Overclocking Ryzen 3000

Experience with the ASRock X570 Phantom Gaming-ITX/TB3

Sometimes it's assumed that smaller form factor motherboards tend to not overclock as well as larger ATX boards. In the real world, the differences are relatively minute, mostly being limited by cramped builds and cooling that doesn't perform as well. In an open environment, there have been mini-ITX motherboards capable of taking world records. Another issue is that on the smaller boards, there is certainly less room for some componentry and when it comes to overclocking, there is much less room for error with the need for vendors to get things right from the outset. But when the hardware is done right, users shouldn't expect much difference.

From the perspective of overclocking, ASRock's Phantom Gaming firmware is wholesome with plenty of options to overclock both processors and memory. To achieve most overclocks, users only need to concern themselves with settings including CPU Core Frequency, CPU VCore voltage, and with the excessive heat generated by AMD's 7nm desktop processors, adequate cooling. For memory overclocking, users can enable X.M.P profiles within the OC Tweaker section or go about customizing settings through the memory frequency, memory voltage, and the FCLK/Infinity Fabric frequency settings. For more advanced tuning, ASRock offers a DRAM Timing Configurator which allows users to tweak primary, secondary, and tertiary memory settings. 

Aside from a couple of high-performance memory overclocking profiles, enabling Precision Boost Overdrive, and an Eco CPU profile, there is nothing else terms of automatic overclocking options. Unlike some of ASRock's firmware, the main screen actually lacks anything of real substance and users looking to enable X.M.P memory profiles have to navigate around the OC Tweaker section looking for it. It would have been nice to have more options in regards to overclocking profiles, but it's not surprising given the limitations of overclocking the current generation of Ryzen 3000 processors. There's a lot of heat to deal with at what is considered the middle of the run overclocks such as 4.3 GHz, and if and when AMD's second-generation on 7nm comes around, users will be expecting a little more from firmware and core clock speeds.

Overclocking Methodology

Our standard overclocking methodology is as follows. We select the automatic overclock options and test for stability with POV-Ray and OCCT to simulate high-end workloads. These stability tests aim to catch any immediate causes for memory or CPU errors.

For manual overclocks, based on the information gathered from the previous testing, starts off at a nominal voltage and CPU multiplier, and the multiplier is increased until the stability tests are failed. The CPU voltage is increased gradually until the stability tests are passed, and the process repeated until the motherboard reduces the multiplier automatically (due to safety protocol) or the CPU temperature reaches a stupidly high level (105ºC+). Our testbed is not in a case, which should push overclocks higher with fresher (cooler) air.

Overclocking Results

The ASRock X570 Phantom Gaming-ITX/TB3 is a solid example of VDroop working correctly with the load line calibration settings set to default settings. When manually overclocking, the variation of VDroop ranges from 0.006 V at 4.3 GHz, to 0.013 and 0.019 V on the CPU VCore at full load when compared with what was set in the firmware. All of the VDroop observed was undervolted meaning it had a very positive impact on power consumption at full load, and we experienced very consistent POV-Ray performance as we went up in each 100 MHz increment. 

The highlight is the Eco mode which the firmware states is set to 45 W with our Ryzen 7 3700X processor. This is a 65 W TDP processor and when using the Eco Mode profile, we saw good POV-Ray performance with an equally good showing in power consumption too. In relation to manual overclocks, the Eco Mode on the ASRock X570 Phantom Gaming-ITX/TB3 performed similarly to our POV-Ray result at 3.8 GHz; not for users looking for high-performance, but perfect for small form factor enthusiasts looking for a good 24/7 mode where heat may be a limiting factor.

Unlike our experience with the GIGABYTE X570 Aorus Xtreme motherboard, enabling precision boost overdrive on the ASRock X570 Phantom Gaming-ITX/TB3 had little to no effect on performance over the default settings which suggests the firmware is at fault somewhere. Our default run did run a little on the warm side compared to what we have seen in previous X570 reviews and the extra heat can be attributed to a load CPU VCore value of 1.337; there is nothing 'leet' about this and we expected a little better.

Gaming Performance Power Delivery Thermal Analysis
Comments Locked

64 Comments

View All Comments

  • DanaGoyette - Thursday, October 10, 2019 - link

    I'll bet nobody buys micro ATX partly because all the micro ATX boards are crippled in things such as audio codec (enjoy your ALC887), Ethernet (yay Realtek), or in Asrock's case, poor VRM efficiency.

    Nobody buys because there are no good boards, no good boards because nobody buys.
  • TheinsanegamerN - Thursday, October 10, 2019 - link

    I remembre when there were tons of micro ATX chioces, the gigabyte snimer M.3, the asus boards, ece.

    Even intel only has two good micro ATX boards, both from asus. Nothing from gigabyte, nothing good from MSI or ASrock. At least the TUF micro has a good audio chip (Realtek ALC S1200A) and intel NIC.
  • Jasmij - Wednesday, October 9, 2019 - link

    Throughout the review I see much talk about Thunderbolt but benchmarks are missing.
    This board failed certification by Intel.
    https://thunderbolttechnology.net/products?tid=15&...

    Can we get some Thunderbolt compatablity and speed tests?
  • DCide - Wednesday, October 9, 2019 - link

    I would like to see tests too, but I don’t see how this motherboard “failed certification” simply by being absent from a list where the newest motherboard I could find was the 2018 Z390 Designare.
  • jeremyshaw - Wednesday, October 9, 2019 - link

    Also, didn't Intel already open standard Thunderbolt? They may not be in charge of certification anymore.
  • DCide - Wednesday, October 9, 2019 - link

    Yes, they did - right about the time the list appears to have stopped growing!
  • jab701 - Thursday, October 10, 2019 - link

    FYI, they are still in charge of certification.

    If you want to use the thunderbolt logo on your device you *have* to pass certification.

    I read that even though USB 4 (or is it USB4) will integrate thunderbolt, if you wish to use the thunderbolt logo it will *still* have to pass intels certification process. This sounds a bit dodgey but if you think about it, I would rather be sure my graphics card enclosure is going to work properly.

    Given The number of USB device out there which *apparently* conform to the USB standard but do not interoperate properly, I would say that USB certification might not be stringent enough.

    (I say this as an Electronic Engineer who has found numerous issues getting kit to work together properly in systems I design and use as part of my job).
  • Cooe - Thursday, December 19, 2019 - link

    This is so freaking false I don't even know where to begin. To legally put the official Thunderbolt logo & branding on ANY for sale product, it MUST pass Intel's certification process. This is a certified board, regardless of what you've read. In fact, it's the major price tag that comes with this certification process for all non-Intel hardware that has kept Thunderbolt off AMD (in an officially supported capacity) until this point (Intel waives the certification fee on products w/ Intel CPU's).

    This is made explicitly clear with the fact that unofficially Thunderbolt 3 works just fine (w/ the Titan Ridge PCIe card) on most all other AM4 as well as X399 boards (with the small exception of device hot swap support not working), but w/o said pricey certification this isn't an "officially" supported setup.
  • andychow - Wednesday, October 9, 2019 - link

    "a DisplayPort 1.4 input for users looking to drive multiple displays with resolutions of up to 4K from a discrete graphics card". How???

    The DP goes from your discrete graphic card into the motherboard. Then what?
  • jeremyshaw - Wednesday, October 9, 2019 - link

    It is for TB3.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now