|
kliras posted:speaking of cinebench, i get 4.35 hz or something like that multi core with a d15 on a 5800X3D which seems good, but the single core hangs at 3.3-3.9 most of the time. i assumed it would be the other way around in terms of frequency, or is cb23 just weird like that? I'm getting a similar behavior (it's mostly jumping between two cores, but none of them really go much above 3GHz in Ryzen Master), so I think Cinebench is just weird like that. Try the 7zip benchmark set to 1 thread if you want to see a single core with high numbers Tamba fucked around with this message at 00:41 on May 13, 2022 |
#
?
May 13, 2022 00:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 10:23 |
|
|
The "AMD Ryzen Balanced" -- comes with the AMD chipset drivers -- plan is what you want to run, because that one has the targeting for cores can boost the best (the ones that get the star and dot in Ryzen Master). So a single-threaded task will go onto the star core, and a second thread will go to the dot one. Otherwise, windows tends to rotate tasks around. (At least, in Win10 you need the AMD plan. Dunno what Win11 does.) kliras posted:i have my minimum cpu usage at like 10% to save power on the windows balanced plan, but i don't know how windows and ryzen are at making sure to max out for tasks like that and gamse without being explicitly told so It doesn't really matter as far as I can tell. Ryzen Balanced puts it at 50% and cores still go to sleep with that setting. At one point I thought it did more, because lowering it to 0% showed lower clock speeds in task manager -- but then I learned that most readouts of clock speed are fundamentally flawed since they don't take sleep into account. For Ryzen and other new CPUs, they are so fast to sleep & resume cores that it's just as fast to turn the dang thing off as to downclock. Like, if it's summer and you care more about heat than performance, it doesn't hurt to lower the %. (But also, cut your PBO to lower watts and get a very efficient underclock.)
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2022 00:56
|
|
|
The Ryzen powerplans aren't really needed anymore, and don't make much (if any) difference for 5000 series parts with the latest drivers/windows updates. From AMD's community manager: quote:"Ryzen 5000 series CPUs do not require a special Ryzen Power Profile, so it is not installed with Chipset driver package. Please use the Windows Balanced Power Profile for these procesors. Previous generation Ryzen processors will continue to use the Ryzen Balanced Power Profile for optimal performance and this is included in the Chipset driver package.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2022 03:52
|
|
|
Indeed, Ryzen Balanced no longer shows up in my power plans with my 5600X on Windows 11, with the latest AMD chipset drivers.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2022 04:09
|
|
|
Undervolting my video card finally brought my 5800x3d temps to more comfortable levels. My 3080 founders is kinda close to my d-15 and blows towards it somewhat. I mean it was fine before, but I'm pretty sure I can hit max boosts now.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2022 11:31
|
|
|
yeah if the ryzen balanced plan still shows up for you, you need to reinstall your chipset drivers and it won't be there anymore
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2022 12:43
|
|
|
Klyith posted:Every board maker has good VRMs and bad VRMs. Every board maker has done stuff like doubled up VRM components to fake a higher number of apparent phases. There are patterns to how frequently they do these things, but buying one particular brand is no guarantee. IMO it's pretty stupid to have PBO enabled anyway, when you can get much better power efficiency using the curve optimizer with PBO off to get almost PBO enabled performance, like I did with my 5600X.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2022 12:17
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:B-die actually is actually crashing to normal RAM prices now! So… I bought two pairs. One pair had errors at JEDEC settings. The other had errors at 3600 18-22-22-22-80. I’m exchanging them because Amazon makes that simple but I suspect the odds are high I’ll get someone else’s DOA sticks because that seems like how this works. I guess since I was in the mood for bios resets and reboots I tested my x3d’s FCLK with my old ram. It couldn’t do anything about 1900MHz without constant WHEAs (3800) but the SOC and fabric voltages could go down a lot and 3800 was still stable. Since the x3d is very sensitive to heat that might help a touch?
