# [Official] Ryzen 2700 and 2700X Owners Club



## jprovido

I'm using a B350 motherboard on my 2700x (upgraded from a 1700x) is it better to run it on stock with XFR or all cores at 4.1GHz 1.34v. I can get it stable at 4150mhz but I decided to just leave it at 4.1GHz and the voltage is not that high


----------



## Minotaurtoo

honestly for me in most cases stock works better... I have a custom loop and the chip overclocks itself to right at 4ghz on all cores under heaviest loads... and all core moderate loads it hits 4.1.... normal loads like gaming and such I see 4.2 to 4.25 ghz common... so it really depends on what you are doing... on all core loads an overclock on all cores is better in general this chip takes care of itself pretty well.


----------



## Shawn Shutt jr

we in this boys! woot woot!


----------



## Minotaurtoo

wondering if you will get better clocks on that than I am on my B350... so far I see peaks routinely hitting 4.35 on up to two cores at a time.... but I can't OC past 4.25 on all cores at once


----------



## AlphaC

SiliconLottery states only 4.2GHz or so for highest bin (i.e. passing Prime95). https://siliconlottery.com/collections/pinnacleridge
* 41x multi at 1.375V
* 41.5x multi at 1.4V
* 42x multi at 1.425V

With Ryzen Master set to 1.45V on the best 4 cores I am able to hit 43.25x multi , 1.4V for 43x multi on best 4 cores.

I think that these CPUs aren't worth multiplier overclocking. The gains are mostly from memory and cache improvements AFAIK. BCLK seems to be the way to go, I will try to get a definitive answer.

PBO+ XFR2 seems to have it hit around 41-42x multi on my chip when all cores are loaded and it is in a X370 board.

For people that don't overclock it's a serious boost over Ryzen 1st gen. My first gen Ryzen is around 1750 Cinebench @ 3.9GHz - 4 GHz, this gets close to 1800 out of the box without messing with PBO so it's likely hovering around 4050 MHz.
Luckily I didn't buy two chips, I think I'm going to get an i7-8700K if Z390 comes around with some decent boards.



jprovido said:


> I've only tested it in dota 2 and it only boosts upto 4GHz at stock. I wonder maybe because I'm only using a B350 motherboard


Is your XFR2 on?


----------



## jprovido

Minotaurtoo said:


> honestly for me in most cases stock works better... I have a custom loop and the chip overclocks itself to right at 4ghz on all cores under heaviest loads... and all core moderate loads it hits 4.1.... normal loads like gaming and such I see 4.2 to 4.25 ghz common... so it really depends on what you are doing... on all core loads an overclock on all cores is better in general this chip takes care of itself pretty well.


I've only tested it in dota 2 and it only boosts upto 4GHz at stock. I wonder maybe because I'm only using a B350 motherboard


----------



## Minotaurtoo

AlphaC said:


> SiliconLottery states only 4.2GHz or so for highest bin (i.e. passing Prime95). https://siliconlottery.com/collections/pinnacleridge
> * 41x multi at 1.375V
> * 41.5x multi at 1.4V
> * 42x multi at 1.425V
> 
> With Ryzen Master set to 1.45V on the best 4 cores I am able to hit 43.25x multi , 1.4V for 43x multi on best 4 cores.
> 
> I think that these CPUs aren't worth multiplier overclocking. BCLK seems to be the way to go, I will try to get a definitive answer.
> 
> PBO+ XFR2 seems to have it hit around 41-42x multi on my chip when all cores are loaded and it is in a X370 board.
> 
> For people that don't overclock it's a serious boost over Ryzen 1st gen. My first gen Ryzen is around 1750 Cinebench @ 3.9GHz - 4 GHz, this gets close to 1800 out of the box without messing with PBO so it's likely hovering around 4050 MHz.
> Luckily I didn't buy two chips, I think I'm going to get an i7-8700K if Z390 comes around with some decent boards.


that silicon lottery bit is interesting... I hit mine with avx linepack for a few run and a few other stress tests at 4.25 @ 1.45v with no issues... board was getting warm a bit since I had LLC turned up enough to keep voltage level... but 4.2 was a breeze to get... I'll try it with prime 95 and see how that does... I usually use linepack with avx because it's pretty much as high as stress can get, but it's possible that on these prime 95 will find an issue I was otherwise unable to find


----------



## Minotaurtoo

jprovido said:


> I've only tested it in dota 2 and it only boosts upto 4GHz at stock. I wonder maybe because I'm only using a B350 motherboard


more likely to do with cooling, I'm running a B350 as well... but then not all B350's are alike so maybe... but I do have a custom loop so I suspect that has something to do with it.


----------



## jprovido

Minotaurtoo said:


> more likely to do with cooling, I'm running a B350 as well... but then not all B350's are alike so maybe... but I do have a custom loop so I suspect that has something to do with it.


temps are in the reallyyyy low and with dota 2 the cpu load is ony at 20-25% so it's not being stressed that much


----------



## Minotaurtoo

jprovido said:


> temps are in the reallyyyy low and with dota 2 the cpu load is ony at 20-25% so it's not being stressed that much


not sure then... this is what I see in most games I play with moderate cpu load (4 cores active)


----------



## jprovido

Minotaurtoo said:


> not sure then... this is what I see in most games I play with moderate cpu load (4 cores active)


maybe it's just dota 2. I'll try to run a few games brb


----------



## jprovido

I enabled the OSD in MSI afterburner to check the clock speed and it's all over the place lol. I tried rocket league and it's ranging from 4000-4175mhz and it doesn't stay put (I saw it go as high as 4200 for just a split second) but usually stays around the 4050-4100 range. does that affect frame times seeing how clock speed changes all the time?

most of the games I've tried it's at 4000-4050mhz. I will try more


----------



## Minotaurtoo

jprovido said:


> I enabled the OSD in MSI afterburner to check the clock speed and it's all over the place lol. I tried rocket league and it's ranging from 4000-4175mhz and it doesn't stay put (I saw it go as high as 4200 for just a split second) but usually stays around the 4050-4100 range. does that affect frame times seeing how clock speed changes all the time?
> 
> most of the games I've tried it's at 4000-4050mhz. I will try more


shouldn't have much affect on frame times over all.... of coarse generally speaking higher clocks is better for frame times.


----------



## jprovido

I decided to stick to my 4.1ghz overclock. I’ve tried a few games and usually it boosts below 4100mhz and games like pubg it hovers around 3975-4000mhz. I’ll just keep it at 4.1ghz I think I’ll get a more consistent performance with this OC


----------



## Minotaurtoo

jprovido said:


> I decided to stick to my 4.1ghz overclock. I’ve tried a few games and usually it boosts below 4100mhz and games like pubg it hovers around 3975-4000mhz. I’ll just keep it at 4.1ghz I think I’ll get a more consistent performance with this OC


and that's the thing with these 2700x's no two people will have the same experience... glad you found what works for you... I tried even a 4.25ghz OC and found that in many cases stock actually worked better lol... but then you saw my screen capture... and that game was one of the worst on the cpu of all I play... It's called The Crew, and it used to keep my FX running @ 75% usage on most map locations with Miami pushing it in the 80's for some reason... but on Ryzen gen 2 it's a walk in the park. Dirt 4 barely uses the cpu and then usually only two cores for whatever reason, but those two cores will boost to 4.35 ghz many times in game.

On another note, I was just playing with a 4.2ghz OC and testing with prime 95 for a bit this time... had to adjust my LLC levels a bit, but as near as I can tell setting just over 1.4v in bios with a fair bit of LLC to keep vcore from dropping below 1.39 and it so far hasn't dropped cores or froze... at first I had hard freeze but voltage dropped to 1.35 lol.... without LLC turned on the vdroop on this board is ridicules. That silicon lottery post by AlphaC has got me wondering... I had kinda assumed based on what I saw from others that 4.2ghz was mediocrity at its finest... but now it looks to be a bit rare maybe? Just don't know if I really want to leave it running for too terribly long... at 4.2 these chips can really pull some power already hit 180 watts peak power draw according to HWiNFO64


----------



## AlphaC

I'm not sure how large the sample size is also.

https://www.hardware.fr/articles/974-7/overclocking-pratique.html
Prime95 stable on 8 cores @ 4.3GHz , 1.35V unless I'm reading it wrong

Quasarzone OC scaling https://quasarzone.co.kr/bbs/board.php?bo_table=qc_qsz&wr_id=152517


----------



## Shiftstealth

Using PE1 on my CH VII i usually stick around 4075Mhz in BF1 which IMO is right where the cutoff is before voltages start to get nutty. PE3 boosts up to 4150, but it was only stable for like 30 minutes in RealBench before it crashed. My chip may be above average since it held 4.15Ghz @ 1.3v for 30 minutes, but i don't really see how a 4.2Ghz all core overclock would even be worth my time to test for stability.


----------



## lcbbcl

Shiftstealth said:


> Using PE1 on my CH VII i usually stick around 4075Mhz in BF1 which IMO is right where the cutoff is before voltages start to get nutty. PE3 boosts up to 4150, but it was only stable for like 30 minutes in RealBench before it crashed. My chip may be above average since it held 4.15Ghz @ 1.3v for 30 minutes, but i don't really see how a 4.2Ghz all core overclock would even be worth my time to test for stability.


When we will get a decent uefi 42x will be something easy at 1.32+V underload,but right now LLC,temps are f...and that huge amount of power draw when stress with IBT or p95, you won't see too often in daily usage.


----------



## hlreijnders

I had gotten the upgrade itch and decided to sell my Ryzen 1700 and upgrade to a 2700X. Still using my Asus Prime X370 Pro tough. It's cooled with a Noctua NH-D15.

I'm not sure if it's normal, but I'm getting really high temps when running Prime95 small fft.
I've set the 2700X to a fixed speed of 4Ghz @ 1,2875v in the bios with LLC3. This results in a vcore of 1,256v while stressed. Temps are 73C measured at Tdie while stressing.

Isn't this a bit high? I ran my 1700 at 3,8Ghz with 1,325v with LLC3 and it never got over 67C in Prime95 and OCCT.

I've tried remounting the cooler, reapply the paste (Gellid GC Extreme). But I'm getting the same temps over and over.

I know I can let it run at stock, but I like to tinker and wanted to compare it a bit with my 1700. What temps are you guys with fixed speeds getting? Is the 2700X really this much hotter?

Verstuurd vanaf mijn Pixel 2 met Tapatalk


----------



## zGunBLADEz

Yeah the cpu is a bit hotter than the first ryzen, which is kind of weird if you asked me using the same voltage and mhz the temps are higher.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

jprovido said:


> I enabled the OSD in MSI afterburner to check the clock speed and it's all over the place lol. I tried rocket league and it's ranging from 4000-4175mhz and it doesn't stay put (I saw it go as high as 4200 for just a split second) but usually stays around the 4050-4100 range. does that affect frame times seeing how clock speed changes all the time?
> 
> most of the games I've tried it's at 4000-4050mhz. I will try more


Thats why multi on amd is better when changing between cores in intel that cycle would create microstutters and perf hits. Even across SMTS as well


----------



## yoshpop

What kind of memory clocks are you guys able to hit? I decided to sell my 1700 and pick up a 2700x this past weekend. I'm using my old ASRock x370 Gaming Professional board and hitting a hard wall of 3466. I can boot 3600 and run a few benchmarks but prime95 will instantly fail. Even with loose timings and 1.2v SoC I have no luck. I can run 3466 14-14-14-34 all day though so I'm not sure if I'm having problems with my board or my IMC isn't that great.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

i really start to like this XFR/PB on this cpu.

I have everything on auto except scalar=10x and 300/300/300 PB
i get 41.25x for example on most app all cores on P95 HIGH FFTS i get 41 and 40x on small ffts he detects the load if is a high power draw (small fft he will downclock to 40x) as cores start passing this small ffts the ones still on them raise a little bit more and more on clock speed till they pass and go back to 41x. In other apps that only uses a few cores they use up to 43.50x. 4-6cores 42-42.50x avg which is better than a fix all around multi at all times. 

I have everything on auto including my llc the only thing i dont like is the high vcore on idle. It can shoot as high as 1.55v in this mobo. I can do 41.25x at 1.37v but im missing the whole ordeal of XFR/PB which is where is at with this cpu.

This and with the PPM Panel tweaks i previously used on my ryzen 1700/1800x this cpu shines all on auto

This is a comparison 
https://www.3dmark.com/compare/fs/15412036/fs/15438985

@gups


----------



## Minotaurtoo

hlreijnders said:


> I had gotten the upgrade itch and decided to sell my Ryzen 1700 and upgrade to a 2700X. Still using my Asus Prime X370 Pro tough. It's cooled with a Noctua NH-D15.
> 
> I'm not sure if it's normal, but I'm getting really high temps when running Prime95 small fft.
> I've set the 2700X to a fixed speed of 4Ghz @ 1,2875v in the bios with LLC3. This results in a vcore of 1,256v while stressed. Temps are 73C measured at Tdie while stressing.
> 
> Isn't this a bit high? I ran my 1700 at 3,8Ghz with 1,325v with LLC3 and it never got over 67C in Prime95 and OCCT.
> 
> I've tried remounting the cooler, reapply the paste (Gellid GC Extreme). But I'm getting the same temps over and over.
> 
> I know I can let it run at stock, but I like to tinker and wanted to compare it a bit with my 1700. What temps are you guys with fixed speeds getting? Is the 2700X really this much hotter?
> 
> Verstuurd vanaf mijn Pixel 2 met Tapatalk


dont know about how normal it is, but I've noticed these seem to run a bit hotter than the 1700 I had did... now keep in mind I'm on a custom loop, but I haven't seen it hit 70's that at that low of a clock/voltage... more like mid 50's when that low.


----------



## Mr Splash

Hey guys, I don't post much but I read alot. Most of you guys are way ahead of me knowledge wise so I appreciate the reading material. I just ordered 2700X with a ASRock 470x Fatality board and some G. Skill Flare 14-14-14-34 / 3200 kit 16GB. But I'm going to love this coming from my ole 8350 and my 980ti classy can stretch now a bit. Keep the info coming ...lol Thanks all ... Peace, Splash


----------



## AlphaC

hlreijnders said:


> I had gotten the upgrade itch and decided to sell my Ryzen 1700 and upgrade to a 2700X. Still using my Asus Prime X370 Pro tough. It's cooled with a Noctua NH-D15.
> 
> I'm not sure if it's normal, but I'm getting really high temps when running Prime95 small fft.
> I've set the 2700X to a fixed speed of 4Ghz @ 1,2875v in the bios with LLC3. This results in a vcore of 1,256v while stressed. Temps are 73C measured at Tdie while stressing.
> 
> Isn't this a bit high? I ran my 1700 at 3,8Ghz with 1,325v with LLC3 and it never got over 67C in Prime95 and OCCT.
> 
> I've tried remounting the cooler, reapply the paste (Gellid GC Extreme). But I'm getting the same temps over and over.
> 
> I know I can let it run at stock, but I like to tinker and wanted to compare it a bit with my 1700. What temps are you guys with fixed speeds getting? Is the 2700X really this much hotter?
> 
> Verstuurd vanaf mijn Pixel 2 met Tapatalk


I had ~ 70°C T_die on R7 1700X with a TS140 Power when power draw peaked about 180W. When using 1.4V or so on it on R7 2700X (4.2GHz) it can reach 80°C (I get the Gigabyte popup message) ; at 41.75x multiplier and ~1.38V or so it is alright.



zGunBLADEz said:


> Yeah the cpu is a bit hotter than the first ryzen, which is kind of weird if you asked me using the same voltage and mhz the temps are higher.


Stilt mentioned this is a byproduct of the 12nm performance process rather than 14nm low power.


----------



## Wolfeshaman

I'll join in on this since I don't have the others anymore.

https://valid.x86.fr/xgjxp9


----------



## Wolfeshaman

Minotaurtoo said:


> dont know about how normal it is, but I've noticed these seem to run a bit hotter than the 1700 I had did... now keep in mind I'm on a custom loop, but I haven't seen it hit 70's that at that low of a clock/voltage... more like mid 50's when that low.



I'm running mine on a Corsair H110i. This thing on Idle is about 28-35 (Tctl) and 38-45 (Tdie) according to HWInfo. Amd seems to have changed the temp reading offset to only 10c instead of the 20c it was before. I'll speak for mine at least but that to me is pretty acceptable idle temps. While under load it will max around 68 (Tctl) and 58 (Tdie). I am also not running my rig in the optimal setup for airflow with my radiator. I have the fans pulling instead of pushing which probably increases the temps a few C or so.


----------



## VPII

Just to add another....

https://valid.x86.fr/kk68rg


----------



## Ipak

Upgraded to full AMD system: https://valid.x86.fr/p2g2xk


----------



## waltercaorle

zGunBLADEz said:


> i really start to like this XFR/PB on this cpu.
> 
> I have everything on auto except scalar=10x and 300/300/300 PB
> i get 41.25x for example on most app all cores on P95 HIGH FFTS i get 41 and 40x on small ffts he detects the load if is a high power draw (small fft he will downclock to 40x) as cores start passing this small ffts the ones still on them raise a little bit more and more on clock speed till they pass and go back to 41x. In other apps that only uses a few cores they use up to 43.50x. 4-6cores 42-42.50x avg which is better than a fix all around multi at all times.
> 
> I have everything on auto including my llc the only thing i dont like is the high vcore on idle. It can shoot as high as 1.55v in this mobo. I can do 41.25x at 1.37v but im missing the whole ordeal of XFR/PB which is where is at with this cpu.
> 
> This and with the PPM Panel tweaks i previously used on my ryzen 1700/1800x this cpu shines all on auto
> 
> This is a comparison
> https://www.3dmark.com/compare/fs/15412036/fs/15438985
> 
> @gups


ciao, what's your cooler? same settings and mb in the blend test i touch the 74 in tdie... I have a h100i v2 +2 [email protected] it seems to me too much. i tried to reapply the thermal paste but nothing change..
However i agree with you, the sweet spot seems to be just @def with ram pushed and the PBO active ..


