Yeah you have a pretty nice setup then. Don't bother too much with OC on these high-end CPUs. They are set up so aggressively by default nowadays (because Intel and AMD want to beat each other in certain benchmarks on launch day) that they leave almost nothing untapped. Five to seven years ago, what they do to the top CPU models at stock would've only been done by overclockers at home, that's how far beyond the most efficient frequency range they push these CPUs now, with accordingly high stock VCore.
If anything, you want to gain back some efficiency by undervolting or setting lower power limits. You can even get higher performance by that, because, say you undervolt by -0.08V or so, then you're getting lower power consumption and lower temperatures, which in turn can make the CPU boost to higher frequencies if it sees more headroom in those parameters that it constantly monitors. Another example, if you set the ECO mode with 142W power limit (PPT), you only lose 5% performance, but at 38% lower power draw! Whenever you have a huge decrease in power draw at a much smaller decrease in performance, you see that you're moving towards a much more comfortable operating range for the CPU. Conversely, this is a sign that AMD deliberately let the power draw go too high, just to have slightly longer result bars in some benchmarks. Same with the top-end GPUs for example, it's all about looking that tiny bit better in the reviews, this can make or break how successful a CPU/GPU is going to be viewed as by the customer.
Of course, it's completely silly to go from 142W to 230W for only 5% more fully multithreaded performance, such jumps should be left to overclockers, and then there would be something perhaps worth overclocking for. The way it is now, the top CPUs are already screaming for mercy at stock (or make your CPU cooler do that). So no use in further OC.