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2022 18:04
|
|
|
I'm running 2 pairs of those same Patriots and had to RMA one pair too. But it's worth the trouble to get a stable 14-16-13-21-34 @ 3800. I bought them at around $129 a pair in early 2020, nice to see them in the $70s now. E: Ryzen Master now seems to work with virtualization enabled (v2.9). It has an auto Curve Optimizer feature that will do per-core optimization but estimates 2.5 hours to run on this 5950x. Going to try that later today. My current all-core stable setting is -18, which is pretty nice by itself for a 540mV - 900mV reduction. Machine ran for several hours each at -30 and -20 before the eventual idling-induced crash, but haven't had any at -18. Tough to test idling reliably, looking forward to seeing what Ryzen Master's auto-testing comes up with. kliras posted:yeah if the ryzen balanced plan still shows up for you, you need to reinstall your chipset drivers and it won't be there anymore This was a useful heads up, thanks. I'd updated to the latest chipset drivers before putting in the 5950x and was still on the Ryzen balanced plan. Reinstalling removed that plan as you said. v1ld fucked around with this message at 18:27 on May 14, 2022 |
|
#
?
May 14, 2022 18:13
|
|
|
When I ran the core optimizer on a 5600x it came up with results that needed to be pushed up at least 5 on the worst cores. I just ran prime95 and checked which cores failed after half an hour. I would not want to do that for 2 CCDs!
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2022 18:45
|
|
|
I have never had any kind of auto-overclocking or auto-voltage-tuning software actually work properly for me, for CPUs or GPUs. Every time, it either leaves a ton of headroom or runs headfirst into unstable settings that cause it to fail. I've decided it's not worth fine-tuning the curve optimizer on a per-core basis and am just running a flat -10 offset across all cores now. Dr. Video Games 0031 fucked around with this message at 18:56 on May 14, 2022 |
|
#
?
May 14, 2022 18:48
|
|
|
I'm skeptical too and happy with the -18 besides, but still looking forward to seeing what it spits out for 2.5 hours of power usage! In particular what it identifies as the less under-voltable cores as I don't have the patience to do it per-core myself. The actual testing is interesting to observe in Ryzen Master - it does it core by core and you can see it drive load on that core, drop load, drive all core load, drop load, go back to driving load on that one core, etc. The zoomed out view of the process is interesting: CPUs and GPUs get tested and binned at fab time, we get to play the lottery. But in reality, there is probably a lot more they could do to bin or tweak a part way more accurately if they had the time to do so - but the economics don't work out of course, there's no point in investing that kind of time which is money on any one chip. But if you can have the user do that really fine tune through software you provide, that's a pretty big win. Restore some of the compute that's being left on the floor through the coarse binning process. But in reality, I fully expect Ryzen Master to fall over in this exercise and suggest -5 or something of course. But the idea is neat.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2022 18:57
|
|
|
I'll say that it's not just crashing you have to watch out for when playing with the curve optimizer. Sometimes the side effects of undervolting can lead to odd behavior at lower frequencies. I don't know how to put it, but programs/your OS just won't work as expected sometimes, like not loading in interface elements correctly or that kind of thing. My 5600X showed odd behavior with programs not loading in correctly at startup and the system not letting me right click on things at -20, so I ran it at -15 for a while, but every so often I'd get weird behavior. I chalked those up to software errors at first, but I decided it was consistent enough to make me try lowering the offset to -10, and it's been perfect ever since. There's probably a stable middle ground somewhere but I can't be bothered trying to find it.
Dr. Video Games 0031 fucked around with this message at 19:07 on May 14, 2022 |
|
#
?
May 14, 2022 19:03
|
|
|
Good to know, thanks. The idling crashes I saw at -30/-20 were hard crashes that bypassed all of Windows crash detection and just failed the machine. So I've been a bit overconfident about being at a safe value assuming I'd get hard crashes if I wasn't at one. I haven't really noticed any problems but just this morning I had weird behavior at login where I couldn't launch anything after login - seemed like Explorer was hanging though the interface was still responsive. It's not happened before of course, but backing off a bit can't hurt at all. It's not like I need the extra 50-100 Mhz a few mV enables.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2022 19:10
|
|
|
Correction: It was -25 all-core where I encountered a series of oddities on startup, -20 where I had occasional misbehaviors that I chalked up to software issues at the time, and -15 where I eventually settled on my 5600X. Every CPU is different though since this is largely down to silicon lottery. What you described at login was the kind of thing that seemed like was happening to me as a result of the undervolt. "Consistent" is probably not the word I should've used when describing my issues. It was more like it was semi-regular. Every few days something would happen that would make me think, "huh, that's odd," and it was always something different every time. Maybe a program would open as a blank window, maybe a menu wouldn't load in all of its options, maybe explorer would just randomly hang, etc. I'd try whatever I was doing again and it would suddenly work again, and I'd just shrug it off. This stopped happening once I backed down from -20 to -15. Dr. Video Games 0031 fucked around with this message at 19:51 on May 14, 2022 |
|
#
?