----------



## VPII

zGunBLADEz said:


> i really start to like this XFR/PB on this cpu.
> 
> I have everything on auto except scalar=10x and 300/300/300 PB
> i get 41.25x for example on most app all cores on P95 HIGH FFTS i get 41 and 40x on small ffts he detects the load if is a high power draw (small fft he will downclock to 40x) as cores start passing this small ffts the ones still on them raise a little bit more and more on clock speed till they pass and go back to 41x. In other apps that only uses a few cores they use up to 43.50x. 4-6cores 42-42.50x avg which is better than a fix all around multi at all times.
> 
> I have everything on auto including my llc the only thing i dont like is the high vcore on idle. It can shoot as high as 1.55v in this mobo. I can do 41.25x at 1.37v but im missing the whole ordeal of XFR/PB which is where is at with this cpu.
> 
> This and with the PPM Panel tweaks i previously used on my ryzen 1700/1800x this cpu shines all on auto
> 
> This is a comparison
> https://www.3dmark.com/compare/fs/15412036/fs/15438985
> 
> @gups


Hi zGunBLADEz, looking at your results I'm really amazed. I get great performance with multicore benchmarks and my physics scores in 3d benchmarks is not bad, but my combined score is always pretty low. These PPM Panel tweaks, what is it that you are referring to. I would really like to get this sorted, my bench results running the cpu at 4.9ghz under dry ice is mostly lower than when I run it at a 4.36ghz overclock which does not make sense.


----------



## MishelLngelo

https://valid.x86.fr/rif8x3

Straight forward OC (42.225 multi) on all cores. Starting voltage set at 1.425v with LLC5, 1200% power. All C states off. 
Still waiting for Asus Prime x470 pro and hopefully I could use my RAM to fullest, now stable only up to 3333MHz.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

not bad at all... best I was able to muster was 4.25 on all cores stable... my highest cinebench score was 1938 @ 4.275ghz, wasn't stable though... Honestly even with an all core OC of 4.25 I lost performance in some games over stock because at stock it boosts 2 cores to 4.3-4.35ghz which is higher than I can OC to on all cores.... and since it boosts 4 cores to 4.2+ regularly I just went back to stock... my best passmark scores were at stock lol.. same for userbench... only programs that could use all 16 threads really benefited from the all core OC


----------



## Garvani

In! 2700x, Asus prime x470, 16bg gskill trident z rgb running at 3200mhz


----------



## skline00

Minotaurtoo said:


> not bad at all... best I was able to muster was 4.25 on all cores stable... my highest cinebench score was 1938 @ 4.275ghz, wasn't stable though... Honestly even with an all core OC of 4.25 I lost performance in some games over stock because at stock it boosts 2 cores to 4.3-4.35ghz which is higher than I can OC to on all cores.... and since it boosts 4 cores to 4.2+ regularly I just went back to stock... my best passmark scores were at stock lol.. same for userbench... only programs that could use all 16 threads really benefited from the all core OC


 Minotaurtoo: I'm running stock eventhough I have an Asus CH6H with 6004 BIOS, 2700x, EK AMD EVO Supremacy waterblock with 2-360 rads and 16G of Flare-X 3200 ram.

Like you, I was able to OC to 4.2 GHZ on all 8 cores but even with all of my cooling capacity, the temps rose significantly from stock.

Also, I get a solid 4GHZ all core OC at stock when stressing with decent scores, for example CB15 -1804-1809.

I had previously run a 1800x OC'd to 4 GHZ ( could push it a bit higher but was flaky) so I settled on that as a solid OC. This 2700x stock slightly outperforms the heavily OC'd 1800x.

I realize that this forum's mantra is "Overclock" and I respect that (I have a 5960x solidly at 4.4 and a 6700k solidly at 4.6) but my initial impression of the 2700x, after some cursory OC attempts, is that AMD has this cpu, at stock, pushed to nearly the limit but it did a MUCH better job of sustaining more of the 8 cores at higher clock speeds when stressed.


Good cooling helps.


----------



## Jaju123

skline00 said:


> Minotaurtoo: I'm running stock eventhough I have an Asus CH6H with 6004 BIOS, 2700x, EK AMD EVO Supremacy waterblock with 2-360 rads and 16G of Flare-X 3200 ram.
> 
> Like you, I was able to OC to 4.2 GHZ on all 8 cores but even with all of my cooling capacity, the temps rose significantly from stock.
> 
> Also, I get a solid 4GHZ all core OC at stock when stressing with decent scores, for example CB15 -1804-1809.
> 
> I had previously run a 1800x OC'd to 4 GHZ ( could push it a bit higher but was flaky) so I settled on that as a solid OC. This 2700x stock slightly outperforms the heavily OC'd 1800x.
> 
> I realize that this forum's mantra is "Overclock" and I respect that (I have a 5960x solidly at 4.4 and a 6700k solidly at 4.6) but my initial impression of the 2700x, after some cursory OC attempts, is that AMD has this cpu, at stock, pushed to nearly the limit but it did a MUCH better job of sustaining more of the 8 cores at higher clock speeds when stressed.
> 
> 
> Good cooling helps.


Best option is CH7 hero with the performance enhancer. That way I'm on Level 3 with it and it boosts to 4350 single core stable and all core is at 4100 or 4125 mhz. Double or triple core is 4250 or so.
Second to that I've found 3333mhz ddr4 with very low latency to give better benchmark scores than 3533 or 3600 with looser timings.


----------



## skline00

Jaju123 said:


> Best option is CH7 hero with the performance enhancer. That way I'm on Level 3 with it and it boosts to 4350 single core stable and all core is at 4100 or 4125 mhz. Double or triple core is 4250 or so.
> Second to that I've found 3333mhz ddr4 with very low latency to give better benchmark scores than 3533 or 3600 with looser timings.



Thank you Jaju123. On my CH6H with the latest release BIOS I have per AIDA64 stress test, at least one core hitting 4334 and 2 ore more over 4250 so I'm close. No sense (or cents HA HA) spending nearly $250 more for a bit more performance.


No doubt, if I was building new, the CH7 Hero would be the way to go.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

waltercaorle said:


> ciao, what's your cooler? same settings and mb in the blend test i touch the 74 in tdie... I have a h100i v2 +2 [email protected] it seems to me too much. i tried to reapply the thermal paste but nothing change..
> However i agree with you, the sweet spot seems to be just @def with ram pushed and the PBO active ..


I have a custom loop koolance 380 block with UT60 and CorsairSP fans @ 2700rpms



VPII said:


> Hi zGunBLADEz, looking at your results I'm really amazed. I get great performance with multicore benchmarks and my physics scores in 3d benchmarks is not bad, but my combined score is always pretty low. These PPM Panel tweaks, what is it that you are referring to. I would really like to get this sorted, my bench results running the cpu at 4.9ghz under dry ice is mostly lower than when I run it at a 4.36ghz overclock which does not make sense.



I share a little tweak back in the other ryzen topic to make the windows use the cpu as it should be, instead of randomly throw threads to any core. This tweaks shine even more on this cpu as it makes sure it boost even more as you have less un-usued cores ending boosting more by itself in the end. It goes in order from 0 to 15 as needed it dont randomly throw threads all over the cpu/cores.
This way if you running a application that do not requires all 16threads you can benefit from the XFR/PB of this cpu

This is the app
https://sourceforge.net/projects/rightmark/files/

the pictures are the settings you need to change

PD: you also get better combined score or better cpu usage in windows 7 on ryzen.


----------



## VPII

zGunBLADEz said:


> I have a custom loop koolance 380 block with UT60 and CorsairSP fans @ 2700rpms
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I share a little tweak back in the other ryzen topic to make the windows use the cpu as it should be, instead of randomly throw threads to any core. This tweaks shine even more on this cpu as it makes sure it boost even more as you have less un-usued cores ending boosting more by itself in the end. It goes in order from 0 to 15 as needed it dont randomly throw threads all over the cpu/cores.
> This way if you running a application that do not requires all 16threads you can benefit from the XFR/PB of this cpu
> 
> This is the app
> https://sourceforge.net/projects/rightmark/files/
> 
> the pictures are the settings you need to change
> 
> PD: you also get better combined score or better cpu usage in windows 7 on ryzen.


Thank you so very much.... I really appreciate this. Will give it a go tonight.


----------



## icecpu

Garvani said:


> In! 2700x, Asus prime x470, 16bg gskill trident z rgb running at 3200mhz




That stock cooler so nice. Can you give me the link for the memory trident Z RGB. Thanks


----------



## waltercaorle

zGunBLADEz said:


> I have a custom loop koolance 380 block with UT60 and CorsairSP fans @ 2700rpms
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I share a little tweak back in the other ryzen topic to make the windows use the cpu as it should be, instead of randomly throw threads to any core. This tweaks shine even more on this cpu as it makes sure it boost even more as you have less un-usued cores ending boosting more by itself in the end. It goes in order from 0 to 15 as needed it dont randomly throw threads all over the cpu/cores.
> This way if you running a application that do not requires all 16threads you can benefit from the XFR/PB of this cpu
> 
> This is the app
> https://sourceforge.net/projects/rightmark/files/
> 
> the pictures are the settings you need to change
> 
> PD: you also get better combined score or better cpu usage in windows 7 on ryzen.


Good information, thank you very much
Not bad for a itx system


----------



## chroniclard

Do people worry about stock boost voltages, they hit over 1.5v?

I have set -0.075 offset, PE3, bclk 101, all core is around 4090, single core boost 4392, max V 1.481 and around 1.237 all core load voltage. Not sure its actually stress test stable however I have not had a single crash in my normal usage.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

chroniclard said:


> Do people worry about stock boost voltages, they hit over 1.5v?
> 
> I have set -0.075 offset, PE3, bclk 101, all core is around 4090, single core boost 4392, max V 1.481 and around 1.237 all core load voltage. Not sure its actually stress test stable however I have not had a single crash in my normal usage.


It's pretty normal, I wouldn't worry about it... it's AMD's way of ensuring stability on weakest cores when they boost to 4.35... if you are stable with the voltage offset though, there is no reason to not keep the voltage offset... might even result in better overall performance since the algorithm works based on temps and power usage.


----------



## Shiftstealth

chroniclard said:


> Do people worry about stock boost voltages, they hit over 1.5v?
> 
> I have set -0.075 offset, PE3, bclk 101, all core is around 4090, single core boost 4392, max V 1.481 and around 1.237 all core load voltage. Not sure its actually stress test stable however I have not had a single crash in my normal usage.


I don't see my voltage boost above 1.428 on mine. So 1.5v sounds kind of high, but i wouldn't worry about it. What cooler are you using? 4090 for PE3 sounds kind of low. When i used PE3 i would stay at 4141 mhz steady.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

Shiftstealth said:


> I don't see my voltage boost above 1.428 on mine. So 1.5v sounds kind of high, but i wouldn't worry about it. What cooler are you using? 4090 for PE3 sounds kind of low. When i used PE3 i would stay at 4141 mhz steady.


If there is one thing I've learned about these chips so far is that no two act alike lol... no idea why... it was my understanding that xfr only worked on x370 boards, but I'm seeing xfr frequencies on my b350... some are seeing high voltages applied to get the boost of 4.35 others are not... maybe that part is down to the binning at the factory... only giving what it has to have to be "stable"


----------



## Shiftstealth

Minotaurtoo said:


> If there is one thing I've learned about these chips so far is that no two act alike lol... no idea why... it was my understanding that xfr only worked on x370 boards, but I'm seeing xfr frequencies on my b350... some are seeing high voltages applied to get the boost of 4.35 others are not... maybe that part is down to the binning at the factory... only giving what it has to have to be "stable"


I think it has to do with FIT analyzing the silicon. My chip is probably a bit better. Even though it isn't stable on PE3 @ 4141Mhz all core for more than 30 minutes in Realbench. But for 4141Mhz it was only at like 1.232v, and still stable for 30 mins so i think it is a decent chip.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

Shiftstealth said:


> I think it has to do with FIT analyzing the silicon. My chip is probably a bit better. Even though it isn't stable on PE3 @ 4141Mhz all core for more than 30 minutes in Realbench. But for 4141Mhz it was only at like 1.232v, and still stable for 30 mins so i think it is a decent chip.


may well be... and yeah that's a decent for sure...likely ahead of the curve. I think mine is middle of the road really... 4.2 stable easy... 4.25 with some difficulty and really pushing voltage... 4.275 not happening unless I just overclock my best cores where 4.35 is easy at 1.45v... very interesting these cpu's are, but at the same time it's not really worth an all core oc... except in the case of performance enhancer type oc


----------



## Shiftstealth

Minotaurtoo said:


> may well be... and yeah that's a decent for sure...likely ahead of the curve. I think mine is middle of the road really... 4.2 stable easy... 4.25 with some difficulty and really pushing voltage... 4.275 not happening unless I just overclock my best cores where 4.35 is easy at 1.45v... very interesting these cpu's are, but at the same time it's not really worth an all core oc... except in the case of performance enhancer type oc


I'm using the wraith spire, but i just ordered a new cooler, should be here next week. I'll have to report back how good my chip is then. I would see 4225Mhz all core


----------



## Minotaurtoo

Shiftstealth said:


> I'm using the wraith spire, but i just ordered a new cooler, should be here next week. I'll have to report back how good my chip is then. I would see 4225Mhz all core


I look forward to you results... with you low voltage requirements I suspect you may well have a 4.3 capable chip, yours is hitting 4.14 at the same volts mine wants for 4.05 prime stable


----------



## Shiftstealth

Minotaurtoo said:


> I look forward to you results... with you low voltage requirements I suspect you may well have a 4.3 capable chip, yours is hitting 4.14 at the same volts mine wants for 4.05 prime stable


I mean, it wasn't 100% stable, but close obviously. It probably needs 1.25v for 4150Mhz. Mind you 1.25v was the reading in CPUZ. So i don't know how far it was drooping in HWInfo. I'll probably just shoot for 1.4v with AUTO LLC. Don't know i'd push my luck, or my chip for 4.3Ghz.


----------



## AlphaC

Whoever's on hwbot should be beating my garbage scores for OCN's sake. Need to socket it into the X470 board to put up "real" results with BCLK. I had those for a baseline comparison. 

http://hwbot.org/hardware/processor/ryzen_7_2700x/


----------



## Jpe1701

I joined the club yesterday!!!! Love it. I can't get it to upload my cpu-z shot. Is it because I'm new maybe? I was going to join the Ryzen 7 first gen owners club last year but never got around to it I guess.

Edit: here's a link https://valid.x86.fr/wfjxfb


----------



## VPII

zGunBLADEz said:


> I have a custom loop koolance 380 block with UT60 and CorsairSP fans @ 2700rpms
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I share a little tweak back in the other ryzen topic to make the windows use the cpu as it should be, instead of randomly throw threads to any core. This tweaks shine even more on this cpu as it makes sure it boost even more as you have less un-usued cores ending boosting more by itself in the end. It goes in order from 0 to 15 as needed it dont randomly throw threads all over the cpu/cores.
> This way if you running a application that do not requires all 16threads you can benefit from the XFR/PB of this cpu
> 
> This is the app
> https://sourceforge.net/projects/rightmark/files/
> 
> the pictures are the settings you need to change
> 
> PD: you also get better combined score or better cpu usage in windows 7 on ryzen.


I tried it last night but for some reason my results dropped by quite a bit. Another app I use is Park Control Pro, to not just check core parking but also set the performance / power scheme. It seems to help a bit, but I cannot seem to replicate my previous best at 4.3ghz.

As an example this was my best run with the cpu at 4.3ghz

https://www.3dmark.com/fs/15391797

And this was a run I did with my processor under Dry Ice and running 4.9ghz. Look at the difference in combined score and graphics score.

https://www.3dmark.com/fs/15410915


----------



## chroniclard

Shiftstealth said:


> I don't see my voltage boost above 1.428 on mine. So 1.5v sounds kind of high, but i wouldn't worry about it. What cooler are you using? 4090 for PE3 sounds kind of low. When i used PE3 i would stay at 4141 mhz steady.


I changed to LLC 1 from Auto and now 4114 ish all core, still same 4392 max boost. Still 1.481 max V.

Have a custom loop, 360 rad, 240 rad, with a 1080 in there as well. Temperatures are great, around 50 max gaming/everyday usage.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

VPII said:


> I tried it last night but for some reason my results dropped by quite a bit. Another app I use is Park Control Pro, to not just check core parking but also set the performance / power scheme. It seems to help a bit, but I cannot seem to replicate my previous best at 4.3ghz.
> 
> As an example this was my best run with the cpu at 4.3ghz
> 
> https://www.3dmark.com/fs/15391797
> 
> And this was a run I did with my processor under Dry Ice and running 4.9ghz. Look at the difference in combined score and graphics score.
> 
> https://www.3dmark.com/fs/15410915


yeah its tricky, but you see your gpu is getting used better than forcing 49x all cores instead. You get better physics but ur gpu perf hurts


----------



## AlphaC

I just figured out how to make my R7 2700X CPU shut down due to CPU thermals (of all things).

