1700x can't exceed 3.8

[Draydince]

I currently have a Ryzen 1700x, but it seems that I cannot get past 3.8ghz with it and my Asrock X370 Taichi.

I bought both the Taichi and the x version over the regular 1700 with the sole intent on overclocking.

I understand silicon lottery and everything, nothing's guaranteed, but I figured since the 1700x has a base turbo of 3.8, I would have a decent chance of getting slightly higher clocks than that.

I can get 3.8 at a relatively low voltage, only 1.29vcore with level 2 LLC.

I can pass Prime, Intel Burn Test, all without issue with minimal heating issues.

But the moment I try to go past 3.8, I crash. Even 3.825 is unstable.

Being able to achieve 3.8 with 1.29v I figured ok, there's plenty of room left before I enter dangerous voltage territory. Unfortunately, all the way up to 1.41 proves unstable and I've read that 1.4 is about the cut off limit for safe voltages so I didn't try to push any further.

Did I just get extremely unlucky, or is there something I'm missing? The Taichi is a little bit more confusing to work with compared to some other boards I've used, but I'm not completely new to OC'ing either so I'm wondering if maybe there's some cryptic, non obvious setting in my bios that I'm missing.

I do have all of the power saving features such as cool and quiet, c6, etc disabled as well.

[Armakar]

that's average for a 1700x.... usually get 3.8 on average, 3.9 if your lucky and 4.0 if your very lucky. 

[Draydince]

12 minutes ago, Armakar said:

that's average for a 1700x.... usually get 3.8 on average, 3.9 if your lucky and 4.0 if your very lucky. 

Ah, damn. I've just seen so many people saying they got 3.9 - 4ghz with their 1700 I figured the chances of getting similar results would be pretty good for a 1700x.

[Armakar]

1 minute ago, Draydince said:

Ah, damn. I've just seen so many people saying they got 4ghz with their 1700 I figured the chances of getting similar results would be pretty good for a 1700x.

Well, the 1700, 1700X and 1800X are all really the same chip, just the 1700X and 1800X are slighly more likely to overclock better due to being base-clocked higher (guaranteeing some form of oc), and they also have XFR. They are all pretty much the same chip though, your likely hearing about people getting 4GHZ with a 1700 because that's more surprising (and therefore people will talk about it) then getting 3.8 which is pretty common.  Your chip isn't bad, it's average. 

Also, iirc, "turbo boost" on chips doesn't boost every core, it usually boosts 1 or 2 cores at a time. So when your chip is boosting to 3.8GHZ, that's across one or two cores, whereas overclocking clocks every core to 3.8.

[Draydince]

Just now, Armakar said:

Well, the 1700, 1700X and 1800X are all really the same chip, just the 1700X and 1800X are slighly more likely to overclock better due to being base-clocked higher (guaranteeing some form of oc), and they also have XFR. They are all pretty much the same chip though, your likely hearing about people getting 4GHZ with a 1700 because that's more surprising (and therefore people will talk about it) then getting 3.8 which is pretty common.  Your chip isn't bad, it's average. 

Also, iirc, "turbo boost" on chips doesn't boost every core, it usually boosts 1 or 2 cores at a time. So when your chip is boosting to 3.8GHZ, that's across one or two cores, whereas overclocking clocks every core to 3.8.

Yeah, I know they're the same chip, just slightly better binned. It's that slightly better binning factor that made me think I would more than likely get similar results to those 3.9-4ghz 1700's. But you're right, I didn't think about the fact that more people would be likely to post about their 4ghz milestone as opposed to the average chips.

It is for one core, but typically matching all cores for that single core boost has been universally obtainable with every chip I've had, with a little wiggle room past that - so I guess I was just hoping for this to match previous experience. 

Oh well. It's not a huge deal. The performance difference isn't giant, but it would have just been nice to get that 4ghz for my own happiness. Luckily I only paid the price of a 1700 for the x version, I don't think I could ever justify actually paying the price difference for just slightly higher base clocks on an overclockable chip.

[DarkSmith2]

you got unlucky.

 

[DarkSmith2]

42 minutes ago, Armakar said:

that's average for a 1700x.... usually get 3.8 on average, 3.9 if your lucky and 4.0 if your very lucky. 

its not, 3,8ghz is what 100% of 1700x are able to do.

[Kinda Bottlenecked]

Welp. Better luck with your next cpu.