May 14, 2022 19:41
|
|
|
Palladium posted:IMO it's pretty stupid to have PBO enabled anyway, when you can get much better power efficiency using the curve optimizer with PBO off to get almost PBO enabled performance, like I did with my 5600X. How do you do this? Just set PBO to Advanced set the curves and don't change anything else?
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2022 16:57
|
|
|
Yes, though some will say to raise the limits because there may be brief high current spikes and you don’t want to trigger the throttling behavior. I have no idea if that is a real thing but if you lower core voltages you definitely won’t hit the default power limits.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2022 20:16
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:Yes, though some will say to raise the limits because there may be brief high current spikes and you don’t want to trigger the throttling behavior. I have no idea if that is a real thing but if you lower core voltages you definitely won’t hit the default power limits. Cool thanks. Currently at -10 all cores and stable (and a fair bit cooler).
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2022 03:49
|
|
|
Stanley Pain posted:Cool thanks. Currently at -10 all cores and stable (and a fair bit cooler). My 5600X at -12 all cores gets 98% performance of PBO on + auto but at 35W less power draw.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2022 09:51
|
|
|
Poop
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2022 10:52
|
|
|
Palladium posted:My 5600X at -12 all cores gets 98% performance of PBO on + auto but at 35W less power draw. Though you can get even more with both PBO and a curve offset. At -15 all core, I get something like 5-10% higher cinebench scores by turning on PBO and letting the CPU draw as much power as it can. Though in practical, everyday usage, PBO just makes my computer fans ramp up more loudly with no meaningful benefit.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2022 14:56
|
|
|
What's a trustworthy source (in Europe) to get hands on something like a Ryzen 5600G Pro? It's for a NAS and the G variants don't have the IO die drawing baseline power. But I'd like Pro for ECC. --edit: Hmm Wendell from L1T claims the non-Pro ones also do ECC?  --edit: Oh wait, the model number would be 5650G, and they sell as tray variant here. Neat. Combat Pretzel fucked around with this message at 17:06 on May 16, 2022 |
|
#
?
May 16, 2022 16:45
|
|
|
Did a per curve tune and it set them all to -27 on my 5800x except for 2 that were lesser and seemed rock solid until I came back to find my computer had rebooted. Not sure if windows update, crash, or the guys installing my AC deciding to plug it into the power strip my PC is on. Is there a way to see what the cause of the reboot was?
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2022 16:59
|
|
|
Probably not for something like that. With extreme undervolts it’ll actually be idling that is unstable and that’s probably what happened. Check for WHEAs maybe? I never checked to see if undervolting heavily did that.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2022 17:14
|
|
|
You can try to see if there's anything in the event viewer, but my money's on a crash due to the core offset being too much.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2022 17:15
|
|
|
^^^^ Should have finished reading the thread  cheesetriangles posted:Did a per curve tune and it set them all to -27 on my 5800x except for 2 that were lesser and seemed rock solid until I came back to find my computer had rebooted. Not sure if windows update, crash, or the guys installing my AC deciding to plug it into the power strip my PC is on. Is there a way to see what the cause of the reboot was? Check Event Viewer under System. You'll see critical errors about it if it was an unexpected shutdown.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2022 17:49
|
|
|
Is there a way to "stress" test these undervolts? I also ran the Ryzen Master tool and it also crashed my computer because of the settings it tried to use.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2022 20:16
|
|
|
Prime95. There’s a script that’ll cycle through modes and cores called core cycler. https://github.com/sp00n/corecycler
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2022 20:29
|
|
|
Ryzen Master's auto Curve Optimizer has issues. Its estimate for me is 2:15 for 16 cores. I first ran it for 4 hours while I was away Sunday and came back to it still on Core 10 with an estimate of an hour left. But the estimate wasn't moving 1:1 with real time, so I cancelled out. Then ran it overnight and it was still on Core 1 after 7-8 hours. Think I'll stick to -15 + PBO for now, which shows improvements in Cinebench single and multi thread loads. Backed off from -18.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2022 20:38
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:Prime95. There’s a script that’ll cycle through modes and cores called core cycler. https://github.com/sp00n/corecycler 12 hours per core seems to be recommended. And I have 16 cores... 