8 threads or more in VirtualBox with SVM enabled , BOINC running 8 threads. 6 threads is fine , power remains under 100W and voltage under 1.35V-ish. CPU ~65°C for 6 threads.
Will have another try on X470 once I get better RAM for it.

I think [email protected] hammers it so hard that the virtualization breaks.

edit: I turned off PBO and temps only hit 60°C now


----------



## geoxile

Is it just me or are the 2700x's temps really unstable? It'll occasionally spin up to 4.35ghz and 1.4+V when web browsing and the temps immediately kick up to nearly 70C in HWinfo (60C actually I think, with offset accounted for). It causes my fans to spin up to max. The 1700 I'm swapping out never had any issues like this and had relatively stable temps, or at the very least it was never in a situation where the temps jumped like 25C instantly.


----------



## Shiftstealth

geoxile said:


> Is it just me or are the 2700x's temps really unstable? It'll occasionally spin up to 4.35ghz and 1.4+V when web browsing and the temps immediately kick up to nearly 70C in HWinfo (60C actually I think, with offset accounted for). It causes my fans to spin up to max. The 1700 I'm swapping out never had any issues like this and had relatively stable temps, or at the very least it was never in a situation where the temps jumped like 25C instantly.


Heh, yeah. I really want to rock the wraith prism because it looks cool. However there have been instances where i've seen the temps spike up to 82C (TDie). It wasn't even in prime or anything. I think i had wow open. Hopefully i get my FSP Windale 6 here shortly. Should prevent that from happening.


----------



## VPII

Is there any confirmation that there is a temperature off-set with the 2700X? I've read a couple places people mention a 10C° off-set, it would be great to know whether this a in fact true.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

VPII said:


> Is there any confirmation that there is a temperature off-set with the 2700X? I've read a couple places people mention a 10C° off-set, it would be great to know whether this a in fact true.


there is... on HWiNFO64 it shows in the Tctl... Tdie however is accurate core temperature reading.


----------



## VPII

Minotaurtoo said:


> there is... on HWiNFO64 it shows in the Tctl... Tdie however is accurate core temperature reading.


Thank you, then I'm pretty happy with my 24/7 overclock as my cpu then only heats up to about 73 to 74C while running Aida64 stress test for a while as it is stable at only 1.268vcore running 4.225ghz.


----------



## Wolfeshaman

VPII said:


> Thank you, then I'm pretty happy with my 24/7 overclock as my cpu then only heats up to about 73 to 74C while running Aida64 stress test for a while as it is stable at only 1.268vcore running 4.225ghz.


I know it was already answered but yes there is still an offset. You might also want to keep and eye out as some of us have experienced a few programs reporting massively higher temps than what it is. 

That being said though, Overall I think I'm pretty happy with the performance of this chip even on stock. There is a really noticeable difference between how my computer was running with the 1800x and now with the 2700x.


----------



## chroniclard

Strange, yesterday 4114 all core boost, today "only" 4089....hmm


----------



## geoxile

Shiftstealth said:


> geoxile said:
> 
> 
> 
> Is it just me or are the 2700x's temps really unstable? It'll occasionally spin up to 4.35ghz and 1.4+V when web browsing and the temps immediately kick up to nearly 70C in HWinfo (60C actually I think, with offset accounted for). It causes my fans to spin up to max. The 1700 I'm swapping out never had any issues like this and had relatively stable temps, or at the very least it was never in a situation where the temps jumped like 25C instantly.
> 
> 
> 
> Heh, yeah. I really want to rock the wraith prism because it looks cool. However there have been instances where i've seen the temps spike up to 82C (TDie). It wasn't even in prime or anything. I think i had wow open. Hopefully i get my FSP Windale 6 here shortly. Should prevent that from happening.
Click to expand...

I have a noctua nh-u14s and the spike still causes the fan to go nuts. Guess the only way to fix it is to set a custom fan curve. AMD and co should do something to normalize those random spikes in the sensors so fans don't spin up and down constantly over half a second of heat


----------



## chroniclard

geoxile said:


> I have a noctua nh-u14s and the spike still causes the fan to go nuts. Guess the only way to fix it is to set a custom fan curve. AMD and co should do something to normalize those random spikes in the sensors so fans don't spin up and down constantly over half a second of heat


I set my watercooling fans in the bios with a custom curve, with a 5 second(I think) spin up/down time, seems to work ok.


----------



## kd5151

Attention kmart shoppers!!!

2700X is $280.50 on ebay with the star wars coupon. May the cores be with you!

I finally picked one up! Might need my head examined but I also picked up the Gigabyte X470 Gaming 7.


----------



## waltercaorle

my pc occasionally freezes, loss of video signal and I have to remove the power. I thought it was a problem with ram but it also happens to default. up to 10 days ago with 1700x I had no problems ... can it be a broken cpu? I had the last bios, released yesterday, but nothing ..


----------



## AlphaC

waltercaorle said:


> my pc occasionally freezes, loss of video signal and I have to remove the power. I thought it was a problem with ram but it also happens to default. up to 10 days ago with 1700x I had no problems ... can it be a broken cpu? I had the last bios, released yesterday, but nothing ..


What motherboard are you using an on what BIOS version? How are you cooling it?

There are so many details you're leaving out.


----------



## waltercaorle

AlphaC said:


> What motherboard are you using an on what BIOS version? How are you cooling it?
> 
> There are so many details you're leaving out.


b350 strix i, bios 4011
2x8gb tridentz @2133
Ax860
Corsair h100i v2
1080ti
Win 10 pro original (fresh install)


----------



## AlphaC

Are you using a Freesync monitor with the Nvidia GPU? I've seen it reported that the monitor will lose signal in that situation.

Also check your power plan to make sure PCIE power saving is disabled.


----------



## waltercaorle

AlphaC said:


> Are you using a Freesync monitor with the Nvidia GPU? I've seen it reported that the monitor will lose signal in that situation.
> 
> Also check your power plan to make sure PCIE power saving is disabled.


none of this ... I have a pg348q. I can play for an hour, make some benchmarks and other things and everything is fine then suddenly, even in idle, it crashes


----------



## AlphaC

Do you get WHEA errors and did you check the BSOD log? 

Are you using even memory timings or turned off gear down mode for the memory in BIOS?

Maybe try to reinstall the chipset driver too https://support.amd.com/en-us/download/chipset?os=Windows 10 - 64


----------



## waltercaorle

AlphaC said:


> Do you get WHEA errors and did you check the BSOD log?
> 
> Are you using even memory timings or turned off gear down mode for the memory in BIOS?
> 
> Maybe try to reinstall the chipset driver too https://support.amd.com/en-us/download/chipset?os=Windows 10 - 64


no, with the first problems I left the bios at default, without touching anything. unfortunately the problems are there too ..
I have not bsod. the video disappears and the PC stays on. the reset does not work and I have to turn off the power supply..
i try with chipset driver..

Thanks for your interest


----------



## Minotaurtoo

waltercaorle said:


> none of this ... I have a pg348q. I can play for an hour, make some benchmarks and other things and everything is fine then suddenly, even in idle, it crashes


I had this happen just a couple months ago... turned out to be a bad PSU... had an intermittent short in it...was completely random.


----------



## miklkit

Someone else had a similar issue and found it to be the cable from the video card to the monitor was bad.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

miklkit said:


> Someone else had a similar issue and found it to be the cable from the video card to the monitor was bad.


given the change in cpu, it could be any number of cables that were wiggled or damaged just right... so that's a good possibility.


----------



## geoxile

waltercaorle said:


> no, with the first problems I left the bios at default, without touching anything. unfortunately the problems are there too ..
> I have not bsod. the video disappears and the PC stays on. the reset does not work and I have to turn off the power supply..
> i try with chipset driver..
> 
> Thanks for your interest


Are you using displayport and is your displayport a properly certified brand/model?


----------



## polkfan

It just feels more snappy i love this 2700X at stock i get 1800 points in R15 and 180 in the ST test. 


I can play around with this little guy so far doing R15 test runs and what not temps have been fine 58C max with the H150i maybe i got a nice chip who knows but i will find out haha. 


Most likely though i'll just run this guy at stock until Ryzen 2 comes out. 


Feels nice i spent 330$ on my 1700 one year ago and now i have the 2700X for the same amount!


----------



## Minotaurtoo

polkfan said:


> It just feels more snappy i love this 2700X at stock i get 1800 points in R15 and 180 in the ST test.
> 
> 
> I can play around with this little guy so far doing R15 test runs and what not temps have been fine 58C max with the H150i maybe i got a nice chip who knows but i will find out haha.
> 
> 
> Most likely though i'll just run this guy at stock until Ryzen 2 comes out.
> 
> 
> Feels nice i spent 330$ on my 1700 one year ago and now i have the 2700X for the same amount!


I'm happy : ) sold the cooler for over 40$ sold my old 1700 for just under 200$ so basically I have a 90$ upgrade... and I just found the precision boost overdrive in my bios...they hid it well... that netted me another 50-150mhz depending on the task at hand using stock settings... only thing it didn't change was the actual boost levels it just boosts higher more often...


----------



## geoxile

I'm using a c6h with a 2700x and so far it seems like the 2700x is worse at handling memory. Can't even hit 2933mhz...


----------



## waltercaorle

Minotaurtoo said:


> I had this happen just a couple months ago... turned out to be a bad PSU... had an intermittent short in it...was completely random.





miklkit said:


> Someone else had a similar issue and found it to be the cable from the video card to the monitor was bad.





Minotaurtoo said:


> given the change in cpu, it could be any number of cables that were wiggled or damaged just right... so that's a good possibility.


hello guys .. I removed all the cables, tested with a voltmeter and reconnected everything. no way  Monday i can try another power supply..

for those who ask, i use the displayport cable from asus


----------



## geoxile

waltercaorle said:


> hello guys .. I removed all the cables, tested with a voltmeter and reconnected everything. no way  Monday i can try another power supply..
> 
> for those who ask, i use the displayport cable from asus


I would try buying a new displayport cable that's certified by VESA. I had problems caused by a bad displayport cable, including boot errors and crash to black, but I got this:
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0098HVZBE/ref=oh_aui_search_detailpage?ie=UTF8&psc=1 and now everything works fine. You might have to power cycle your monitor too (unplug from power and leave for 30 to 60 sec)


----------



## polkfan

Minotaurtoo said:


> I'm happy : ) sold the cooler for over 40$ sold my old 1700 for just under 200$ so basically I have a 90$ upgrade... and I just found the precision boost overdrive in my bios...they hid it well... that netted me another 50-150mhz depending on the task at hand using stock settings... only thing it didn't change was the actual boost levels it just boosts higher more often...


I for real just had a person ask me on ebay for just the Prism cooler and wanted to pay 40$ for it like *** man trying to get 150-200$ for both the 1700 and the Prism but it seems like maybe i should separate the 2?


----------



## jprovido

polkfan said:


> I for real just had a person ask me on ebay for just the Prism cooler and wanted to pay 40$ for it like *** man trying to get 150-200$ for both the 1700 and the Prism but it seems like maybe i should separate the 2?


sold my 1700x+prism for 200. just wanted to get rid of it asap tbh


----------



## Luminair

geoxile said:


> I have a noctua nh-u14s and the spike still causes the fan to go nuts. Guess the only way to fix it is to set a custom fan curve. AMD and co should do something to normalize those random spikes in the sensors so fans don't spin up and down constantly over half a second of heat


This problem has already been solved  I don't know where it is in your bios, but buried somewhere should be an option to change the "spin up time" or "hysteresis" for the fan. So let's say it's 2 seconds by default. A jump from 50% temperature max to 100% temp max for 2 seconds will cause the fan to go from quiet to loud. But if you changed it to 20 or 30 seconds, it would go from quiet to quiet, because the spinup time is so slow that the fan speed lags behind the temp change, and then the temp goes back down before the fan ever had a chance to speed up. The Asus tweaking tool for windows will actually raise this bios setting to 20 or 30 seconds when you use its automatic overclock feature because whoever made the tool knows that crazy random fan speeds are annoying 




geoxile said:


> I'm using a c6h with a 2700x and so far it seems like the 2700x is worse at handling memory. Can't even hit 2933mhz...


The quality of the chips is random, and Zen and Zen+ both have the same weak memory controller which varies a lot from chip to chip. So it is entirely possible that a new 2700x will have worse memory compatibility than an old 1700... Sorry, but probably all you can do is sell it and try again


----------



## JYYJ

Would Cryorig H7 Quad lumi, rated TDP 160w sufficient for 2700x? No OC intended. 

Sent from my Redmi Note 3 using Tapatalk


----------



## Minotaurtoo

polkfan said:


> I for real just had a person ask me on ebay for just the Prism cooler and wanted to pay 40$ for it like *** man trying to get 150-200$ for both the 1700 and the Prism but it seems like maybe i should separate the 2?


definitely separate... I got 41 for the prism and 196 for the 1700 both on auctions.


----------



## geoxile

Luminair said:


> This problem has already been solved  I don't know where it is in your bios, but buried somewhere should be an option to change the "spin up time" or "hysteresis" for the fan. So let's say it's 2 seconds by default. A jump from 50% temperature max to 100% temp max for 2 seconds will cause the fan to go from quiet to loud. But if you changed it to 20 or 30 seconds, it would go from quiet to quiet, because the spinup time is so slow that the fan speed lags behind the temp change, and then the temp goes back down before the fan ever had a chance to speed up. The Asus tweaking tool for windows will actually raise this bios setting to 20 or 30 seconds when you use its automatic overclock feature because whoever made the tool knows that crazy random fan speeds are annoying
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The quality of the chips is random, and Zen and Zen+ both have the same weak memory controller which varies a lot from chip to chip. So it is entirely possible that a new 2700x will have worse memory compatibility than an old 1700... Sorry, but probably all you can do is sell it and try again


I was able to get memory up to 3200mhz by using looser timings. Not the ideal solution but it seems to be working okay. As for the spin-up time. It helped a little but doesn't really solve the problem for me. Anything above 5s seems to start dropping performance since I'm not OCing it manually, it apparently affects boost behavior. The best compromise I found was a 2.5s spin up and the ASUS C6H's silent preset for fan. Same boost behavior as stock and the fans spin up less frequently.


----------



## polkfan

Minotaurtoo said:


> definitely separate... I got 41 for the prism and 196 for the 1700 both on auctions.


Yeah i just ended the listing so i could do it that way haha i had 2 people wanting to buy it for 40$ why are people wanting this cooler so badly. 

Its loud isn't? Never tried it but man.


----------



## chroniclard

For those that are using boost what sort of voltages are you using/seeing?


----------



## Minotaurtoo

polkfan said:


> Yeah i just ended the listing so i could do it that way haha i had 2 people wanting to buy it for 40$ why are people wanting this cooler so badly.
> 
> Its loud isn't? Never tried it but man.


no idea...pretty colors?


chroniclard said:


> For those that are using boost what sort of voltages are you using/seeing?


1.55 tops for the 4.35ghz xfr boost... 1.44 for 4.25 boost levels and 1.3x for 4.05 levels.


----------



## AlphaC

polkfan said:


> I for real just had a person ask me on ebay for just the Prism cooler and wanted to pay 40$ for it like *** man trying to get 150-200$ for both the 1700 and the Prism but it seems like maybe i should separate the 2?


Prism is a hot item, Ryzen 7 not so much.


----------



## Luminair

geoxile said:


> Anything above 5s seems to start dropping performance since I'm not OCing it manually, it apparently affects boost behavior. The best compromise I found was a 2.5s spin up and the ASUS C6H's silent preset for fan.


Yeah! That would be a different way of accomplishing the same thing. Either you have a wide fan speeds range and a slow spinup/spindown speed, or you have a narrow fan speed range and make the maximum speed low. So you need your minimum fan speed at such a level that regular usage doesn't slow down the chip by throttling. Personally I have noctua fans idle at a silent speed and slowly spin up to whatever speed is necessary to keep temps out of the danger zone. I think some of the nvidia/amd/intel automatic boost systems lower peak speeds before dangerous temps are reached, so you're right that keeping temps low early is good if you're not manually overclocking.


----------



## gtz

Any non x 2700 owners? Just read the whole thread and don't see any mention on the chip?

Just curious, what are people's experience with those chips.


----------



## abso

How much voltage do most 2700X chips need to get 4Ghz allcore? My 1700X needs 1.281V so Im not sure if it is worth upgrading.


----------



## chroniclard

abso said:


> How much voltage do most 2700X chips need to get 4Ghz allcore? My 1700X needs 1.281V so Im not sure if it is worth upgrading.


My voltage when using all core @ 4089 is 1.281V, however boosting to 4392 it will use about 1.475V

Not sure it was worth upgrading from my 1700X but its a really nice CPU and a decent Ryzen evolution.


----------



## VPII

abso said:


> How much voltage do most 2700X chips need to get 4Ghz allcore? My 1700X needs 1.281V so Im not sure if it is worth upgrading.


