    So while using PBO may be advisable in some cases, it never hurts to manually overclock and see your results as well. Sacrificing a small bit of 1-2 core performance, assuming I was able to hit the 4.4ghz advertised, for a large power and heat savings while improving all core performance is definitely worth looking into.

    Reply
  • JayGau
    Alvar, take a look at this: https://www.pcgamesn.com/amd/ryzen-7-3700x-overclocking-benchmarks-performance
    Those guys managed to have something that actually POST at 4.3GHz on all cores with 1.4375V and you claim you do the same and it's stable but with 1.175V? Very hard to believe.
    Reply
  • Alvar "Miles" Udell
    There's been a couple of AGESA updates since they did their test, and there's also the silicon lottery. It's not Prime95 stable, but then again neither were my 1800X and FX-8350 and they never gave me any issues with their overclocks in either AIDA64 or normal usage. The voltage does fluctuate quite a bit as to be expected, a bit more than I'd like, +/- 0.025v, but as it's currently over half an hour AIDA64 stressing cache (and counting, see screenshot below), it's stable.

    Also remember that it's been several months since the Ryzen 3000 series released, going on a year, giving TSMC time to perfect their yields, whereas PCGamesN used a very early chip.


    Reply
  • razor512
    I wish they would do a deep dive into PBO and the clock offsets.
    The issue with Ryzen is that there are tradeoffs due to boost states when there are limited thread use.

    For example, the R7 3800X will boost to 4.5GHz under lightly threaded workloads, but with a manual overclock, your only choice is an all core OC that may top out at 4.3GHz. Thus a manual overclock will lower your performance in lightly threaded workloads.


    Ryzen does not allow for you to tweak the boost curve, e.g., suppose your CPU could handle 4.7GHz on 1 core, 4.6 on 2 cores, and 4.5 on 4 cores, and 4.3 on all cores when at full load. An ideal scenario would be an OC curve that would allow you to enter in a custom curve and the CPU will automatically choose the best aspect of the curve to use based on the workload.

    Since that is not available, there is a heavier push to use PBO and the auto OC function, thus we need to find a way to get someone to do a thorough test into it using average cooling such as an NH-D15.

    In focusing more on the article, they showed a test run of multiple loops of cinebench. Imagine if they had repeated the test but with better cooling, as well as with some of the PBO settings changed to show us how tyo better maintain our performance. Imagine if they specified the exact cooler used and temperatures for that graph, since precision boost has time limited boost functions that will reduce performance even if temperatures are low, unless you change that multiplier thing in the PBO settings.

    While many tasks are multithreaded, there are still make tasks that are lightly threaded, while not ideal, PBO currently offers the best chance at getting a balance of all core clock speed, and maintaining some of the lightly threaded boost speeds, thus appealing to people who are gaming where often there will be a single thread bottleneck, such as the render thread, or the AI or physics thread being a single thread in the game engine, and thus due to a lower clock speed, even though the game is not at 100% load on all cores, you have that physics thread bottlenecking because it is using 1 core worth of CPU time, and everything is waiting on that thread. In cases like that, PBO offers better performance in the game as compared to an all core 4.3GHz overclock. because the bottleneck thread may be at 4.4 or 4.5GHz instead.

    Or in productivity tasks, photoshop is heavily reliany on single threaded performance, same with adovbe after efeects and a number of other programs, but then there are effects and tasks which will load all cores equally.
    Reply
  • alextheblue
    razor512 said:
    I wish they would do a deep dive into PBO and the clock offsets.
    Agreed. PBO + Auto OC article would be nice. I would like to see if there's any advantages to using Ryzen Master vs just enabling PBO in the BIOS. I'd certainly kick on XMP in the BIOS and make sure FCLK and MCLK are 1:1 (well, as long as you're not pushing your RAM speeds too far, 3600 is the most I can afford anyway).
    Reply
  • TJ Hooker
    I actually wish someone would do a follow up investigation on manual Ryzen 3000 OC, with the latest AGESA, and possibly a newly purchased chip. In TH's original review they said the following:
    "Our resident overclocking expert Allen 'Splave' Golibersuch has also spent time with early Ryzen 3000 samples and was unable to break the 4.1 GHz barrier without sub-ambient cooling."
    A month or so later, the same Splave writes an article where he casually throws out that he overclocked a 3700X to 4.4 GHz all core with only 1.25V, and says:
    "In short, fixed frequency IS the fix for now, and maybe forever."
    But the seemingly huge change in OC results isn't even acknowledged, let alone explained. I asked him about it in the comments in that second article, but didn't get a response.