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2022 21:10
|
|
|
Kibner posted:12 hours per core seems to be recommended. And I have 16 cores... That's if you want to be sure that your settings are equally stable as if you'd run normal full-load prime95 on a normal OC for the same amount of hours. Running prime95 for 12 hours seems excessive to me. I'd be pretty happy that my OC was stable with just 2-3 hours of crunching primes. So do like 2 or 3 overnight runs and see how that goes. But then, if I cared enough about stability to want complete absolute assurance that my OC was stable, I just wouldn't OC.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2022 23:14
|
|
|
Also, does that really find any instabilities that might crop up at low usage? The most common failures when using the curve optimizer are at idle. AMD should really just give us full VF curve control with Zen 4, like we have for Nvidia GPUs. Dr. Video Games 0031 fucked around with this message at 23:24 on May 16, 2022 |
|
#
?
May 16, 2022 23:21
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:Prime95. There’s a script that’ll cycle through modes and cores called core cycler. https://github.com/sp00n/corecycler So do I read the logs or does it just crash and that's my cue that yup it's hosed.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2022 23:21
|
|
|
Dr. Video Games 0031 posted:Also, does that really find any instabilities that might crop up at low usage? The most common failures when using the curve optimizer are at idle. I'm really not sure how idle is going to cause more failures. Ultimately, if a set of clockspeed and voltage settings is stable enough to boot windows, and stable enough to run a steady load from prime95, the remaining potential failures are going to come during the transitions between load and idle. In some SA thread recently, either here or the youtuber thread, someone linked this buildzoid video about vdroop. He shows why one source of instability is the downward spike into undervoltage as the CPU moves up and down in load. He's doing this with an overvolted OCed CPU, but the same principle is gonna apply to an undervolted CPU running at stock-ish speeds. I could see that prime95 script that rotates cores producing a decent number of transition spikes -- since it's doing that with windows core affinity, every time it switches it'll produce a momentary halt as windows moves the process to a new core. Or you could do what buildzoid is doing and run all-core prime95 while wiggling the mouse for an hour.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2022 01:19
|
|
|
Yeah I think “idle instability” is more accurately failing to clock up momentarily to do something. Zen 3 cores can go from halt to 4.85GHz to halt in under a second and luckily/unfortunately windows always has some random thing to do like updates or anti malware scans or telemetry or some such.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2022 01:24
|
|
|
Dr. Video Games 0031 posted:Also, does that really find any instabilities that might crop up at low usage? The most common failures when using the curve optimizer are at idle. Yeah some of my curve optimizer settings would run things like F@H or P95 for days on end but crash at idle. The most reliable test I could find was to let the PC idle for a while and then start up something like ST Cinebench or Geekbench, and just repeating that process over a few times.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2022 02:17
|
|
|
QQ about the 5800X3D - overclocking is disabled but the curve optimizer still works, yes? Would an overclocked 5900X still come out on top (in gaming) in some cases? And is there any hint of which will age better/be more useful in UE5, the larger cache or the 5900x's larger core count and higher frequency?
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2022 14:36
|
|
|
Mozi posted:QQ about the 5800X3D - overclocking is disabled but the curve optimizer still works, yes? Would an overclocked 5900X still come out on top (in gaming) in some cases? And is there any hint of which will age better/be more useful in UE5, the larger cache or the 5900x's larger core count and higher frequency? - Are you upgrading to run videogames faster? Get the 5800X3D - Are you doing any compute stuff where the extra 4 cores will improve your experience? Get the 5900X (and probably don't overclock it, the gains are minuscule) Arzachel fucked around with this message at 15:22 on May 17, 2022 |
|
#
?
May 17, 2022 15:07
|
|
|
i currently don't have curve optimizer for 5800X3D in the latest version of ryzen master on my x470 motherboard. either it's for x570, or it's because i don't have agesa 1.2.0.7, so there are some limitations to it
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2022 15:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 10:23 |
|
|
I don't do much that could be considered 'productivity work' (don't tell my boss...), mostly would be for high refresh rate gaming with a video or something going on another monitor. Would be a B550 mobo though so hope CO is available there, I've heard good things about undervolting...
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2022 15:14
|
|