It is difficult to say for when I read many of the people's comments here regarding voltage needed for various speed most of them fairly high. I'm pretty fortunate with my cpu, I think I may have purchased one of the first here in South Africa. My cpu can run 4.2ghz using only 1.268vcore set in the bios but when read with a multimeter it is actually 1.263v. 

I've tested my cpu with performance enhancement in the bios of the CHVII Hero and I was surprised when I saw the cpu running at 43 x 100 which is 4.29 to 4.3ghz (with PH set to 4) and perfectly stable with only 1.35vcore which is 1.32v when measuring with a multimeter. 

So with these cpu's it is more luck than anything else with the cpu you'll get. Your 1700X needing 1.281vcore for 4ghz is not bad so it is a tough call whether to go with 2700X or keeping your 1700X.


----------



## TristanL

"joinging" the club tomorrow, which power-plan do you guys use?


----------



## Minotaurtoo

TristanL said:


> "joinging" the club tomorrow, which power-plan do you guys use?


I use balanced... but some say performance is best..


----------



## i_max2k2

Hi guys, moved a few days back to the dark side. I have been able to get my proc to do 4.4Ghz with PB2 (atleast on some cores) , being at 101 bclk and -0.1 on manual offset voltage. On the other hand I'm trying to understand the motherboard options, coming from 2600k, there are some similarities but I am not sure what are good voltages to stick to. I saw someone using 2.1v for PLL, what are you guys trying to stablize 4.3ghz+, I'm fairly stable with Vcore 1.394v on CPU for 4.3ghz everything else auto. I haven't tried PE settings yet.


----------



## VPII

i_max2k2 said:


> Hi guys, moved a few days back to the dark side. I have been able to get my proc to do 4.4Ghz with PB2 (atleast on some cores) , being at 101 bclk and -0.1 on manual offset voltage. On the other hand I'm trying to understand the motherboard options, coming from 2600k, there are some similarities but I am not sure what are good voltages to stick to. I saw someone using 2.1v for PLL, what are you guys trying to stablize 4.3ghz+, I'm fairly stable with Vcore 1.394v on CPU for 4.3ghz everything else auto. I haven't tried PE settings yet.


I personally try to keep my vcore in the low 1.3v range with 1.35vcore as max. I do feel that using a vcore less than 1.3v is best to ensure that temps do not reach 80C. At present I'm perfectly stable with my cpu at 4.216ghz using only 1.268vcore which reads with the dmm 1.263v. As for the other voltages, I've set them manually as follow:

CPU SOC Voltage: 1.05v
1.8 PLL Voltage: 1.82v
1.05 SB Voltage: 1.05v

I've used this to get the most stable with my memory running stock 3200Mhz CL14 14 14 34 T1. I've also set LLC 5 in the bios as the vdrop was to much if left on auto and I prefer to have a stable voltage. The above voltage settings is set the same when I run my 2700X at 4.36ghz except for the vcore where I need 1.44v. This however I'll only do for short bench runs.

When I used Performance Enhancement 4 it would overclock my cpu to 4.29ghz with the vcore still on auto it will only go as high as 1.35v, but with the LLC on auto it will read with the dmm as 1.32v. It is not perfectly stable, but good enough to run benchmarks.


----------



## i_max2k2

VPII said:


> I personally try to keep my vcore in the low 1.3v range with 1.35vcore as max. I do feel that using a vcore less than 1.3v is best to ensure that temps do not reach 80C. At present I'm perfectly stable with my cpu at 4.216ghz using only 1.268vcore which reads with the dmm 1.263v. As for the other voltages, I've set them manually as follow:
> 
> CPU SOC Voltage: 1.05v
> 1.8 PLL Voltage: 1.82v
> 1.05 SB Voltage: 1.05v
> 
> I've used this to get the most stable with my memory running stock 3200Mhz CL14 14 14 34 T1. I've also set LLC 5 in the bios as the vdrop was to much if left on auto and I prefer to have a stable voltage. The above voltage settings is set the same when I run my 2700X at 4.36ghz except for the vcore where I need 1.44v. This however I'll only do for short bench runs.
> 
> When I used Performance Enhancement 4 it would overclock my cpu to 4.29ghz with the vcore still on auto it will only go as high as 1.35v, but with the LLC on auto it will read with the dmm as 1.32v. It is not perfectly stable, but good enough to run benchmarks.


Thank you. On IBT at 1.394v the system reaches a maximum of 78C for 10 runs, with not so high ambients, I have a feeling I'll never touch 80 on my day to day to stuff. But for now, I have gone back to 101 Bclk and negative offset of 0.1v, which can boost the proc up to 4.4ghz. I'll run some benches on both ends and see how that looks.


----------



## Sasquatchen

abso said:


> How much voltage do most 2700X chips need to get 4Ghz allcore? My 1700X needs 1.281V so Im not sure if it is worth upgrading.


I can get a stable 4Ghz all cores at 1.188v, and 4.23Ghz all cores at 1.375v. Just looking at others' numbers it just depends on your chip.


----------



## TristanL

Minotaurtoo said:


> I use balanced... but some say performance is best..


thanks! The standard balanced or still the Ryzen balanced? - no member as for today, thx amazon :/


----------



## Minotaurtoo

TristanL said:


> thanks! The standard balanced or still the Ryzen balanced? - no member as for today, thx amazon :/


never actually installed the Ryzen balanced on this system so it's just the standard balanced... just for giggles I tried the high power and it did make a slight difference in some apps... cinebench mc score went up about 20 pts but that's about the biggest I saw... single core stayed the same strangely...


----------



## zGunBLADEz

Not too shabby for a B350-I mobo and a 32G Kit XD


----------



## Minotaurtoo

these cpu's are just insane powerful... it's hard to believe still for me how far AMD has come... was just Feb last year that best cpu AMD had was a 9590 and now these more than double the performance of those... my highest ever score was 827 in cinebench and now I'm getting 1845 on "enhanced" stock settings.


----------



## ShiftyJ

I can't seem to get PE1 or PE2 to boot, do I have a complete dud of a chip or is something else wrong?

Ryzen 2700X
Crosshair VI Hero Bios 6004


----------



## spyshagg

Most my games (Assetto Corsa etc) are single threaded only, so this cpu is not the perfect match for my needs. 

However, I'm hoping it to be 10% faster than my 4.05ghz 1800x, which is to say, ~4.5ghz ST. 

Seen some people reaching it with level 3 and some BCLK clocking. Here's hoping!


----------



## Minotaurtoo

it's possible that it's not giving enough voltage or is simply trying to high of a clock... or any number of other factors... I'm assuming that 6004 is the latest bios for that board (I honestly have no idea) but can you even get into bios on PE1/2 or is it a complete no post? I only ask because if it's not raising voltage enough, you may need to up the LLC settings or set a voltage offset... but I say this with caution since many boards including mine, really push the voltage limits even at complete stock settings.


----------



## ShiftyJ

I've got it post at both PE1 and PE2 from just consistent rebooting.

Voltage goes to 1.4 for PE1 and 1.5 for PE2 but temps are okay, is this normal or am I just unlucky?


----------



## Minotaurtoo

ShiftyJ said:


> I've got it post at both PE1 and PE2 from just consistent rebooting.
> 
> Voltage goes to 1.4 for PE1 and 1.5 for PE2 but temps are okay, is this normal or am I just unlucky?


voltage is pretty high for sustained times..but high enough that it shouldn't be unstable... but then many time "auto oc" like that will be unstable... could try upping the LLC settings a bit... I've heard others have to do that...but yeah...maybe just not the silicone lottery winner


----------



## ShiftyJ

Minotaurtoo said:


> voltage is pretty high for sustained times..but high enough that it shouldn't be unstable... but then many time "auto oc" like that will be unstable... could try upping the LLC settings a bit... I've heard others have to do that...but yeah...maybe just not the silicone lottery winner


Thanks, what's a safe LLC level for 24/7 use?


----------



## Minotaurtoo

ShiftyJ said:


> Thanks, what's a safe LLC level for 24/7 use?


depends on your board...mine I can set to extreme (max) level and still not exceed the bios set voltage by more than .01 some boards list it as level1, 2, 3 etc... on those I don't know, but you don't want to set it on a level high enough to exceed your bios set voltage if you can help it... a little overshoot is ok (.01) but some will over shoot by extreme amounts like .1... I aim to set mine where voltage is as close to bios set voltage as possible, that simple...


----------



## tekjunkie28

Minotaurtoo said:


> I'm happy : ) sold the cooler for over 40$ sold my old 1700 for just under 200$ so basically I have a 90$ upgrade... and I just found the precision boost overdrive in my bios...they hid it well... that netted me another 50-150mhz depending on the task at hand using stock settings... only thing it didn't change was the actual boost levels it just boosts higher more often...


Precision boost override? What is that? What do I set it as?

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## tekjunkie28

Minotaurtoo said:


> never actually installed the Ryzen balanced on this system so it's just the standard balanced... just for giggles I tried the high power and it did make a slight difference in some apps... cinebench mc score went up about 20 pts but that's about the biggest I saw... single core stayed the same strangely...


I have found that in cpuz the single core actually goes down about 10-20 points using ryzen balanced plan or high performance. But I also have noticed a very very slight performance boost in those 2 also in games but its not worth even opening power plan window to change it. 

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## polkfan

Ryzen Master 
1.35V 4.275Ghz Fail can't run R15 once

So we know i don't have some magical chip lol gonna keep trying


----------



## Minotaurtoo

tekjunkie28 said:


> Precision boost override? What is that? What do I set it as?
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


Precision boost overdrive basically sets the power limits and temp limits up a bit so it stays higher clocked on more cores longer... and all mine has for settings is auto, disable, enable, and manual... on my board enabled is said to use boards power limit and thermal limits so I set it there and seems to work fine... and finding it can be frustrating... (going by memory here lol...) advanced > CBS (or something like it) > nsib (again not sure) > amd precision boost overdrive > accepted > then you can select enabled.... I know that's not a very good map as I've forgotten the exact name of two of the menu selections, but maybe its close enough for some idea, and I'm sure no two boards are exactly the same anyway due to differences in bios layouts.


----------



## chroniclard

Been using PE3, 103.4 bclk, -0.4 offset. Which ends up with 4497ish boost and around 4181 all core.

Voltage does end up 1.512 sometimes but temperatures are under control so think its ok. (seeing as it uses more volts stock!)


----------



## jprovido

what's the cheapest X470 motherboard that I can get away with that has no problems overclocking a 2700x? I'm thinking of upgrading my B350 motherboard. I feel bad for it because the vrm's doesn't have heatsinks lol


----------



## xtheEnemy

Hi guys, first time posting here.

Anyone here using the Wraith Prism cooler and/or the Aorus Ultra Gaming Mobo? 
What's your cinebench score and load temp at?

I'm not sure if my score/temp/voltage is "ok" 

https://i.imgur.com/QaHgTA3.jpg

I set everything to stock with just XMP and XFR on. 
Aida64 stress test can hit upto 90C though :/ 

https://valid.x86.fr/bn355a


----------



## tekjunkie28

Stock everything with aorus gaming 5 wifi and 2700x stock. Ram is 16 18 18 36 3200mhz. Cinebemch score is just like your 1756 1770

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## xtheEnemy

Is that with Cinebench set in Realtime in Task Manager?

I noticed when it is not in Real Time it goes down to 1600-1650~.

Also, Quick question, According to tweaktown, the 2700X has a 10C offset. So the temp that I see in Ryzen Master/HWINFO (CPU(Tdie)) I should -10 from that ?


----------



## kd5151

xtheEnemy said:


> Is that with Cinebench set in Realtime in Task Manager?
> 
> I noticed when it is not in Real Time it goes down to 1600-1650~.
> 
> Also, Quick question, According to tweaktown, the 2700X has a 10C offset. So the temp that I see in Ryzen Master/HWINFO (CPU(Tdie)) I should -10 from that ?


Yes. Also the prism has a switch on the cooler that controls max rpm of the fan. Low setting is about 2750 rpm. High setting is about 3750 rpm. Can be noisy though on high.


----------



## spyshagg

chroniclard said:


> Been using PE3, 103.4 bclk, -0.4 offset. Which ends up with 4497ish boost and around 4181 all core.
> 
> Voltage does end up 1.512 sometimes but temperatures are under control so think its ok. (seeing as it uses more volts stock!)


What board and what LLC are you using?


----------



## Billy_BAD_Boy

Hi guys,

After upgrading to latest BIOS from Asus 4011, my temps started to vary a lot and the fans seems to freak out. With the stock bios things were a lot better. Tried 2.6 sec. offset, but little help. 

Also I noticed that probably due to higher reported temps the score in CB15 dropped around 30 cb. Before all cores managed around 4GHz in the test, but now it is dropping bellow 3.9 GHz.

Tried PBO but the score is again lower than previous bios.

What would you recommend? Going back to 4008

ASUS x470 prime plus and 2700X

Thanks!


----------



## Minotaurtoo

Billy_BAD_Boy said:


> Hi guys,
> 
> After upgrading to latest BIOS from Asus 4011, my temps started to vary a lot and the fans seems to freak out. With the stock bios things were a lot better. Tried 2.6 sec. offset, but little help.
> 
> Also I noticed that probably due to higher reported temps the score in CB15 dropped around 30 cb. Before all cores managed around 4GHz in the test, but now it is dropping bellow 3.9 GHz.
> 
> Tried PBO but the score is again lower than previous bios.
> 
> What would you recommend? Going back to 4008
> 
> ASUS x470 prime plus and 2700X
> 
> Thanks!


I recently had a similar experience... I flashed back to old bios and all is well again...


----------



## Minotaurtoo

For those with Asus boards (even b350 boards) ASUS zenstates has been updated to work with 2000 series cpu's... personally I loved zenstates as a nice simple p-state overclocker for the 1000 series, but for the 2700x the only real use I saw was the performance enhancer where level 3 resulted in an all core oc of 4.15ghz but it cut down top single core clock to 4.25 on mine a bit of a trade off... and was a bit flaky so I just went back to stockish settings.

here is the link: http://www.overclock.net/forum/13-amd-general/1684897-asus-zenstates.html


----------



## Billy_BAD_Boy

Back to BIOS 0222 and all is ok now.

I don't know what is asus doing with the new updates but they are simply not working well.


----------



## LancerVI

May I join you?

2700x on Asus Prime X470-Pro



Also.....I haven't run an AMD proc since my old FX-53.......HWinfo and AISuite are telling me one thing about temp and MSI afterburner another; approx 10 degrees higher. Which one is right?

I also feel like a stranger in a foreign land in BIOS. Any tips/tricks would be appreciated.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

LancerVI said:


> May I join you?
> 
> 2700x on Asus Prime X470-Pro
> 
> 
> 
> Also.....I haven't run an AMD proc since my old FX-53.......HWinfo and AISuite are telling me one thing about temp and MSI afterburner another; approx 10 degrees higher. Which one is right?
> 
> I also feel like a stranger in a foreign land in BIOS. Any tips/tricks would be appreciated.


well.. the tdie temp on hwinfo is correct as I understand it... tctl is an offset temp with a + 10c offset.

as for bios help, I suggest using stock settings with only memory docp settings enabled and performance enhancer or amd precision boost overdrive turned on... anything else usually sacrifices your peak single thread speeds (mine reaches 4.35 ghz) so unless you can achieve an all core OC of 4.25 or better stock may actually give better performance overall... In most games my cpu boosts that high on 4 or so cores anyway.... now on extreme all core loads it drops down to 4.075 with precision boost overdrive on and down to 4ghz with it off.


----------



## LancerVI

Minotaurtoo said:


> well.. the tdie temp on hwinfo is correct as I understand it... tctl is an offset temp with a + 10c offset.
> 
> as for bios help, I suggest using stock settings with only memory docp settings enabled and performance enhancer or amd precision boost overdrive turned on... anything else usually sacrifices your peak single thread speeds (mine reaches 4.35 ghz) so unless you can achieve an all core OC of 4.25 or better stock may actually give better performance overall... In most games my cpu boosts that high on 4 or so cores anyway.... now on extreme all core loads it drops down to 4.075 with precision boost overdrive on and down to 4ghz with it off.


Awesome. Thanks brother.


----------



## chroniclard

spyshagg said:


> What board and what LLC are you using?


CH6 and if I recall correctly LLC 3.


----------



## spyshagg

Whats the name of the software people here use to switch between windows power profiles?

I had one I got from this forum, that enabled me to set power plan per application. I uninstalled it ages ago but it must have left the settings still enabled, thus when I run some specific apps, it auto switches from Balanced to Performance..


----------



## PriestOfSin

Got my 2700X last week, have been thoroughly enjoying it. Seems to run a bit hotter than my OC'd R7 1700, but my cooling solution is A E S T H E T I C first, performance second. Honestly kinda surprised that it works so well on my X370 Taichi. XFR typically boosts up to 4.2 on a single core, and seems to settle on 4.0 / 4.1 on all cores during gaming, etc.

Getting another 16gb kit of 3200 CL14 memory this weekend, too. I'll finally be able to populate all my ram slots.


