Overclocking The Ryzen 2000 Series APUs: The Conclusion

If we go back to our Ryzen 2000 Series APU review, it is clear that the Ryzen 3 2200G ($99) and Ryzen 5 2400G ($169) are true winners when it comes to building a gaming system on a budget, without making too  much of a sacrifice, especially when focusing on popular gaming titles that do not require ultimate horsepower. Puting the Zen architecture with a good amount of Vega cores is mouthwatering for budget aficionados, as Intel offers nothing for this performance at this price. From an overclocking perspective, the Ryzen 2000 series does have more to offer, providing the system is well-rounded enough and capable of doing so; the APUs may be fully unlocked, but the system will need a B350/X370 chipset board to progress above the defaulted stock specifications.

In our testing, a consistent jump in performance was apparent when the CPU frequency, integrated graphics frequency, and memory, were all overclocked. We have already seen and delved into how memory scales on Ryzen CPUs, but with the capability of increasing and overclocking the Vega cores on the iGPU proves very fruitful in gaming. The only caveat with overclocking comes through extra power consumption and heat, but even with a modest overclock of 3.9 GHz on the 2200G, pushing memory up to DDR4-3333, and the integrated graphics to 1360 MHz, temperatures are well within the recommended guidelines when using a big cooler. This might be a drawback however, as the cooler bundled with the APUs was not up to the task of such a heavy push.

There are reports of the Ryzen 2000 series APUs going further than our sample was able to achieve. In each case our limit was on the temperatures, so we have a future article planned on delidding the processors and testing the difference to see if it is worth popping the heatspreader off to get a few more degrees off. As it stands, overclocking the Ryzen APUs has many benefits, and although they'll never reach the performance of processor at double the cost, for the market they are intended, an extra 7-30% (depending on the benchmark) is quite handy to have.

Overclocking is Dead: Long Live Overclocking

If we go back to the previous decade, processors such as the Q6600 were a prime example of when tweaking more than just the multiplier was required to get a decent overclock: the base clock was paramount in making extra performance. At the time, for that chip at least, the core multiplier was down at x9, and a base clock of 266 MHz gave the chip a frequency of 2.4 GHz. The only way to push the CPU frequency beyond that was by increasing the base clock. 

The times where base clock overclocking was an important tuning factor to increasing performance has now changed. There have been times since where going +/- 10 MHz have been possible since, although that depended on the rest of the system (PCIe, chipset, DRAM) remaining stable. The only real need for base clock overclocking is in a competitive nature, where people compete against each other to see who has the bigger overclock. Being able to tune that important extra frequency on the CPU and memory can be the difference between a world record score or 30th place.

Even with AMD’s Zen core architecture, there has been the question popping up around on reddit and various communities about whether or not it’s worth overclocking purely with the multiplier or adding in some base clock tuning. The fact that the majority of the motherboards currently available on the AM4 socket do not have external clock generators means that extreme base clock tuning isn’t possible, and doesn’t give much weight to the users that want it. But the upside is that it is a lot easier for mainstream users to overclock especially processors like the Ryzen CPUs and Ryzen APUs. 

Is Overclocking the Ryzen 2000 Series APUs Worth it?

The Ryzen 2000 series really can benefit from being pushed beyond the rated specifications by overclocking. Even within the safe parameters as specified by AMD in terms of voltages, the gains when the CPU core clock, graphics frequency, and memory are all pushed equate to a nice jump in performance. This can be the difference between playing at a decent frame rate and the game chopping around. Sure, the Ryzen series as a whole can benefit from an overclock, but for integrated gaming, overclocking the integrated graphics can a difference if the user requires the extra performance but doesn’t want to be burdened with the extra cost of upgrading.

Overclocking Results: CPU and Gaming
Comments Locked

63 Comments

View All Comments

  • 0ldman79 - Wednesday, April 18, 2018 - link

    Setting the multiplier manually automatically disables Cool'n'quiet, can it be reenabled afterwards while keeping the higher multiplier?

    I plan on overclocking mine the same as my FX 6300, keep Cool'n'quiet, keep turbo and just push it all higher. I like the idle dropping down to nothing and I prefer to keep my turbo so single threaded apps (still have a few) get everything they can possibly get.
  • gavbon - Wednesday, April 18, 2018 - link

    You can re-enable it no problem, I only found it to automatically disable Cool'n'Quiet on MSI boards, there's absolutely nothing stopping you enabling it again :)
  • YoloPascual - Wednesday, April 18, 2018 - link

    Should have oced the gpu to 1600 instead of the cpu.
  • krazyfrog - Wednesday, April 18, 2018 - link

    Image compression is making my eyes bleed.
  • PeachNCream - Wednesday, April 18, 2018 - link

    The images in the article are fine and your eyes are working well enough for you to broadcast your whining to the rest of the world. Besides, the value in the article is in the written content, not the pretty pictures. If you want pictures as the primary content delivery mechanism, go buy a bunch of pre-literacy board books like The Very Hungry Caterpillar.
  • dromoxen - Friday, April 20, 2018 - link

    thess were my exact thoughts as many people here ... underclock the CPU and overclock the GPU for gaming (spend your heat budget on the GPU) and then on other tasks overclock the cpu and underclock the gpu) BUT I expect this cannot be done on one windows session . Actually using ryzen Master , it probably could . But youd need some scripts to o switch.
    If i ever take the plunge (waiting for 4000mhz dram) will examine this...
  • John_M - Friday, April 20, 2018 - link

    A few things trouble me about this article.

    Firstly, the charts for 7-zip and 3DPM are incorrect. If lower really is better, then they show the stock 2200G outperforming the overclocked 2400G. If they are so blatantly wrong, then can the others be trusted?

    Secondly, DDR4 defaults to 2133 MHz (2 x 1066) if you "forget" to enable XMP, not 2400. This is not a good representation of stock RAM frequency. I would have preferred to see you set 2933 MHz, as specified by AMD.

    Thirdly, the Thermaltake Floe Riing 360 is an unrealistically expensive choice of cooler for either of those processors. Who spends more on the cooler than on the processor?

    Fourthly, you can overclock the iGPU and adjust the SoC voltage in the ASRock UEFI BIOS, but it's rather hidden away!
  • cpupro - Saturday, April 21, 2018 - link

    ASUS have the best looking UEFI.
  • Galatian - Wednesday, April 25, 2018 - link

    Thanks for the test, but I hope you will test all parts separately? I mean the FPS increase probably stems from the huge increase from the faster RAM, but you make it sound like the CPU and GPU overclock take equal parts.
  • ballsystemlord - Wednesday, April 25, 2018 - link

    Where did you get your data from when you wrote?

    "ed: I'm in the sliding scale camp, for what it is worth. I find it amusing to note that DRAM bit-errors, unaffected by overclocking, can happen on the scale of one per GB per four years (or less). That's about a worse case scenario, but it translates to about one bit-error per three months in a system with 16GB. that is something that can't be controlled by stability testing. Hopefully it occurs in DRAM that isn't being used."

    Thanks!

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now