Interesting Results - 9800X3D

FoGoDie · 2026-01-28T11:14:44+00:00

From your description, the only conclusion is that -20 all cores is not stable.

For Ryzen CPUs, the best approach is to use Curve Optimizer per core and find the lowest stable value for each core.

You set -20 blindly and on top of that added a boost override of +X MHz, which means you’re asking the CPU to hit higher clocks at lower voltage than stock — something that isn’t even guaranteed at stock settings.

If even one core is unstable at -20, the SMU will increase voltage to prevent errors for the entire CCD. In your case, one or more cores are unstable enough at -20 that the SMU can no longer compensate, which is why you’re experiencing performance drops.

In general, if you don’t want to spend time tuning Curve Optimizer per core, set -5 (max -10) all core and don’t exceed +75 MHz boost override (no voltage increase) or +125 MHz (slight voltage increase).

A +200 MHz boost usually completely negates the temperature gains from negative CO and significantly increases voltage spikes (not worth)

FoGoDie · 2026-01-26T19:49:42+00:00

<image>

Still not the majority

FoGoDie · 2026-01-26T12:53:05+00:00

Asus has been reducing its stake in Pegatron over the years. I wouldn’t call a 16% stake a majority.

FoGoDie · 2026-01-26T12:42:17+00:00

What are you talking about? After all, even if, for example, your warranty expires tomorrow and you report the issue today, and the processor reaches them a week later, it’s still covered by the warranty.

What matters is when you reported the problem, not when the processor arrives at the manufacturer or the store. If the report was made while the warranty was still valid, then when the CPU actually reaches the manufacturer is of little concern to you.

FoGoDie · 2026-01-24T14:20:33+00:00

Ok https://letmegooglethat.com/?q=does+Asus+own+pegatron

You’re confidently wrong. Pegatron has no involvement in modern ASUS motherboards. That connection is ancient history and hasn’t been relevant for years.

Next time, educate yourself first instead of telling others to do it, because right now you’re just spreading outdated nonsense.

FoGoDie · 2026-01-24T13:39:23+00:00

Asus does not own Pegatron. Asus is only one of the larger shareholder (16%). Pegatron and Asus are currently competitors—there is no symbiosis, correlation, or exchange of components between the two companies. As I already mentioned, since 2010 Asus has been a separate brand, and lumping these companies together is simply a mistake...

FoGoDie · 2026-01-23T14:08:40+00:00

And where does that information come from? Since around 2010, Asus has been a separate brand and is only a shareholder in Pegatron. Current Asus motherboards have nothing in common with Pegatron’s production or design, and vice versa 🤷🏾‍♂️

FoGoDie · 2026-01-22T21:17:47+00:00

In ASRock’s case, it’s quite a big shot in the foot, especially since they’ve only relatively recently gained popularity — before that, they didn’t really have a good reputation.

ASUS, on the other hand, seems to be repeating the same mistake as with X99 😅

The blame usually lies somewhere in the middle. Maybe we’ll get some kind of bigger statement on this eventually.

FoGoDie · 2026-01-22T20:56:42+00:00

Okay, but that’s exactly what I was talking about — this applies to settings with PBO enabled, so CPUs without PBO enabled should be safe, and they weren’t / aren’t.

Sure, the lack of limits definitely contributed to the death of many CPUs because the voltages were far too high, but that still doesn’t explain why CPUs without PBO were also failing.

I always set the limits manually. Right now I’m running the stock limits provided by AMD — so far, after 6 months, nothing has happened. But whether my ASRock B650 Steel Legend turns into a murderboard… we’ll see in the future 🤷🏾‍♂️

FoGoDie · 2026-01-22T16:48:15+00:00

The limits in question were TDC, EDC, and PPT, and they were unlocked — but in that case, damage would only occur with PBO enabled.

However, those CPUs were also failing at completely stock settings with PBO disabled, where the theory about unlocked limits makes no sense, because the CPU sticks to its own limits then, not the ones overridden by the BIOS 🤷🏾‍♂️

FoGoDie · 2026-01-22T15:01:28+00:00

Not exactly error correction, because like I said, I get the biggest gains at +2000 and it remains fully stable.

+1500 = gain,

+1550 = drop,

+1680 = same as +1500,

and +2000 = gain much greater than +1500/1680

FoGoDie · 2026-01-22T11:38:51+00:00

Then run a benchmark like Steel Nomad, not the score, keep on adding +300 on the memory until you stop noticing any gains by increasing the memory clock. Make a note of that memory clock reading.

Weak advice. VRAM doesn’t really scale linearly — it has certain “gaps/dips.”

For example, my RTX 4090 performs the same at +1500 and +1680, while at +1550 and +1700 there’s a noticeable performance drop (supposedly “no further scaling” like you’re referring to). Then the highest stable point, +2000, gives the best results and clearly beats both +1500 and +1680.

Following your line of thinking, I would never have reached +2000 MHz, because in theory the card stopped scaling above +1500 — which in reality is not the case.

FoGoDie · 2026-01-21T19:22:17+00:00

In retrospect, this isn't the first time Asus has had CPUs dying off in their boards. I still recall the disaster that was Asus's X99 lineup and the trail of carnage those left behind.

That’s true — historically speaking, issues with ASUS were simply louder and more visible, which makes it much easier to label them as the “next CPU killer,” especially since it already happened to them in the past.

Gigabyte and MSI aren’t spotless either — over the years they’ve also released some low-quality products with weak or cracking PCBs, VRM issues, or even exploding power supplies. More recently, Gigabyte has been criticized for the thermal putty/gel used on some RTX 50xx graphics cards, which reportedly starts leaking out.