----------



## Shiftstealth

PriestOfSin said:


> Got my 2700X last week, have been thoroughly enjoying it. Seems to run a bit hotter than my OC'd R7 1700, but my cooling solution is A E S T H E T I C first, performance second. Honestly kinda surprised that it works so well on my X370 Taichi. XFR typically boosts up to 4.2 on a single core, and seems to settle on 4.0 / 4.1 on all cores during gaming, etc.
> 
> Getting another 16gb kit of 3200 CL14 memory this weekend, too. I'll finally be able to populate all my ram slots.


Grats sir.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

for anyone who doesn't think stress testing is needed and those who think games can't use 16 threads... I present to you me playing universe sandbox 2 .... this was an intense multi galaxy and super massive black hole experiment I did... and dang can it use up some cores... strangely, it seemed to draw more power than intel burn test and actually pushed the core clocks down below what cinebench does (all settings are auto except ram speeds and I have precision boost overdrive on)


----------



## LancerVI

Minotaurtoo said:


> for anyone who doesn't think stress testing is needed and those who think games can't use 16 threads... I present to you me playing universe sandbox 2 .... this was an intense multi galaxy and super massive black hole experiment I did... and dang can it use up some cores... strangely, it seemed to draw more power than intel burn test and actually pushed the core clocks down below what cinebench does (all settings are auto except ram speeds and I have precision boost overdrive on)


That's pretty impressive. I've been meaning to get US/2.


----------



## eXteR

PriestOfSin said:


> Got my 2700X last week, have been thoroughly enjoying it. Seems to run a bit hotter than my OC'd R7 1700, but my cooling solution is A E S T H E T I C first, performance second. Honestly kinda surprised that it works so well on my X370 Taichi. XFR typically boosts up to 4.2 on a single core, and seems to settle on 4.0 / 4.1 on all cores during gaming, etc.
> 
> Getting another 16gb kit of 3200 CL14 memory this weekend, too. I'll finally be able to populate all my ram slots.


I also have X370 Taichi and also as you i'm coming from Ice cold Oc'd 1700x.

2700X apply too much voltage at stock, compared my [email protected] was using 1.27v

I recommend you trying some things:

1- LLC 5
2- Apply Manual Voltage, Offset, input a negative value. Taichi max is -0,1v

Now i'm using PBO, that put also more voltage than default, but if i leave stock and apply -0,5v, it stays at load about 1,2v to all cores.

I tried -0,1v but was too agresive, going to 1.15v all cores at 3.95 and was unstable.

With PBO (TTP 300W) my boost all core is 41.5 on heavy benchmarks like IBT, Prime, YCruncher, etc.

Max temps on those test are 68ºc and gaming real usage max 48-40º.

My CB R15 results are 1888 on Multi and 179 on Single.

Here's a shot yesterday while doing a 2h google stress app to test ram stability at 3333C14.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

LancerVI said:


> That's pretty impressive. I've been meaning to get US/2.


its a big step ahead of the original... and a bit of a shock... I wasn't expecting it to need such high end hardware... but some simulations will actually bring this cpu down to its knees.... still in a quasi beta form too though so there are some issues...like sometimes it will not trigger a higher performance state and all cores will be at idle speeds with 70% usage if you don't pick high power plan in windows.


----------



## Copyright

Recently picked up a 2700X and Gigabyte Gaming 7 X470. Found power plan settings prevent my boost from going up to 4.35. I have to stay on balanced to do this. 


Couple things I need help with....

Where is the XFR setting on my MOBO?
Is anyone doing any better with PBO enbaled?
Should I mess with LLC while at stock clock using PB?
I would like to mess with BCLCK to squeeze out some more performance but need to know how to go about this. 

Coming away from intel this has been a struggle. Still wondering if I should have done the 8700K and just done a delid to 5ghz+. I have delidded the last three I have owned and really enjoyed them. Seems like the X470 boards have more features. 

My other issue is painfully slow boot times compared to my intel setup. Guess this won't matter much as long as Sleep function continues to work. 

I have read that multiplier overclocking really doesn't help much.. could use some advice on other methods to sqeeze out some more performance. Thx for any help!


----------



## Billy_BAD_Boy

Billy_BAD_Boy said:


> Hi guys,
> 
> After upgrading to latest BIOS from Asus 4011, my temps started to vary a lot and the fans seems to freak out. With the stock bios things were a lot better. Tried 2.6 sec. offset, but little help.
> 
> Also I noticed that probably due to higher reported temps the score in CB15 dropped around 30 cb. Before all cores managed around 4GHz in the test, but now it is dropping bellow 3.9 GHz.
> 
> Tried PBO but the score is again lower than previous bios.
> 
> What would you recommend? Going back to 4008
> 
> ASUS x470 prime plus and 2700X
> 
> Thanks!


Actually back to BIOS 0222 and all is good now as it was. Temps are better and fan is not so erratic in spinning. No PBO in this version though. 

STOCK and 3200 14-14-14-28-42 1T @ CB15 *1835* cb










https://imgur.com/0G4WzfA


----------



## Minotaurtoo

Copyright said:


> Recently picked up a 2700X and Gigabyte Gaming 7 X470. Found power plan settings prevent my boost from going up to 4.35. I have to stay on balanced to do this.
> 
> 
> Couple things I need help with....
> 
> Where is the XFR setting on my MOBO?
> Is anyone doing any better with PBO enbaled?
> Should I mess with LLC while at stock clock using PB?
> I would like to mess with BCLCK to squeeze out some more performance but need to know how to go about this.
> 
> Coming away from intel this has been a struggle. Still wondering if I should have done the 8700K and just done a delid to 5ghz+. I have delidded the last three I have owned and really enjoyed them. Seems like the X470 boards have more features.
> 
> My other issue is painfully slow boot times compared to my intel setup. Guess this won't matter much as long as Sleep function continues to work.
> 
> I have read that multiplier overclocking really doesn't help much.. could use some advice on other methods to sqeeze out some more performance. Thx for any help!



Precision boost overdrive made a big difference on mine... I actually don't bother to OC any other way because I can't hit an all core over 4.25ghz anyway.... for the slow boots, usually with fast boot enabled I have boots faster than my monitor can come alive... only restarts take a bit because of the memory training thing ryzen can do sometimes... maybe set all ram timings manually? as for the xfr settings... I find none...seems totally automated on mine, but I have a b350.... xfr still works as I see 4.35ghz regularly on single cores.


----------



## PriestOfSin

eXteR said:


> I also have X370 Taichi and also as you i'm coming from Ice cold Oc'd 1700x.
> 
> 2700X apply too much voltage at stock, compared my [email protected] was using 1.27v
> 
> I recommend you trying some things:
> 
> 1- LLC 5
> 2- Apply Manual Voltage, Offset, input a negative value. Taichi max is -0,1v
> 
> Now i'm using PBO, that put also more voltage than default, but if i leave stock and apply -0,5v, it stays at load about 1,2v to all cores.
> 
> I tried -0,1v but was too agresive, going to 1.15v all cores at 3.95 and was unstable.
> 
> With PBO (TTP 300W) my boost all core is 41.5 on heavy benchmarks like IBT, Prime, YCruncher, etc.
> 
> Max temps on those test are 68ºc and gaming real usage max 48-40º.
> 
> My CB R15 results are 1888 on Multi and 179 on Single.
> 
> Here's a shot yesterday while doing a 2h google stress app to test ram stability at 3333C14.


I *thought* the auto voltage seemed high, I wondered if CPUz was bugging out or something. Will absolutely try your suggestions later on this evening, right now I'm slotting my old 1700 into my brother in law's build... he's coming from an R5 1400, so it should be a pretty dang solid upgrade for him. Also gonna tune his ram.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

for what it's worth I routinely get voltage spikes to 1.55 when boosting to 4.35..... and at stock when an all core boost gets near 4.15 it'll be around 1.4v.... that is pretty normal for these chips... general rule I'm getting from AMD's papers is under 60C higher voltage isn't an issue for short durations... but as temps climb or the load sustains for a long time, the system will automatically drop clocks and voltage to keep it safe.... 



now of coarse if you can apply a - voltage offset and be stable, do it... saves power and heat and will ultimately result in better boosting behavior when working in a temp/current limited situation. I just tried it (again) and tested stability... I have only done a -.05v offset though... so far so good and for the first time I saw an all core boost of 4.2 under mild loads.... (this is with precision boost overdrive on too)


----------



## Juuhuu

Today ran simulation in 1 program that I use and while on my laptop (i7-4700HQ), sim is finished in 4min 56sec, on ryzen 2700X, it was finished in 1min 8sek. This is so great. I was expecting 100-150% improvement not 400+. CPU usage was 89% while on laptop it's 100%. Not sure why since program is capable of using up to 16 threads. Temp in A-tuning (asrock's software) was below 70C all the time (noctua NH-U14S).


----------



## tekjunkie28

Juuhuu said:


> Today ran simulation in 1 program that I use and while on my laptop (i7-4700HQ), sim is finished in 4min 56sec, on ryzen 2700X, it was finished in 1min 8sek. This is so great. I was expecting 100-150% improvement not 400+. CPU usage was 89% while on laptop it's 100%. Not sure why since program is capable of using up to 16 threads. Temp in A-tuning (asrock's software) was below 70C all the time (noctua NH-U14S).


Dang that's fast. Is the 4700 just 4 core without hyperthreading?

Also why is most peoples temps high with beefy aftermarket coolers? I dont go over 65C on the stock cooler. 

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## os2wiz

Copyright said:


> Recently picked up a 2700X and Gigabyte Gaming 7 X470. Found power plan settings prevent my boost from going up to 4.35. I have to stay on balanced to do this.
> 
> 
> Couple things I need help with....
> 
> Where is the XFR setting on my MOBO?
> Is anyone doing any better with PBO enbaled?
> Should I mess with LLC while at stock clock using PB?
> I would like to mess with BCLCK to squeeze out some more performance but need to know how to go about this.
> 
> Coming away from intel this has been a struggle. Still wondering if I should have done the 8700K and just done a delid to 5ghz+. I have delidded the last three I have owned and really enjoyed them. Seems like the X470 boards have more features.
> 
> My other issue is painfully slow boot times compared to my intel setup. Guess this won't matter much as long as Sleep function continues to work.
> 
> I have read that multiplier overclocking really doesn't help much.. could use some advice on other methods to sqeeze out some more performance. Thx for any help!



Are you looking for an core speed of 4.35 GHZ or single core? Most people will not successfully overclock to 4.35 GHZ on all 8 cores unless they have excellent water cooling. I have done a 4.3 GHZ on all 8 cores but was not fully stable. You must be careful not to exceed 1.38 core voltage for 24/7 usage or you will likely reduce the longevity of your cpu. For a benchmark you can get away with 1.42 volts.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

os2wiz said:


> Are you looking for an core speed of 4.35 GHZ or single core? Most people will not successfully overclock to 4.35 GHZ on all 8 cores unless they have excellent water cooling. I have done a 4.3 GHZ on all 8 cores but was not fully stable. You must be careful not to exceed 1.38 core voltage for 24/7 usage or you will likely reduce the longevity of your cpu. For a benchmark you can get away with 1.42 volts.


actually for quick benches and such with some cores disabled you can get away with much more... default settings result in all core boosts to near 1.4 volts under light all core loads... and 1.45 under quad core loads with single core loads hitting upwards of 1.55.... engaging precision boost over drive will push this even higher on all but the single core... running all cores flat out I've seen it hit 1.4v with default voltage.... that's why many of us use a - offset.... default voltages on 2700x is a bit higher than needed... but for 24.7 use... yeah I'd keep under 1.38v : )


----------



## Juuhuu

tekjunkie28 said:


> Dang that's fast. Is the 4700 just 4 core without hyperthreading?
> 
> Also why is most peoples temps high with beefy aftermarket coolers? I dont go over 65C on the stock cooler.


4700 is 8 threads.
In load it gets up to 73C.. but I don't know is that real 73 or is it 73-10?


----------



## lcbbcl

os2wiz said:


> Are you looking for an core speed of 4.35 GHZ or single core? Most people will not successfully overclock to 4.35 GHZ on all 8 cores unless they have excellent water cooling. I have done a 4.3 GHZ on all 8 cores but was not fully stable. You must be careful not to exceed 1.38 core voltage for 24/7 usage or you will likely reduce the longevity of your cpu. For a benchmark you can get away with 1.42 volts.


Do you have a source for the 1.38V 24/7? and you say idle or load?


----------



## Minotaurtoo

lcbbcl said:


> Do you have a source for the 1.38V 24/7? and you say idle or load?


 I don't know where he got it, but it has been put out by various sources I've seen on youtube when the reviews came out... most of them stated that it was for when using the stock air cooler and that higher voltages were acceptable when using high end water cooling.... and the chip itself can detect this...that's why me and many others are seeing voltages hit 1.55 range on single core boosts and holding at or even above 1.4v for multi core boosts... with stock settings... I inserted a negative voltage offset on mine because it didn't need all that voltage to be stable, but I'm sure AMD wouldn't do it if it weren't ok... warranties and all... 



here is a snippit from HWiNFO64 while I was running universe sandbox2... core voltage hitting well over 1.4 and that's with a -.05 offset in the bios : )


----------



## lcbbcl

Minotaurtoo said:


> I don't know where he got it, but it has been put out by various sources I've seen on youtube when the reviews came out... most of them stated that it was for when using the stock air cooler and that higher voltages were acceptable when using high end water cooling.... and the chip itself can detect this...that's why me and many others are seeing voltages hit 1.55 range on single core boosts and holding at or even above 1.4v for multi core boosts... with stock settings... I inserted a negative voltage offset on mine because it didn't need all that voltage to be stable, but I'm sure AMD wouldn't do it if it weren't ok... warranties and all...
> 
> 
> 
> here is a snippit from HWiNFO64 while I was running universe sandbox2... core voltage hitting well over 1.4 and that's with a -.05 offset in the bios : )


I am not concern about PBO when he kick and go at 4.35ghz,that its a moment and its for 1 2 cores but when all cores are at 1.4V then its another story.
I would like to see from AMD a statement for safe voltage.
SiliconLottery says 1.425V


----------



## Minotaurtoo

lcbbcl said:


> I am not concern about PBO when he kick and go at 4.35ghz,that its a moment and its for 1 2 cores but when all cores are at 1.4V then its another story.
> I would like to see from AMD a statement for safe voltage.
> SiliconLottery says 1.425V


 I'm guessing you didn't look at the screen cap... 5 cores were at 4.166ghz 2 were at 4.141 and only one was at 4.116..... that means 5 cores were at 1.437v not one or two and it wasn't just for a moment...it does this hours on end when I am gaming... and that is with the -.05v offset I have in bios... with out that it would have been 1.487 which I saw quite commonly before I put in the offset.


I think when using such high voltages the concern would be more related to heat than direct voltage damage to the chip.... at full load with avx instructions it can pull over 200 watts easy with voltages over 1.4...


edit: I just looked back at my hwinfo64 and after playing a while I saw where it was pulling up to 155watts with only pbo turned on... still temps were in check at only 56C... I imagine a stock cooler would have let it hit temps high enough to trigger downclocking from precision boost and xfr


----------



## tekjunkie28

lcbbcl said:


> I am not concern about PBO when he kick and go at 4.35ghz,that its a moment and its for 1 2 cores but when all cores are at 1.4V then its another story.
> I would like to see from AMD a statement for safe voltage.
> SiliconLottery says 1.425V


Quote from AMD forums "the processor cannot and will not use unsafe voltages." He goes on to say Voltage over time is the main concern. 1.5v for a bit is perfectly fine. 


Seems these processors are smarter then what we think. 

This quote is from Robert halford or whatever is name is with AMD. He is the technical marketing person.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## lcbbcl

Minotaurtoo said:


> I'm guessing you didn't look at the screen cap... 5 cores were at 4.166ghz 2 were at 4.141 and only one was at 4.116..... that means 5 cores were at 1.437v not one or two and it wasn't just for a moment...it does this hours on end when I am gaming... and that is with the -.05v offset I have in bios... with out that it would have been 1.487 which I saw quite commonly before I put in the offset.
> 
> 
> I think when using such high voltages the concern would be more related to heat than direct voltage damage to the chip.... at full load with avx instructions it can pull over 200 watts easy with voltages over 1.4...
> 
> 
> edit: I just looked back at my hwinfo64 and after playing a while I saw where it was pulling up to 155watts with only pbo turned on... still temps were in check at only 56C... I imagine a stock cooler would have let it hit temps high enough to trigger downclocking from precision boost and xfr


In your screen shoot at that moment i see 1.43V but current intensity its 25A ,under ibt you can have 80A+ and that its the problem.
You can have 100% usage cpu but the the intensity of current its what its "killing him" producing watts and ofc heat
Now while i answer here i test my ram for stability and Cpu its at 100% 1.36V but 35A 40A pulling aprox 100W but i can make it pull 180W at same voltage.Cpu its a default settings



tekjunkie28 said:


> Quote from AMD forums "the processor cannot and will not use unsafe voltages." He goes on to say Voltage over time is the main concern. 1.5v for a bit is perfectly fine.
> 
> 
> Seems these processors are smarter then what we think.
> 
> This quote is from Robert halford or whatever is name is with AMD. He is the technical marketing person.
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


CPU its "smart" and he will ask X voltage when he boost for Y frequency but that dosen't mean that its safe to manual set 1.5V because we saw that he can doit alone.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

lcbbcl said:


> In your screen shoot at that moment i see 1.43V but current intensity its 25A ,under ibt you can have 80A+ and that its the problem.
> You can have 100% usage cpu but the the intensity of current its what its "killing him" producing watts and ofc heat
> Now while i answer here i test my ram for stability and Cpu its at 100% 1.36V but 35A 40A pulling aprox 100W but i can make it pull 180W at same voltage.Cpu its a default settings
> 
> 
> CPU its "smart" and he will ask X voltage when he boost for Y frequency but that dosen't mean that its safe to manual set 1.5V because we saw that he can doit alone.



