zen 2 degradation

[xg32]

buildzoid just posted on youtube about his chip degrading below stock speed, a quick google showing users on reddit losing clocks around 1.3v within a month, some degrading even below 1.3v around the 3 month mark. Looks like tech jesus' original vid on undervolting seems to be the way to go.

[Samfisher]

Might be more useful if you linked your sources bud

[xg32]

6 minutes ago, Samfisher said:

Might be more useful if you linked your sources bud

https://www.youtube.com/post/UgwIDprhUtrJzFuhW0N4AaABCQ

 

looks like the safe voltage is around 1.25v~

 

anyway, used to push my sandy/ivy pretty hard and degrade after 2 years or so is pretty much acceptable, but 1-3months is pretty damn ridiculous under 1.3v and definitely lower than what most expected

[GoldenLag]

33 minutes ago, xg32 said:

anyway, used to push my sandy/ivy pretty hard and degrade after 2 years or so is pretty much acceptable, but 1-3months is pretty damn ridiculous under 1.3v and definitely lower than what most expected

which comment points to above 1,25v degrades?

 

the examples i saw did 1.34 and not the now standard 1,325v upper limit suggested these days. 

[Samfisher]

Does this only matter if you messed with the voltage manually?  Mine's at stock.

[xg32]

13 minutes ago, GoldenLag said:

which comment points to above 1,25v degrades?

 

the examples i saw did 1.34 and not the now standard 1,325v upper limit suggested these days. 

somewhere in there some1 did 1.275 and it still degraded after 3 months, so i'm just guessing on the 1.25. i guess at this point we have to wonder if pbo's safe. AMD probably didn't test it that long. I'm hoping buildzoid/tech jesus make a video on it soon lol.

[GoldenLag]

1 minute ago, xg32 said:

somewhere in there some1 did 1.275 and it still degraded after 3 months

now that is an importance source, but you would need to link it aswell

 

using word seach i cant see any mention of that voltage. 

[Sir0Tek]

28 minutes ago, xg32 said:

somewhere in there some1 did 1.275 and it still degraded after 3 months, so i'm just guessing on the 1.25. i guess at this point we have to wonder if pbo's safe. AMD probably didn't test it that long. I'm hoping buildzoid/tech jesus make a video on it soon lol.

I am not sure they(he) is using pbo and such. Seems mostly like the traditional oc with fixed settings.

[ewitte]

Odd because before I did negative offset I was getting about 1.35v all core with just PBO on with stress tests.  Just letting it do its thing.  It is maxing at about 1.272v with the negative offset.  It still hits 1.35v with lighter loads.

[GoldenLag]

1 hour ago, ewitte said:

It still hits 1.35v with lighter loads.

that is expected as low current loads can have higher voltage without degredation. 

[porina]

I'll have to dig it up later as I'm about to go into a meeting, but there was an interview posted on Anandtech where design considerations of Zen 2 were discussed. One is that AMD included a consideration for ageing characteristic. Basically they run so close to the limit, they know as the CPU gets older it will need more voltage for a given clock and it will adjust itself.

 

Speculation on my part, if overclocking of any form is involved it may accelerate this process.

[nick name]

The Stilt had his pre-release specimen start to "degrade" pretty quickly, but he was testing a lot.  

[porina]

Found it:

Quote

With electromigration, there are two solutions. One is to set the frequency and voltage of the processor low enough that over the expected age of the CPU it won’t ever become an issue, as it happens at such a slow rate – alternatively set the voltage high enough that it won’t become an issue over the lifetime. The second solution is to monitor the effect of electromigration as the core is used over months and years, then adjust the voltage upwards to compensate. This requires a greater level of detection and management inside the CPU, and is arguably a more difficult problem.

 

What AMD does in Ryzen 3000 is the second solution. The first solution results in lower-than-ideal performance, and so the second solution allows AMD to ride the voltage/frequency limits of a given core. The upshot of this is that AMD also knows (through TSMC’s reporting) how long each chip or each core is expected to last, and the results in their eyes are very positive, even with a single core getting the majority of the traffic. For users that are worried about this, the question is, do you trust AMD?

From: https://www.anandtech.com/show/14873/reaching-for-turbo-aligning-perception-with-amds-frequency-metrics-/3

 

I mis-remembered in part in that it wasn't one of the many interviews they did with AMD, but close enough.