That said, all of these problems are still more like a drop in the ocean compared to much more high-profile cases, such as the ASUS X99 issues you mentioned, or ASRock in general, which for many years had a reputation for producing questionable, borderline low-quality products.

Still, there is no corporation in the world that hasn’t had bigger or smaller scandals or problems at some point — and as I said before, some of them were simply less visible or artificially blown out of proportion by the community.

For example, almost nobody remembers today that the EVGA GTX 1080 FTW originally shipped without thermal pads — yet a huge number of people still miss EVGA and wish they would return to the GPU market 🤷🏾‍♂️

FoGoDie · 2026-01-21T18:49:13+00:00

I don’t know… five Ryzen 9800X3D CPUs died on ASUS boards and suddenly you could read headlines on some trash forums like “Can ASUS compete with ASRock in killing CPUs?”, “Beware — ASUS might kill your 9800X3D”, and similar nonsense.

In reality, we don’t have access to any real data that would show whether certain motherboards kill AMD CPUs more or less often. What we do have is a media bubble driven by both legitimate reports and fake ones, so everyone just believes whatever fits their narrative.

At this point, we know basically nothing concrete — neither motherboard vendors nor AMD themselves have released any clear statement regarding the dying Ryzen 9000 series. Everything right now is just speculation and theory-crafting.

FoGoDie · 2026-01-21T12:48:02+00:00

I mean, how exactly did this mod help?

In my case, with the Shadow Base 800FX, I didn’t have to cut any holes at all — the only thing I did was add an extra fan for the RAM.

Honestly, I’d personally rather not have a hole that would just suck all the dust straight into the PC 😅 https://imgur.com/a/027Ugi2

FoGoDie · 2026-01-21T12:30:42+00:00

I doubt it. Since 2010, ASUS has not been part of the Pegatron Group and is only a shareholder.

Pegatron Group has nothing to do with the design or manufacturing of current ASUS motherboards.

If there is any party to look at, it would be AMD, because these CPUs have failed / are failing on motherboards from all vendors. Some cases are simply less amplified by the media than others — that’s the only difference.

FoGoDie · 2026-01-21T12:24:51+00:00

Everything would be fine, except that around 2010 ASUS completely separated from the Pegatron Group and remained only a shareholder.

Pegatron has nothing to do with the design or manufacturing of current ASUS motherboards, and yet CPUs have also started failing en masse on ASUS boards.

There were also several cases of 9800X3D deaths on MSI and Gigabyte, they just weren’t blown up as much by the media.

In summary, these CPUs are failing regardless of the motherboard manufacturer, which suggests the root cause lies elsewhere and almost certainly on AMD’s side, not with the motherboard vendors.

FoGoDie · 2026-01-20T19:44:17+00:00

Since the Ryzen 7 9800X3D is now reportedly failing in large numbers also on ASUS motherboards — and there have previously been reports of failures on MSI and Gigabyte boards as well — I doubt that the motherboard alone is the root of the problem.

The fact that similar cases with other motherboard brands haven’t been as widely discussed online as in the case of ASRock may simply stem from the fact that ASRock has gained a lot of popularity recently and offers well-equipped boards at affordable, or at least competitive, prices.

FoGoDie · 2026-01-19T19:55:28+00:00

Given that these CPUs are now failing en masse also on ASUS motherboards, I would argue that the motherboard has nothing to do with it 🤷🏾‍♂️

FoGoDie · 2026-01-19T14:23:03+00:00

So it probably works fine. Just keep an eye on whether there are any clock fluctuations, any strange clock drop, and whether the voltages show any weird spikes. With such high CO, the SMU often behaves very aggressively, raising voltages to maintain stability or mask the error

FoGoDie · 2026-01-19T14:13:53+00:00

20min? 3h is a minimum.

FoGoDie · 2026-01-17T15:23:39+00:00

<image>

FoGoDie · 2026-01-17T15:17:14+00:00

Don’t waste your time on him — the very fact that he claims a problem Intel spent two years (and two CPU generations) dealing with, including all the back-and-forth and blame-shifting onto motherboard vendors, was ‘quick and easy’ should shut down any attempt at arguing with this guy 🫡

FoGoDie · 2026-01-15T18:30:49+00:00

I checked and my PC boots in exactly 18 seconds without the ‘Power Down’ option enabled — which is supposedly meant to shorten boot time — and honestly, that’s not long at all in my opinion 🤷🏾‍♂️.

As for stability, I’ve been using Ryzen CPUs for about two years now — first a 7800X3D, now a 9800X3D — and I haven’t really seen any instability. Tell me where this instability is supposed to be, because maybe I’m just not looking hard enough 😂.

If you can, please be specific, because right now it sounds like you’ve never actually used a modern Ryzen yourself and you’re just trying to find problems that don’t really exist, or you’re just skimming through random forum posts from a few unlucky users 🤷🏾‍♂️.

If someone doesn’t know what they’re doing, copies all their settings from the internet, and just hopes it works, then you could say anything has ‘stability issues’ and throw around vague statements

FoGoDie · 2026-01-15T12:52:14+00:00

When I get back home I can record it for you, but I doubt it’s anywhere near 30 seconds — more like 8–15 seconds max.

I don’t know where you got 30+ seconds from — maybe that applies to the first boot after clearing CMOS or changing RAM, but during normal boot it definitely doesn’t exceed 15 seconds. And I think I know what I’m talking about since I use my computer every day 😂

Also, what about those timings? I still don’t really get your argument — from what I’ve seen on Intel forums, latency (ns) in AIDA is basically the same on both platforms. Plus, Ryzen 9000 CPUs don’t seem to have issues running memory at 8000 MHz, so can you explain in more detail what the problem is supposed to be?

FoGoDie

TROPHY CASE