That's kinda what I was saying... it's not the voltage but rather the heat generated from the extra wattage when pushed hard.... I don't think 1.38v is a hard limit though... sure going to 1.45 is likely to shorten the life of the cpu but then pretty much overclocking is trading life span for performance now.... 



my big concerns would be controlling heat on the cpu and vrm's on the board.... in the FX days people said the same things... and I ran my FX @ 5+ ghz for 3 years with it routinely pulling over 300 watts, but temps were under control thanks to an extreme cooling setup... now my son is using the same chip on the same board still chugging along... 



These chips are a different lithography and are too new to really know how voltage, current and heat will affect them long term, but if they are anything like previous AMD cpu's the voltage would have to be extreme to kill it (like the 1.5 for long term you mentioned) one guy in the threadripper thread accidentally ran his at 1.57v for two weeks! suffered from some degradation but that's it according to him ... never actually seen current kill one personally, but I'm sure it can be done.... heat though... that's a killer... seen vrm's go up in smoke several times and burnt a couple cpu's myself back before I discovered water cooling.




EDIT: Just thought I'd best add this.... I have and will continue to recommend that all leave the 2700x at stock with precision boost overdrive enabled... I have not been able as of yet to get an all core OC that exceeds the daily performance of just leaving it set like this... yes cinebench and other highly multithreaded apps will perform slightly better with a 4.2ghz all core OC, but most things actually will do better leaving it to take care of itself.


----------



## lcbbcl

Minotaurtoo said:


> That's kinda what I was saying... it's not the voltage but rather the heat generated from the extra wattage when pushed hard.... I don't think 1.38v is a hard limit though... sure going to 1.45 is likely to shorten the life of the cpu but then pretty much overclocking is trading life span for performance now....
> 
> 
> 
> my big concerns would be controlling heat on the cpu and vrm's on the board.... in the FX days people said the same things... and I ran my FX @ 5+ ghz for 3 years with it routinely pulling over 300 watts, but temps were under control thanks to an extreme cooling setup... now my son is using the same chip on the same board still chugging along...
> 
> 
> 
> These chips are a different lithography and are too new to really know how voltage, current and heat will affect them long term, but if they are anything like previous AMD cpu's the voltage would have to be extreme to kill it (like the 1.5 for long term you mentioned) one guy in the threadripper thread accidentally ran his at 1.57v for two weeks! suffered from some degradation but that's it according to him ... never actually seen current kill one personally, but I'm sure it can be done.... heat though... that's a killer... seen vrm's go up in smoke several times and burnt a couple cpu's myself back before I discovered water cooling.
> 
> 
> 
> EDIT: Just thought I'd best add this.... I have and will continue to recommend that all leave the 2700x at stock with precision boost overdrive enabled... I have not been able as of yet to get an all core OC that exceeds the daily performance of just leaving it set like this... yes cinebench and other highly multithreaded apps will perform slightly better with a 4.2ghz all core OC, but most things actually will do better leaving it to take care of itself.


At this moment with my C6H i can't trust no sensors or reports to hwinfo,manual BCLK 42.5x with 1.38V give me 180W and 72C temp,using PE4 at same Vcore i had 131W and 80C.
I might get your advice and keep at stock and we will see if some day we can have a decent UEFI


----------



## miklkit

I just looked at that HWINFO64 screenie and what jumped out at me is the VID. It's not 9590 high but it is up there. No wonder it likes some volts.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

miklkit said:


> I just looked at that HWINFO64 screenie and what jumped out at me is the VID. It's not 9590 high but it is up there. No wonder it likes some volts.


without the -.05v offset it will hit 1.55vid : )


----------



## miklkit

Holy guacamole! You have top end water cooling so it works out for you, but how badly does it throttle back for those with air cooling?


----------



## spyshagg

My PBO is set to level 3 on CH7 + 103mhz of BCLK

All core boost = 4170mhz @ ~1.30v
One core boost= 4480mhz @ 1.490~1.550v 

It can maintain ~4400mhz with 3 cores loaded using also 1.490~1.550v


Watercooled of course.


----------



## spyshagg

My main issue, is that Windows defaults to use my #3 and #8 best cores for boosting. The best ones are number #1 and #2 and are never used in boosting.


----------



## polkfan

I want to actually OC this thing already had rare issues that i know is over low v-core like a graphical issue in chrome that caused my screen to freak out and it came back and then i had Far Cry 5 freeze the other day and lock my PC up same stuff used to happen with my 1700 at stock with 3200mhz set in my weird e-die samsung dual channel kit of ram. 


Setting to just get it to be stable 1.25V 4.0Ghz that should easily work lol.


Edit i guess it could come from cool and quiet and other power saving features as it froze in Far cry 5 after it was on idle for like 1 hour same with my PC when i went to use it on chrome




Ok now i have 4.1Ghz at 1.35V trying to push this thing lol my goal is to get at least 180 in single core in R15 while manually overclocking it


----------



## Juuhuu

Today when running one program, cpu temp went to 82C in A-tuning (asrock's program). Is that real 82 or 82-10 so 72C? It was after ~5min 90% CPU load (program can use 16 threads).


----------



## Kildar

Well... I just ordered a 2700X from NewEgg for $319.

I hope I'm not making a mistake....


----------



## Minotaurtoo

Juuhuu said:


> Today when running one program, cpu temp went to 82C in A-tuning (asrock's program). Is that real 82 or 82-10 so 72C? It was after ~5min 90% CPU load (program can use 16 threads).


if you are using HWiNFO64 its the tdie that's true temp and tctl that's the offset... Ryzen master shows correct (true) temp... other software... who knows? lol


----------



## chroniclard

Currently running an all core clock at 4225, this takes 1.394 manual set voltage before its IBT stable and uses 1.36 under high all core loads, LLC 4. Temps are ok and performance is decent.

Alternatively can run the bclk overclock with negative offset for higher single core boosts at 4497 which is much better single core but not as good multi scores.


----------



## PriestOfSin

Kildar said:


> Well... I just ordered a 2700X from NewEgg for $319.
> 
> I hope I'm not making a mistake....


What are you coming from? My 1700 wouldn't go above 3.8 for it's life, so I'm pretty dang happy with my 2700X.


----------



## Kildar

I have my 1700 running at 3950. I don't know if I have a good chip or a good MB...


----------



## SavantStrike

Kildar said:


> I have my 1700 running at 3950. I don't know if I have a good chip or a good MB...


Both.

My 1700X will do just shy of 4.0 with a very mild voltage bump on my x370 Taichi. 

My mom's 1700X on the same board with the same kit of b-die ram (literally the same kit and board as i binned the chips) won't do more than 3.85 without a lot more voltage than my chip needs for 3.975. Considering my mom didn't need the extra performance I kept the faster chip.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

going from a 1700 to 2700x was a surprising jump... at stock... but max OC I only gained 250mhz at same volts.


----------



## tekjunkie28

Minotaurtoo said:


> going from a 1700 to 2700x was a surprising jump... at stock... but max OC I only gained 250mhz at same volts.


I think that's on par or higher then what AMD claimed so that's actually good

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Cadman597

*High Temps stock*

I'm running very hot. 

I already tried to repaste with the line and dot method.
The cooling paste I used is Cooler Master Mastergel Nano. 
I have 6 Cougar HDB 140mm Casefans so I don't think its airflow.
The temps in the maximum column are from a AIDA64 stresstest.

Is there anyone else also running this same cooler?

Any tips are appreciated.

https://imgur.com/7dVA6ZP


----------



## Minotaurtoo

tried to look at the image, but for some reason it's very blurred out... even when I tried to full screen it... anyway, one tip I always try when I have temp issues is... another cooler... but if you don't have another one to test that won't really help you... but if you do give it a shot... since I can't read the info in the screencap, I can't tell what your voltages, clocks, cpu fan speeds are and other temp sensors on the board so I can't really help much other than to suggest taking the case panels off and testing... probably won't help much if there is something else wrong... mounting pressure could be off... as in not even, or enough or in some cases with certain coolers too much... good luck... I'll peep back in later to see if your image suddenly becomes readable to me...


----------



## hughjazz44

Cadman597 said:


> I'm running very hot.
> 
> I already tried to repaste with the line and dot method.
> The cooling paste I used is Cooler Master Mastergel Nano.
> I have 6 Cougar HDB 140mm Casefans so I don't think its airflow.
> The temps in the maximum column are from a AIDA64 stresstest.
> 
> Is there anyone else also running this same cooler?
> 
> Any tips are appreciated.


They just run hot. I have never seen a real explanation. 

My 1700X at 1.375v would hit around 75 degrees. My 2700X at 1.3v will easily push into the upper 80s. Even with a 360mm AIO strapped on, this thing will still hit the upper 80s (although with more volts).

Don't pull your hair out trying to figure it out. Just accept the fact that they run hotter at the same volts.

On the flip side, my 2700X can hit 4.0GHz with only 1.275v. My 1700X couldn't hit 3.9GHz at all.


----------



## Cadman597

Minotaurtoo said:


> tried to look at the image, but for some reason it's very blurred out... even when I tried to full screen it... anyway, one tip I always try when I have temp issues is... another cooler... but if you don't have another one to test that won't really help you... but if you do give it a shot... since I can't read the info in the screencap, I can't tell what your voltages, clocks, cpu fan speeds are and other temp sensors on the board so I can't really help much other than to suggest taking the case panels off and testing... probably won't help much if there is something else wrong... mounting pressure could be off... as in not even, or enough or in some cases with certain coolers too much... good luck... I'll peep back in later to see if your image suddenly becomes readable to me...


I added a link to my original post:

https://imgur.com/7dVA6ZP panel off doesnt help much. I'll test tomorrow with MX-4 just to be sure. Also have the thicker Noctua paste. A friend of mine with a 1800X runs 10 degrees cooler with the same Noctua U14S. 
So something has to be off. Both of us had to place the mounting kit to make it work.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

Cadman597 said:


> I added a link to my original post:
> 
> https://imgur.com/7dVA6ZP panel off doesnt help much. I'll test tomorrow with MX-4 just to be sure. Also have the thicker Noctua paste. A friend of mine with a 1800X runs 10 degrees cooler with the same Noctua U14S.
> So something has to be off. Both of us had to place the mounting kit to make it work.


1800x has a lower tdp than 2700x and the die shrink from 14nm to 12nm also seems to have added some extra heat.... so basically if your friend is getting 10c lower then it may be just the limits of your cooler.... still... seems a bit high to me though... I don't have any experience with that cooler but on my custom loop this chip gets significantly hotter than my 1700 did at similar volts... but I rarely see temps above 60C... I'd definitely check into it more, because it seems awful warm to me... safe long term temp is 85C on these chips... so if it's only during short periods that you see these temps, you will be ok even if you can't get much improvement


----------



## Shiftstealth

Minotaurtoo said:


> 1800x has a lower tdp than 2700x and the die shrink from 14nm to 12nm also seems to have added some extra heat.... so basically if your friend is getting 10c lower then it may be just the limits of your cooler.... still... seems a bit high to me though... I don't have any experience with that cooler but on my custom loop this chip gets significantly hotter than my 1700 did at similar volts... but I rarely see temps above 60C... I'd definitely check into it more, because it seems awful warm to me... safe long term temp is 85C on these chips... so if it's only during short periods that you see these temps, you will be ok even if you can't get much improvement


Safe longterm is 85c tdie, or 85c tctl?


----------



## lcbbcl

Shiftstealth said:


> Safe longterm is 85c tdie, or 85c tctl?


I use Kryonaut paste and i use the method that they do recommend and i get better results compared with dot or line.


----------



## springs113

Those on water, what temps are you guys seeing stress testing? GPU in loop as well?


----------



## chroniclard

springs113 said:


> Those on water, what temps are you guys seeing stress testing? GPU in loop as well?


With my CPU and GPU(1080) in the loop IBT AVX can hit 70 degrees. Though depends which clocks I am running, all core or PE3 boost style.

Gaming between 50-60.


----------



## Juuhuu

Feel like my cpu fan on noctua U14S has delay in getting higher speeds @ higher temps so I want to make manual plan. Today temp was at 81C tdie and fan was still slow..
At what temps would you make what % of fan speed? (I think I saw that already, but can't find).

What are your tdie at idle? Mine is most of the time around 50C tdie with fan very low.. no noise.


----------



## springs113

chroniclard said:


> With my CPU and GPU(1080) in the loop IBT AVX can hit 70 degrees. Though depends which clocks I am running, all core or PE3 boost style.
> 
> Gaming between 50-60.


I take it afterburner is returning incorrect readings then?
Is Ryzen Master showing the correct temp values?
I've seen 83c in afterburner for my cpu reading meanwhile my gpu stays at about 45-50c(vega 64). I'm thinking to redo my cpu thermal paste application. What method did you use? What cpu block?


----------



## chroniclard

springs113 said:


> I take it afterburner is returning incorrect readings then?
> Is Ryzen Master showing the correct temp values?
> I've seen 83c in afterburner for my cpu reading meanwhile my gpu stays at about 45-50c(vega 64). I'm thinking to redo my cpu thermal paste application. What method did you use? What cpu block?


HWInfo temperature readings for CPU, think they are correct. The Tdie reading.

GPU sits around 40 gaming. Some XSPC CPU block, forgot which.

I use Thermal Grizzly Hydronaut(think its Hydronaut) and I spread the paste thinly all over with the spreader.


----------



## usoldier

chroniclard said:


> With my CPU and GPU(1080) in the loop IBT AVX can hit 70 degrees. Though depends which clocks I am running, all core or PE3 boost style.
> 
> Gaming between 50-60.


Whats max volts you see while boosting in PE3?

On my rig iam getting 1.565v boosting and on full load IBT and Prime95 its 1.327v max temps 71cº 

Dunno if i should worrie with the boost voltage being that high ?


----------



## springs113

chroniclard said:


> HWInfo temperature readings for CPU, think they are correct. The Tdie reading.
> 
> GPU sits around 40 gaming. Some XSPC CPU block, forgot which.
> 
> I use Thermal Grizzly Hydronaut(think its Hydronaut) and I spread the paste thinly all over with the spreader.


I'm also using an XSPC block raystorm, in Cinebench I have hit 83 @4.2 all core oc actual die reading using hwinfo, using kryonaut. Don't you think my reading is high? I've hit mid to low 70s at stock. I really do think that this is a little outrageous though. Thinking of pulling apart my system and reapplying my thermal paste. What do you think? granted I know that there are variables left unknown.


----------



## chroniclard

springs113 said:


> I'm also using an XSPC block raystorm, in Cinebench I have hit 83 @4.2 all core oc actual die reading using hwinfo, using kryonaut. Don't you think my reading is high? I've hit mid to low 70s at stock. I really do think that this is a little outrageous though. Thinking of pulling apart my system and reapplying my thermal paste. What do you think? granted I know that there are variables left unknown.


Seems quite high to me. I have never reached those temperatures doing anything.


----------



## springs113

I just pulled everything apart, about to reapply the thermal paste... it was spread even too so I don't know


----------



## Minotaurtoo

Shiftstealth said:


> Safe longterm is 85c tdie, or 85c tctl?


tdie... tctl is just an offset temp for the xfr


----------



## kawzir

Any suggestion on testing the lowest voltage required to keep the system stable? I'm on 2700x and asus prime x470-pro, running it at stock with stock cooler, trying to find the lowest voltage offset settings. What software is good for it and whats the standard of a stable system.


----------



## AlphaC

Prime95 is the recommended stress test.


OCCT AVX Linpack is sort of similar as is AIDA64 FPU.


The other recommended stress test is ASUS Realbench.


----------



## minal

kawzir said:


> Any suggestion on testing the lowest voltage required to keep the system stable? I'm on 2700x and asus prime x470-pro, running it at stock with stock cooler, trying to find the lowest voltage offset settings. What software is good for it and whats the standard of a stable system.



Generally it seems up to about -100mV is possible, but needs to be verified with stress testing. I also aim to undervolt my 2700X as much as possible. For me -100mV sometimes boots and sometimes doesn't, so I'll be testing one or two steps less.


----------



## polkfan

I'll play around with overclocking this thing once asrock gets around to fixing the memory bug in the taichi x370 board i mean it feels noticeably slower when overclocked guessing its over that. 

I was able to stabilize my stock settings by turning off cool and quiet and setting LLC to 3 and to OC mode.


I currently do not recommend buying the taichi until it is fixed unless you don't plan to OC which to be honest the 2700X is already pushing itself but if you can still trick XFR and get a little boost


----------



## The Sandman

springs113 said:


> I'm also using an XSPC block raystorm, in Cinebench I have hit 83 @4.2 all core oc actual die reading using hwinfo, using kryonaut. Don't you think my reading is high? I've hit mid to low 70s at stock. I really do think that this is a little outrageous though. Thinking of pulling apart my system and reapplying my thermal paste. What do you think? granted I know that there are variables left unknown.





chroniclard said:


> Seems quite high to me. I have never reached those temperatures doing anything.