    It seems like all the info published on manual OC came out with the initial reviews right when the NDA lifted, and any subsequent investigation (as new AGESAs were released or whatever) focused purely on boost behavior, either stock or PBO/AOC.
    Reply
  • AMDIs4me
    JayGau said:
    Alvar, take a look at this: https://www.pcgamesn.com/amd/ryzen-7-3700x-overclocking-benchmarks-performance
    Those guys managed to have something that actually posts at 4.3GHz on all cores with 1.4375V and you claim you do the same and it's stable but with 1.175V? Very hard to believe.
    I know this is an old message by now, but I just wanted to share my two cents on this. With the latest bios, I can get 4.5GHZ per CCX (CCX0 it seems is my best one) and at 1.425. Now, I would never run my CPU at that voltage for longer than just a benchmark. For the curious ones, I own a MEG X570 (GodLike) currently at 1.3 without trying to fine-tune it one bit, since I am certain my CPU will outlast my need for it before it degrades if it ever does at that voltage.

    I can get 4300 all cores on my 3700X, never exceeding 75c under 100% load in my room temp, with a stock cooler. And this is what I currently use for 24/7 along with my ram that could never exceed 3200 without 1.5v lol. I am now at 3800 pushing infinity to 1900 and only 1.4v on Gskill cl 16 (3200) 64GB set.

    Previously, I gave up trying to manual OC (when they first came out) since it wouldn't even let me get 4.1-4.2GHZ with anything less than 1.41875

    Bottom line: RYZEN OC has come a long way with the latest AGESA updates. And now, this is where the silicon lottery comes into play, I suppose. Some of us can get 4.4 at 1.2 others only at 1.4, like me. 🤷
    Reply
  • AMDIs4me
    razor512 said:
    I wish they would do a deep dive into PBO and the clock offsets.
    The issue with Ryzen is that there are tradeoffs due to boost states when there are limited thread use.

    For example, the R7 3800X will boost to 4.5GHz under lightly threaded workloads, but with a manual overclock, your only choice is an all core OC that may top out at 4.3GHz. Thus a manual overclock will lower your performance in lightly threaded workloads.


    Ryzen does not allow for you to tweak the boost curve, e.g., suppose your CPU could handle 4.7GHz on 1 core, 4.6 on 2 cores, and 4.5 on 4 cores, and 4.3 on all cores when at full load. An ideal scenario would be an OC curve that would allow you to enter in a custom curve and the CPU will automatically choose the best aspect of the curve to use based on the workload.

    Since that is not available, there is a heavier push to use PBO and the auto OC function, thus we need to find a way to get someone to do a thorough test into it using average cooling such as an NH-D15.

    In focusing more on the article, they showed a test run of multiple loops of cinebench. Imagine if they had repeated the test but with better cooling, as well as with some of the PBO settings changed to show us how tyo better maintain our performance. Imagine if they specified the exact cooler used and temperatures for that graph, since precision boost has time limited boost functions that will reduce performance even if temperatures are low, unless you change that multiplier thing in the PBO settings.

    While many tasks are multithreaded, there are still make tasks that are lightly threaded, while not ideal, PBO currently offers the best chance at getting a balance of all core clock speed, and maintaining some of the lightly threaded boost speeds, thus appealing to people who are gaming where often there will be a single thread bottleneck, such as the render thread, or the AI or physics thread being a single thread in the game engine, and thus due to lower clock speed, even though the game is not at 100% load on all cores, you have that physics thread bottlenecking because it is using 1 core worth of CPU time, and everything is waiting on that thread. In cases like that, PBO offers better performance in the game as compared to an all-core 4.3GHz overclock. because the bottleneck thread may be at 4.4 or 4.5GHz instead.

    Or in productivity tasks, photoshop is heavily reliant on single-threaded performance, same with adobe after effects and a number of other programs, but then there are effects and tasks which will load all cores equally.
    I don't know if you are aware of this, but here is something I personally do. Under Ryzen master, I choose either creator or gaming profile (Creator for me) and then I drag the slider on my fastest cores to as high as it can go, normally I can hit 4.4-4.5 (3700X) with a low enough voltage, especially since it will easily hit those speeds under light load and not even get hammered by voltage. Once you've found the max for your CCX 0 and CCX 1 fastest 4 cores, you can then check under "Task manager--->Details" and locate the software that you are using "set affinity". You can then untick all the cores that are not running at the high frequencies, this will give it access to the so-called fastest cores that are currently running at the highest speed your chip can handle.

    This same method could be used for games, as well. I personally don't see it as worthy, and I don't know if you would really gain performance vs all core 4.2-4.3 but I have verified that it works. As for the "Is it better than all core 4.3" I do not know, that is up to the individual to decide... All I do know is that my single thread application(s) will run at 4.5GHZ or 4.7 if your CPU can indeed go that high when I only give them access to said cores through "set affinity". Remember, do not mirror the speed of one core to all the rest. We want to manually boost each of the fastest cores manually, through some trial and error (or HWINFO) you can see how high they can go and get a somewhat reliable voltage level to work with. I personally was able to 4.4 all 4 of those cores with only 1.33125... You see, since those are the only 4 cores that are running fast AF, the other ones are only running at 3520-3600, so the CPU is not requiring high voltage to maintain only 4 cores. Depending on the lottery, of course.
    Reply