u/LostEconomist7923

I'm currently manually overclocking my 9950X3D, and I have a really strange BIOS issue.

In the first picture, when CPU Ratio Mode = All Core, I can manually enter the CPU clock ratio without any problem.

However, as soon as I switch CPU Ratio Mode = Per CCX (second picture), the CPU Clock Ratio option disappears completely.

Previously, when I selected Per CCX, the BIOS would automatically show separate options for:

CCD0 Ratio :

CCD1 Ratio :

so I could set different multipliers for each CCD.

Now those options are completely gone.

Here's what I've already tried:

1. Updated the BIOS to the latest version.

It didn't fix the issue, so I flashed back to my previous BIOS version. Still exactly the same problem.

2. This actually happened on older BIOS versions too. I have several BIOS profiles saved in Favorites for overclocking. Oddly enough, depending on which saved profile I loaded, the Per CCX (CCD0/CCD1 Ratio) options would sometimes appear and sometimes disappear, even on the same BIOS version.

3. I've cleared CMOS countless times.

No difference.

I have no idea what's causing this anymore.

Has anyone experienced this before or knows what BIOS setting controls whether the CCD0/CCD1 Ratio options appear?

I'm really stuck and would greatly appreciate any help. 🙏

BTW my mainboard is : GIGABYTE AUROS PRO ICE REV 1.0

Just got my hands on a fresh 9950x3d and did a quick cinebench tests both R23 and 2026.

I simply loaded the exact same BIOS profile I was using on my old 9800X3D, and it booted right up without any issues. Hopefully that's a good sign that this chip has a stronger memory controller.

Looks like I'll have plenty to tinker with over the next few days.

The temp peaked at 89. That's a bit on the high side right? I'll probably start by dialing in the voltage again since I just used a rough estimate to get things up and running.

I heard cinebench 2026 is also quite sensitive to memory performance, so it'd be great if I can either push the RAM frequency higher or tighten timings like cl or trcd even further.

Anyway, that's my first impressions after taking my new toy for a quick spin!

I picked up a 9070 XT Taichi three days ago, and after spending some time testing it, I wanted to share my thoughts.

​

I've used the Mercury, Nitro+, Gaming OC, and Steel Legend so far and i'm confident saying that, among all the 9070 XT models currently on the market, the ASRock Taichi is the king of raw performance. It has the highest power limit of any 9070 XT, and in my experience, it absolutely puts that extra headroom to good use.

​

If you're considering buying a 9070 XT and your #1 priority is performance, I would strongly recommend the Taichi.

​

It's usually significantly cheaper than cards that are considered to be in the same tier, such as the Mercury, Nitro+, and Red Devil, yet in terms of pure benchmark performance it can absolutely dominate all three.

​

Of course... that's only if raw performance is your main concern. 😆

​

Mercury: Best thermals

Red Devil: Good potentials

Nitro+: Most balanced overall

​

Taichi: Absolute performance monster 👍👍

Picked up my 9070 XT Taichi this morning (6/10).

Got home, threw it in my system, and immediately ran Steel Nomad.

Pretty happy with the result. Not a bad score at all.

The Taichi seems to be a great card so far. 👍

** I'm not a serious overclocker. I just do this for fun and out of curiosity. Don't take it too seriously—it's just a fun experiment. 🙂

Tested CPU: Ryzen 7 9800X3D

Tested GPU: RX 9070 XT Steel Legend

Tested RAM: G.Skill Trident Z5 Royal 32GB 6400 CL 28-38-34-30 vs Stock

As shown in the picture:

- Tightened every timing my system would allow.

- Not just primary timings. Secondary and tertiary timings included.

- At these settings, lowering even a single timing by 1 causes TM5 to fail.

- Might still be able to reduce voltage a little, but RAM temps already average around 63°C.

- Stability tested with TM5 Extreme for 14 hours.

- Also passed Cinebench with a manually overclocked 5.5 GHz all-core CPU.

With that out of the way, here are the benchmark results.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

<Pass Mark results>

The memory benchmark score improved by over 1,000 points.

The most noticeable change was latency, dropping from 57ns to 39ns.

*I know this isn't as rigorous or accurate as something like AIDA64, but I wanted to show the difference on the surface.

Once again, this is all just for fun. 😁

<Time Spy results>

GPU: RX 9070 XT Steel Legend

As shown in the screenshots, the overall score difference was roughly 1,500 points. Huge.

The GPU score itself didn't change much, but the CPU score increased by more than 3,000 points — about a 20% improvement.

For reference:

• GPU undervolt: -190mV

• VRAM: 2800MHz

• Fast Timing enabled

<Fire Strike results>

GPU: RX 9070 XT Steel Legend

Surprisingly, the overall score showed very little difference, even when including the graphics score.

The gap was only around 600 points. That said, it's still well beyond normal run-to-run variance.

The stock result shown here was actually the highest score out of 5 runs.

For reference:

• GPU undervolt: -170mV

• VRAM: 2800MHz

• Fast Timing enabled

<Steel Nomad results>

As expected, there was very little difference in the score.

Still, the gap was large enough that I wouldn't call it run-to-run variance. The stock result shown here was the highest score out of 5 runs.

Anyone who has benchmarked a 9070 XT in Steel Nomad probably knows that once you're above 78 FPS, gaining even 0.1 FPS becomes surprisingly difficult.

For reference:

• GPU undervolt: -105mV

• VRAM: 2800MHz

• Fast Timing enabled

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

That's it for my testing.

Looking at the results, the gains weren't as dramatic as I expected considering the amount of time I invested into tuning the RAM. Maybe that's both the blessing and the curse of X3D CPUs.

That said, RAM overclocking can still push you past performance ceilings that are otherwise hard to break through.

The gains may not be huge, but it definitely helps unlock a little more of your system's potential.

Next time I'll share the in-game results from titles like Forza Horizon, Cyberpunk 2077, Metro Exodus, League of Legends, and Overwatch.

Thanks for reading! And if you enjoyed the post, I'd appreciate a like too 😆🙂

So far, I stabilized 6400MHz CL28-38-36-30. It passed TM5 + AIDA64 Extreme for a total of 6 hours.

The problem is that I want to push either CL26-38-38-38 or 28-36-36-36, but AIDA throws errors within 10 minutes.

I’ve already tried 1.50–1.55V, but it still won’t pass.

My guess is that I need to tune some secondary/tertiary timings, or especially adjust VDD voltage, but I’m not sure where to start.

Does anyone have any advice on what I should try next?

*I know the temperature is a bit high. The average was around 65°C.

Played around with BCLK after setting my 9800X3D to CO -45 (just for Cinebench fun).

Anything past -50 caused clock stretching, so -45 seems to be the limit for my chip.

On ASUS/MSI you can isolate BCLK to the CPU, but Gigabyte ties it to the whole system. Because of that I could only go up to 104 — anything higher throws AIDA errors within 5–7 minutes.

At 104, it boosts past 5.5GHz (vs ~5.42GHz stock), but it’s not stable enough for daily use so I didn’t keep it.

Since BCLK affects everything on Gigabyte, I had to retune other settings too (FCLK 2200 → 2067, RAM 8000 → 7600).

Without touching those, 102 BCLK was the highest stable point on my setup.

Stock max boost was ~5425MHz, but at 102 BCLK I’m seeing 5510+.

If you’re on ASUS/MSI, having CPU-only BCLK control probably makes undervolting/OC way more enjoyable.

I’ll likely switch to one of those next time.

Anyways, if you’ve got thermal/voltage headroom, definitely worth trying BCLK for fun — it’s cool seeing what your chip can really do 😄