I have to agree with chroniclard, I've never seen those temps with my 2700x/C6H running PE3 OC (all cores 4200MHz under load @ 1.267v, 4350MHz single core) 
What I do notice is most all manual OC's take noticeably more voltage than what mine needs using the "Performance Enhancer" preset, and probably take a performance hit as well.

Here is 2hrs of Prime95 with 90% memory under load to give you a better idea http://www.overclock.net/forum/27458033-post37392.html


----------



## Minotaurtoo

This may be helpful to some... it also does address the heat issues of 2700x cpu's a little...very little... ok it just mentions it lol... but does have some good info on voltage curves with ryzen gen 2
https://www.clipzui.com/video/n3c436v2t335u3z22574y3.html


----------



## Kildar

OK!

Got my 2700X in yesterday and plopped it in my C6H. 

I got it to OC all cores to 4250 using P0 State, LLC 3, Vcore Offset + .2000 fairly easily.

Vcore in HWI reads 1.375 and 1.352 in CPU-Z.

Coretemp has temps at 64-65 under full load (Mining) and HWI has Tctl at 73.5 and Tdie at 63.5.

This sound about par for what everyone else is seeing?

TIA


----------



## AlphaC

Kildar said:


> OK!
> 
> Got my 2700X in yesterday and plopped it in my C6H.
> 
> I got it to OC all cores to 4250 using P0 State, LLC 3, Vcore Offset + .2000 fairly easily.
> 
> Vcore in HWI reads 1.375 and 1.352 in CPU-Z.
> 
> Coretemp has temps at 64-65 under full load (Mining) and HWI has Tctl at 73.5 and Tdie at 63.5.
> 
> This sound about par for what everyone else is seeing?
> 
> TIA


Better than my R7 2700X chip 

It won't do 4.2GHz all core without BCLK even with 1.425V and turbo LLC (~0.02V V_Droop). On the best 4 cores the most it will do is ~4.325GHz so I think only the best 2 cores can do 4.35GHz.


You should go by V_Core SVI2 TFN and Ryzen Master voltage.



By the way R7 2700 is on sale on Newegg @ Ebay for $255

https://www.ebay.com/itm/AMD-RYZEN-...ost-Socket-AM4-65W-YD2700BBAFBOX/302704252665


----------



## Solohuman

AlphaC said:


> Prime95 is the recommended stress test.
> 
> 
> OCCT AVX Linpack is sort of similar as is AIDA64 FPU.
> 
> 
> The other recommended stress test is ASUS Realbench.



What about AMD overdrive? 
https://www.amd.com/en/technologies/amd-overdrive


----------



## AlphaC

AMD overdrive is for pre-Ryzen CPUs.


----------



## CJMitsuki

hughjazz44 said:


> They just run hot. I have never seen a real explanation.
> 
> My 1700X at 1.375v would hit around 75 degrees. My 2700X at 1.3v will easily push into the upper 80s. Even with a 360mm AIO strapped on, this thing will still hit the upper 80s (although with more volts).
> 
> Don't pull your hair out trying to figure it out. Just accept the fact that they run hotter at the same volts.
> 
> On the flip side, my 2700X can hit 4.0GHz with only 1.275v. My 1700X couldn't hit 3.9GHz at all.



They dont really run that hot, my 2700x with PState OC to 4.275 ghz @ 1.406 vCore hits 80c but thats while running 10 loops of IBT AVX on very high and I only use a Corsair H115i with liquid metal. If I had a 360 Id be mid 70s during IBT AVX. If im running most other stress tests I barely get above 65c.




Spoiler















Honestly, I wouldnt run XFR at all. It shows nice overclocks but the performance is lacking. I would also avoid all core overclocking as well since you never get to idle. I run a P State 0 OC (AB) which I think is 4.275ghz if im not mistaken with a +.2125 offset and 3200mhz ram OC to 3466mhz. From my time benchmarking my 2700x on literally every setting you could think of, manual all core runs slightly better performance than P State OC but within <1% and XFR was miles behind in actual performance. Then again, maybe im doing it wrong?




Spoiler















If you are getting abnormally high temps then I would examine air flow within the case, the type of thermal compound you are running and if possibly it was applied incorrectly, as well as the possibility of a malfunctioning cooler. Even when I was running a tiny Corsair H60 with liquid metal I was all core OCing at 1.42v @ 4.25ghz and staying under 80c. If you are running good thermal compound and a decent cooler then it is airflow, a malfunction in the cooler, or incorrectly applied compound. If it is airflow Id suggest Noctua NF-A14 iPPC 3000s those things push so much air at 100% youll think your desktop is about to take off and start flying, if its the thermal compound and you feel comfortable, go for the Thermal Grizzly Conductonaut, stuff is amazing but nerve wracking to install.


----------



## AlphaC

You need to look at power, not just voltage.


The point of enabling XFR is not to hit 4.35GHz but to hit more than that. If you have 43.5x multiplier and 104 BCLK you can have a larger difference than 4.2-4.3GHz all core or p-state.


i.e. the point is not to pump 170-200W into the CPU and still have > 4.3 GHz + for light load.


----------



## Bigdog302

I upgraded from a Ryzen 5 1600X to this Ryzen 7 2700X. It does a flat out great job in encoding and even gaming. I ran this online Benchmark and it did better than I expected. http://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/9006334

I upgraded to a G.Skill F4-3600C16D-16GTZR memory kit as well, I could not get it stable at 3400,3466 or 3600 but I did get it to run at 3333 rock solid and stable using The Stilts fast 3333 timings. I want to upgrade my graphics cards soon as the RX480 crossfire arrangement is holding it back. this test was ran at stock settings for the 2700X and it is not bad at all.

here is a firestrike benchmark in 1080P under windows 7 X64 https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/26832172
a run in Firestrike Benchmark 1080P under Windows 10 X64 https://www.3dmark.com/fs/15621369
and a run in Timespy https://www.3dmark.com/spy/3842553

I have the boost set up where it comes in very aggressively and it boosts to 4.35 in some cases. there is no need to OC the CPU but instead I am chasing memory speed and it does respond very nice to higher memory clocks. even the little bump to 3333 from 3200 was very noticeable.


----------



## CJMitsuki

AlphaC said:


> You need to look at power, not just voltage.
> 
> 
> The point of enabling XFR is not to hit 4.35GHz but to hit more than that. If you have 43.5x multiplier and 104 BCLK you can have a larger difference than 4.2-4.3GHz all core or p-state.
> 
> 
> i.e. the point is not to pump 170-200W into the CPU and still have > 4.3 GHz + for light load.



I understand what you are saying and I love the idea of XFR and honestly Id love to use it but the benchmarks I ran with it enabled had me sad. It was hitting 4.35ghz but the actual performance of it besides single core performance was awful. Maybe I will run through it again and see if maybe I missed something because Cinebench scores were around 1920 and I just figured with the voltages I saw, the frequencies I was seeing would have been much better. I will say that single core performance on XFR is better though and yes, the power draw is much lower but I have yet to see much more than 4.35ghz and bclk OC is pretty unstable for me at least. Im sure it will get better as new bios revisions come and the raw performance will pick up because is does seem like a pretty complicated idea that would take some time to perfect. I hope to see 4.5ghz+ with it once they expand on it a bit more in the coming months.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

CJMitsuki said:


> They dont really run that hot, my 2700x with PState OC to 4.275 ghz @ 1.406 vCore hits 80c but thats while running 10 loops of IBT AVX on very high and I only use a Corsair H115i with liquid metal. If I had a 360 Id be mid 70s during IBT AVX. If im running most other stress tests I barely get above 65c.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 201388
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Honestly, I wouldnt run XFR at all. It shows nice overclocks but the performance is lacking. I would also avoid all core overclocking as well since you never get to idle. I run a P State 0 OC (AB) which I think is 4.275ghz if im not mistaken with a +.2125 offset and 3200mhz ram OC to 3466mhz. From my time benchmarking my 2700x on literally every setting you could think of, manual all core runs slightly better performance than P State OC but within <1% and XFR was miles behind in actual performance. Then again, maybe im doing it wrong?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 201390
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you are getting abnormally high temps then I would examine air flow within the case, the type of thermal compound you are running and if possibly it was applied incorrectly, as well as the possibility of a malfunctioning cooler. Even when I was running a tiny Corsair H60 with liquid metal I was all core OCing at 1.42v @ 4.25ghz and staying under 80c. If you are running good thermal compound and a decent cooler then it is airflow, a malfunction in the cooler, or incorrectly applied compound. If it is airflow Id suggest Noctua NF-A14 iPPC 3000s those things push so much air at 100% youll think your desktop is about to take off and start flying, if its the thermal compound and you feel comfortable, go for the Thermal Grizzly Conductonaut, stuff is amazing but nerve wracking to install.


 you definitely have the rare chip there friend... I've seen professionals struggle to get anywhere near those overclocks with their chips in their reviews online. I just watched a video where a guy was struggling to get 2000 cinebench score and barely squeaked by on a very unstable OC. Most people can't get an all core oc above 4.25 stable... just can't... my chip is meritocracy in its most majestic form as in it does exactly what is the expected median... I can achieve an all core oc of 4.25... but just barely... temps are not an issue for me, but I have a custom loop. 



One thing I noted is that you are showing the cpu temp under the motherboard heading... the temp to look for is the one called Tdie as you can see in the screen capture tdie is higher than the cpu temp reading under the motherboard heading (this may not be true in your case though)


----------



## CJMitsuki

Minotaurtoo said:


> you definitely have the rare chip there friend... I've seen professionals struggle to get anywhere near those overclocks with their chips in their reviews online. I just watched a video where a guy was struggling to get 2000 cinebench score and barely squeaked by on a very unstable OC. Most people can't get an all core oc above 4.25 stable... just can't... my chip is meritocracy in its most majestic form as in it does exactly what is the expected median... I can achieve an all core oc of 4.25... but just barely... temps are not an issue for me, but I have a custom loop.
> 
> 
> 
> One thing I noted is that you are showing the cpu temp under the motherboard heading... the temp to look for is the one called Tdie as you can see in the screen capture tdie is higher than the cpu temp reading under the motherboard heading (this may not be true in your case though)



That is actually Tdie but I renamed it to suit my own personal tastes. CPU also reads the same but I have disabled it on my HWiNFO since I dont need 2 of the same reading. The one with the higher offset you are referring to is named Tctl and I never go by that temp. I think thats the reading that the XFR looks at for throttling purposes and possibly other parts of the system would as well but not sure. Also, I rearrange my HWiNFO massively so not many of the readings are in their original spots and I hide over 100 of them and rename many with custom fonts and sizes and colors when they reach a certain point for a soft warning to keep an eye on it.



I wasnt able to reach that OC until I got 4xNoctua NF-A14 iPPC 3000, 2xNF-A12, and an A20 so if it ever needs the extra air the 4x3000rpm fans will kick in to 100%. It does sound rather intimidating once it reaches that point lol. I was only able to maintain 4.25ghz before that but I had some Nidec Gentle Typhoons and they are great for silent operation but not for what I needed. Good thing about the Noctuas is that at 1000rpm I cant even tell they are there but at 3000rpm they are something akin to a helicopter with my case about to liftoff from my desk


----------



## waltercaorle

waltercaorle said:


> my pc occasionally freezes, loss of video signal and I have to remove the power. I thought it was a problem with ram but it also happens to default. up to 10 days ago with 1700x I had no problems ... can it be a broken cpu? I had the last bios, released yesterday, but nothing ..





waltercaorle said:


> b350 strix i, bios 4011
> 2x8gb tridentz @2133
> Ax860
> Corsair h100i v2
> 1080ti
> Win 10 pro original (fresh install)





waltercaorle said:


> no, with the first problems I left the bios at default, without touching anything. unfortunately the problems are there too ..
> I have not bsod. the video disappears and the PC stays on. the reset does not work and I have to turn off the power supply..
> i try with chipset driver..
> 
> Thanks for your interest





Minotaurtoo said:


> I had this happen just a couple months ago... turned out to be a bad PSU... had an intermittent short in it...was completely random.





miklkit said:


> Someone else had a similar issue and found it to be the cable from the video card to the monitor was bad.





waltercaorle said:


> hello guys .. I removed all the cables, tested with a voltmeter and reconnected everything. no way  Monday i can try another power supply..
> 
> for those who ask, i use the displayport cable from asus





geoxile said:


> I would try buying a new displayport cable that's certified by VESA. I had problems caused by a bad displayport cable, including boot errors and crash to black, but I got this:
> https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0098HVZBE/ref=oh_aui_search_detailpage?ie=UTF8&psc=1 and now everything works fine. You might have to power cycle your monitor too (unplug from power and leave for 30 to 60 sec)


Hey guys small update..sorry for the multiquote .. 
after buying a new psu , the displayport cable and dismantled the whole pc, the same problem remained
I decided to change cpu (thanks amazon). Now everything works well. I no longer had freeze
thanks anyway


----------



## kd5151

Best part about the 2700X? LoL.


----------



## Juuhuu

Bus speed should be left at 100mhz?
I ask because like 15y ago, I remember we OCed Bus speed to higher and lowered multiplier..


----------



## nexxusty

In!

He he, I've been gone for awhile. Since the 1700 I bought last year.

I'm picking up a 2700x new in two hours for $270. I'm very happy about that. Hehe.

For those with custom water, does the chip react better than the first iteration of Ryzen? My WC system was completely overkill for it.

I was able to get the same clocks with 120mm rad space as with 480mm radspace, a res, XSPC Raystorm and a D5.


----------



## waltercaorle

nexxusty said:


> In!
> 
> He he, I've been gone for awhile. Since the 1700 I bought last year.
> 
> I'm picking up a 2700x new in two hours for $270. I'm very happy about that. Hehe.
> 
> For those with custom water, does the chip react better than the first iteration of Ryzen? My WC system was completely overkill for it.
> 
> I was able to get the same clocks with 120mm rad space as with 480mm radspace, a res, XSPC Raystorm and a D5.


no system was completely overkill for this cpu.
ryzen+ likes low temperatures, especially if you use @def or pbo.
I have a small loop 240+120+cpu+gpu+d5 and, with manual pbo, under heavy stress(4.050/4.1ghz for all cores) i exceed 70 ° C, in game it reaches 50/60 °C and i'm sure if i had a bigger system it would boost at higher frequencies


----------



## Minotaurtoo

nexxusty said:


> In!
> 
> He he, I've been gone for awhile. Since the 1700 I bought last year.
> 
> I'm picking up a 2700x new in two hours for $270. I'm very happy about that. Hehe.
> 
> For those with custom water, does the chip react better than the first iteration of Ryzen? My WC system was completely overkill for it.
> 
> I was able to get the same clocks with 120mm rad space as with 480mm radspace, a res, XSPC Raystorm and a D5.


same here... my loop was overkill for the 1700, but this one likes it and it really helps the auto boost functions to work... infact they work so well I decided to just keep stock settings with docp and precision boost overdrive turned on.


----------



## AlphaC

Juuhuu said:


> Bus speed should be left at 100mhz?
> I ask because like 15y ago, I remember we OCed Bus speed to higher and lowered multiplier..



If you can push 104ish BCLK you should


----------



## nexxusty

Minotaurtoo said:


> nexxusty said:
> 
> 
> 
> In!
> 
> He he, I've been gone for awhile. Since the 1700 I bought last year.
> 
> I'm picking up a 2700x new in two hours for $270. I'm very happy about that. Hehe.
> 
> For those with custom water, does the chip react better than the first iteration of Ryzen? My WC system was completely overkill for it.
> 
> I was able to get the same clocks with 120mm rad space as with 480mm radspace, a res, XSPC Raystorm and a D5.
> 
> 
> 
> same here... my loop was overkill for the 1700, but this one likes it and it really helps the auto boost functions to work... infact they work so well I decided to just keep stock settings with docp and precision boost overdrive turned on.
Click to expand...

This is EXACTLY what I wanted to hear.

Welcome news indeed.

I'm going to have to disagree with that other guy about the 1700 benefitting from high end WC.

It doesn't. I see you understand what I said and agree.


----------



## chroniclard

Anyone had any luck with higher mem speeds with 2700X? 

If you have achieved 3446 or higher could you let me know what memory/timings you are using. Best I can get with my corsair lpx is 3333 with decent timings.


----------



## VPII

chroniclard said:


> Anyone had any luck with higher mem speeds with 2700X?
> 
> If you have achieved 3446 or higher could you let me know what memory/timings you are using. Best I can get with my corsair lpx is 3333 with decent timings.


Not sure what chips is used on the Corsair LPX. My G.Skill F4-3200C14D with Samsung B-die chips does 3600 CL15-15-15-38 but 2T. Still great performance I'm getting out of it with those timings. But this is not stress test stable if I want stress test stable I need to up CL to 16 which still gives good performance.


----------



## CJMitsuki

chroniclard said:


> Anyone had any luck with higher mem speeds with 2700X?
> 
> If you have achieved 3446 or higher could you let me know what memory/timings you are using. Best I can get with my corsair lpx is 3333 with decent timings.



ive gotten 3466, 3553, and 3600 stable with x470 board. Are you running Samsung B-Die? Which model ram are you running? My particular model is f4-3200c14d-8gtzr which is g.skill. The Die and mobo you are using will play a big role along with the 2700x in memory speed. Note that 3466 performed better for me than the 3553 and 3600mhz speeds due to relaxed timings and using gear down which gives more headroom at the expense of adding latency. Also, each set of memory will be unique even if it is Sammy B Die, youll need to be lucky on several instances to get 3600 or higher and it be worth it. CPU IMC and the memory Die lottery for the most part. From what ive seen running through every frequency from 3200-3600mhz Ive found out that frequency isnt everything to Ryzen. If you lose a couple ns latency to gain the next step in frequency then it may not even be worth getting to that frequency. The sweet spot for the 2700x right now seems to be 3400-3466mhz depending on how tight you can get the timings. If you can get your latency below 60ns then that seems to be about perfect at this moment until bios revisions let you go further with memory. Ill post my timings for 3466mhz C14 but they are super tight. I would visit the DRAM calculator thread and download that tool and get familiar with what you can do to gain stablilty and how you should go about changing your timings if the DRAM calculators settings dont work right away. They arent a plug and play anyway, more like a guide to get you close.


I would shoot for the highest frequency I could attain without using Gear Down Mode or Power Down Mode enabled, its much better to have to use 2T than to use those because you will introduce too much latency and more than likely lose the benefit of the added speed and possibly end up with worse performance from your CPU.


----------



## chroniclard

Yeah its b-die. Its corsair lpx, supposedly runs 16-18-18-36 @ 3466 but cant get that stable, yet.

I used the ram calc and running this at the moment, which is not too bad. The constant tweaking I do just wants me to try some faster memory. 

Also not sure if 103.4 bclk makes it harder to get stable ram timings or not. I have not tried 2T at all, for some reason I thought this would be slower?

Problem with the ram calc is there is no way to calculate timings for say C15 or C16 instead.


----------



## Lumpus

I've bookmarked several DDR's at NewEgg (waiting for a sale) -
TridentZ -3200 ~ 14 cas - https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820232649
Sniper X -3400 ~ 16 cas - https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820232727&cm_re=sniper_x-_-20-232-727-_-Product (not b-die but interesting)
TridentZ -3600 - 15 cas - https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820232306

I'm leaning towards the TridentZ -3600's... I think with tuning I could get the cas down to 14 - has anyone tried this?


Some testers suggest that -3400 is about the sweet spot for Ryzen but others think that the 3200 @ 14 (or OC'ed faster/tighter) might be better
I think as new BIOS updates come for the X470 boards that having more top speed @ 3600+ (but at decent cas) might be better in the longer term.
Suggestions?


----------



## CJMitsuki

Lumpus said:


> I've bookmarked several DDR's at NewEgg (waiting for a sale) -
> TridentZ -3200 ~ 14 cas - https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820232649
> Sniper X -3400 ~ 16 cas - https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820232727&cm_re=sniper_x-_-20-232-727-_-Product (not b-die but interesting)
> TridentZ -3600 - 15 cas - https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820232306
> 
> I'm leaning towards the TridentZ -3600's... I think with tuning I could get the cas down to 14 - has anyone tried this?
> 
> 
> Some testers suggest that -3400 is about the sweet spot for Ryzen but others think that the 3200 @ 14 (or OC'ed faster/tighter) might be better
> I think as new BIOS updates come for the X470 boards that having more top speed @ 3600+ (but at decent cas) might be better in the longer term.
> Suggestions?



With my testing all the way from 3200-3600mhz the best performance comes from 3466c14 ran at 2T to get timings super tight. Basically you want to run the highest frequency you can attain at or below 1.5v VDD while not enabling Gear Down as it will degrade your latency to the point that the added frequency will be a performance loss. As with the 3200mhz vs the 3466mhz I ran it at c12 and 3466mhz still outperformed it but it was not bad. 3553 and 3600 for me required Gear Down mode to be enabled but I am working on 3553 without Gear Down mode but it is difficult to get 100% stable but I am getting close. 3466mhz runs beautifully though around 59ns latency and sometimes lower. I am running F4-3200c14-8gtzr which is the TridentZ RGB kit single rank 2x8gb. You may have better luck with the 3600c15 kits, I also ran a 4133c18 kit and my 3200c14 was much better. I would not stray from using B Die if I were you, unless you like getting frustrated.












chroniclard said:


> Yeah its b-die. Its corsair lpx, supposedly runs 16-18-18-36 @ 3466 but cant get that stable, yet.
> 
> I used the ram calc and running this at the moment, which is not too bad. The constant tweaking I do just wants me to try some faster memory.
> 
> Also not sure if 103.4 bclk makes it harder to get stable ram timings or not. I have not tried 2T at all, for some reason I thought this would be slower?
> 
> Problem with the ram calc is there is no way to calculate timings for say C15 or C16 instead.



Yes, the higher bclk will make it harder to achieve better memory OC, at least for me it was. I would run a P State OC personally, it seems to be the best for performance and being able to idle the CPU down when not requiring high performance. I also use High Performance power plan but I set minimum processor to 50%. Also there is a way to calculate for c15 and such in the ram calculator, you just go to the SPD Browser in Thaiphoon Burner and find the kit you want to test and load it into the software then export it to html file and use that html file to import it to the DRAM calculator. All samsung B Die are the same chip, the chips that are used for 3600, 3733, etc are just binned @ higher frequencies. So technically you can get a 3200 kit that will outperform a 3600 chip, it happens all the time.


----------



## tekjunkie28

CJMitsuki said:


> With my testing all the way from 3200-3600mhz the best performance comes from 3466c14 ran at 2T to get timings super tight. Basically you want to run the highest frequency you can attain at or below 1.5v VDD while not enabling Gear Down as it will degrade your latency to the point that the added frequency will be a performance loss. As with the 3200mhz vs the 3466mhz I ran it at c12 and 3466mhz still outperformed it but it was not bad. 3553 and 3600 for me required Gear Down mode to be enabled but I am working on 3553 without Gear Down mode but it is difficult to get 100% stable but I am getting close. 3466mhz runs beautifully though around 59ns latency and sometimes lower. I am running F4-3200c14-8gtzr which is the TridentZ RGB kit single rank 2x8gb. You may have better luck with the 3600c15 kits, I also ran a 4133c18 kit and my 3200c14 was much better. I would not stray from using B Die if I were you, unless you like getting frustrated.
> 
> View attachment 201712
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, the higher bclk will make it harder to achieve better memory OC, at least for me it was. I would run a P State OC personally, it seems to be the best for performance and being able to idle the CPU down when not requiring high performance. I also use High Performance power plan but I set minimum processor to 50%. Also there is a way to calculate for c15 and such in the ram calculator, you just go to the SPD Browser in Thaiphoon Burner and find the kit you want to test and load it into the software then export it to html file and use that html file to import it to the DRAM calculator. All samsung B Die are the same chip, the chips that are used for 3600, 3733, etc are just binned @ higher frequencies. So technically you can get a 3200 kit that will outperform a 3600 chip, it happens all the time.


Using the high performance power plan is detrimental to single core performance from my testing and it completely repeatable.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## springs113

I need some help, i would like to overclock my CPU while maintaining the down clock when its not necessary. I'm new to this Pstate thing and LLC thing. My CPU can reach 4.2 on auto along with 3600mhz mem.


----------



## CJMitsuki

tekjunkie28 said:


> Using the high performance power plan is detrimental to single core performance from my testing and it completely repeatable.
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk



My benchmarks tell me another story but I could see where certain setups may produce that. In regards to single core and multicore performance then Precision Boost has better single core performance over P State OC but the multicore is the exact opposite for now. When it comes to P State OC I dont really see how the high performance plan would affect the single core performance when it will always run at what you set the P State O at.




springs113 said:


> I need some help, i would like to overclock my CPU while maintaining the down clock when its not necessary. I'm new to this Pstate thing and LLC thing. My CPU can reach 4.2 on auto along with 3600mhz mem.



What you do is find the speed which you state is is 4200mhz, I think that is A9 hex code and you find which voltage 4.2 runs at. Once you have those you go into bios to the P State section and change only P State 0 and only change the hex code for the clock speed and take note of the voltage it shows then you use a bit of math and subtract that voltage from your desired voltage and set a CPU offset voltage so that you get the desired voltage for that particular clock speed. Also make sure C States are enabled and make sure Core Boost and manual clock and all of that is set to auto in bios besides AI overclock. set that to manual and set the bclk to 100 because mine was trying to set mine to 100.6 and it was making my memory unstable for some reason. As fsr as LLC I run near max on everything in the LLC menu but you need to make sure your board has good VRMs and good cooling to those VRMs or they will end up overheating trying to maintain the voltage. I also never change the option for current balance, I set it to maintain thermal balance so it will throttle when cpu is getting a bit warm. That may not be a problem if you have decent cooling at 4.2ghz but I run mine at 4.275 and it will get hot while running something like IntelBurn or OCCT on very high. Its fine for Prime95 and such since they dont even hit 70c but IBT and OCCT will hit 80c and I try not to let my CPU go over 80c.


----------



## chroniclard

Thanks CJMitsuki, appreciate the info. 

Going to have a play with 2T @ 3446.


----------



## CJMitsuki

chroniclard said:


> Thanks CJMitsuki, appreciate the info.
> 
> Going to have a play with 2T @ 3446.


No problem, let me know how it turns out.


----------



## chroniclard

Hmm, might actually be working with 2T and 3446, however improvements are marginal, read is actually slower but copy and write are faster with a .5 improvement in latency. 

Think I will keep an eye out for offers on DDR4 and grab some other ram to play with at some point.


----------



## CJMitsuki

chroniclard said:


> Hmm, might actually be working with 2T and 3446, however improvements are marginal, read is actually slower but copy and write are faster with a .5 improvement in latency.
> 
> Think I will keep an eye out for offers on DDR4 and grab some other ram to play with at some point.


If it passes stability testing then id say thats much better than before, werent you having problems getting 3466 stable? If I were you I would drop to 3400c14 2T and tighten timings as far as possible maybe something like 14-14-14-22-36-4-6-24-3-8-12-0-2-2-272-202-124. If that is stable I would keep dropping the tRFC timings until you find the lowest you are stable with. You could possibly even drop tRRDL to 4 and tFAW to 16 as an option if you had the headroom. tRFC can drop latency by a lot quite often. I can imagine if you were able to get tRFC to 251-186-114 you may get some really good numbers and performance over 3466.


----------



## polkfan

My PC loves to glitch up on 18:10 drivers with 4.7 bios with my XMP ram settings, also my PC crashed on far cry 5 one time when i left it on idle for a few min. 


Not sure what to do since the Asrock Taichi X370 can't be overclocked without having terrible memory speeds. 

Tried LLC3 on SOC and Vcore and tried 1. 

Seems to be more stable with Asrock's "AMD all in 1 driver ver:17.40.1025" But that could be a placebo but i never had any issues with it. 

One other thing is i'm simply not around my machine enough to fully test it.

To be fair i never redid windows when i got this chip but i highly doubt that is it


----------



## Minotaurtoo

anyone get an all core oc over 4.3ghz stable yet? I can't get quite to 4.3 even.


----------



## JYYJ

Minotaurtoo said:


> anyone get an all core oc over 4.3ghz stable yet? I can't get quite to 4.3 even.


I could get all core 4.3 using PE3 with 0.0500 offset in Crosshair VII Hero. 

Sent from my ONEPLUS A5000 using Tapatalk


----------



## CJMitsuki

Minotaurtoo said:


> anyone get an all core oc over 4.3ghz stable yet? I can't get quite to 4.3 even.


Depends on what you call stable. Me and a few others have gotten near 4.4ghz here>>>>>http://www.overclock.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1701180


----------



## Wuest3nFuchs

Today i bought a 2700x in a local hardwarestore near me [Austria] .
I was so lucky but when i inspected the CPU https://imgur.com/a/4C9SvoJ


I never got a new CPU with a HS like this and it was sealed !
My last AMD was a opteron 170 paired with a DFI Lanparty :thumb: and i never had such a new cpu with a HS like this not from Intel or AMD either 

So i'm very sceptical about this HS it has .
Also send a pic to a friend which has a 1800x and he didn't have that... look yourself...i mean by all means to me it looks like there was already something mounted a Cooler on the HS.
https://imgur.com/a/4C9SvoJ


I also watched some images of this cpu on the net, and no they weren't CGI 

Should i keep it or take it back to the shop ?
What do you think ,do you agree with my opinion above?


Greetings , a sad fox


----------



## tekjunkie28

Wuest3nFuchs said:


> Today i bought a 2700x in a local hardwarestore near me [Austria] .
> I was so lucky but when i inspected the CPU https://imgur.com/a/4C9SvoJ
> 
> 
> I never got a new CPU with a HS like this and it was sealed !
> My last AMD was a opteron 170 paired with a DFI Lanparty :thumb: and i never had such a new cpu with a HS like this not from Intel or AMD either
> 
> So i'm very sceptical about this HS it has .
> Also send a pic to a friend which has a 1800x and he didn't have that... look yourself...i mean by all means to me it looks like there was already something mounted a Cooler on the HS.
> https://imgur.com/a/4C9SvoJ
> 
> 
> I also watched some images of this cpu on the net, and no they weren't CGI
> 
> Should i keep it or take it back to the shop ?
> What do you think ,do you agree with my opinion above?
> 
> 
> Greetings , a sad fox


Take it back. 

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Wuest3nFuchs

Sure thx, btw saw a nice picture from the first page and this is a nogo to what i have here!


----------



## CJMitsuki

*I now have 4.3ghz IBT AVX stable for everyday use as well as 4.4ghz stable only to run Cinebench.
*

4.3ghz IBT AVX Stable


Spoiler















4.4ghz Cinebench Stable


Spoiler


----------



## Minotaurtoo

CJMitsuki said:


> *I now have 4.3ghz IBT AVX stable for everyday use as well as 4.4ghz stable only to run Cinebench.
> *
> 
> 4.3ghz IBT AVX Stable
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 203954
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 4.4ghz Cinebench Stable
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 203956



color me jealous, I can't even get 4.3 cinebench stable without terrible high voltages.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Minotaurtoo said:


> color me jealous, I can't even get 4.3 cinebench stable without terrible high voltages.



Well, to be fair 4.4ghz requires higher than what is deemed safe voltage but I only use it for a few minutes for benchamrks and post the score to HWBOT. I have to go to 1.5v to go above 4.4ghz so idk if im going to try that or now...I can control the heat but I dont want to destroy the cpu.


----------



## chroniclard

CJMitsuki said:


> Well, to be fair 4.4ghz requires higher than what is deemed safe voltage but I only use it for a few minutes for benchamrks and post the score to HWBOT. I have to go to 1.5v to go above 4.4ghz so idk if im going to try that or now...I can control the heat but I dont want to destroy the cpu.


Whats your voltage at for 4.3, 1.425?

I am doing 1.381V for 4225, could go a fair bit higher I guess but wasnt sure on if its "safe".


----------



## CJMitsuki

chroniclard said:


> Whats your voltage at for 4.3, 1.425?
> 
> I am doing 1.381V for 4225, could go a fair bit higher I guess but wasnt sure on if its "safe".



Yes, at the VRM it is 1.425 but once it gets to the vCore it is 1.406 so I can technically bump it up a step or two and still be in range of what is considered safe for daily use. Although Ive seen conflicting studies on the subject of "safe" voltages. On one hand you have the crowd that voltage is the cause of a degraded cpu that has been OC'd then you have the crowd that believes the heat from said voltage is the real factor and voltage by itself not harm the cpu. I dont fully agree with that but I am more apt to believe that heat is the root cause while really high voltages can hurt many things Maybe squeeze 4.35ghz out of it but probably only 4.325ghz.


----------



## JackCY

This thread needs an OC spreadsheet and stats same as Intel CPUs have from Darkwizzie. Just don't forget to require a decent 4-8h test as a minimum to be included to avoid the CPUz didn't crash for 30 seconds trolls.

The x264/5 test in my Sig should work and be predefined for 16 threads? Otherwise check Darkwizzie's threads for his iterations of the test with possibly updated default settings.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

chroniclard said:


> Whats your voltage at for 4.3, 1.425?
> 
> I am doing 1.381V for 4225, could go a fair bit higher I guess but wasnt sure on if its "safe".


I have to run pretty high llc to get 4.2 at 1.4 even... but without LLC I have to set 1.45v... LLC on this board is kinda broken though


----------



## kris_4

I am using ASUS Crosshair VII Hero with my 2700X.
As I am running my 2700X at 4.2GHz with 1.3375V same as my friend who is running the same settings with a D15 cooler with below 70 degree Celsius when full loading.
But in my case, I am using NZXT Kraken X62 with 100% pump and fan push configuration. It will rise up to 87 degree Celsius and system freezing every few seconds when full loading.
Is it a common thing or it is just my individual problem?


----------



## CJMitsuki

kris_4 said:


> I am using ASUS Crosshair VII Hero with my 2700X.
> As I am running my 2700X at 4.2GHz with 1.3375V same as my friend who is running the same settings with a D15 cooler with below 70 degree Celsius when full loading.
> But in my case, I am using NZXT Kraken X62 with 100% pump and fan push configuration. It will rise up to 87 degree Celsius and system freezing every few seconds when full loading.
> Is it a common thing or it is just my individual problem?


I would look at my thermal compound and if the AIO is mounted incorrectly maybe too tight or too loose. Can never tell. I’m running Liquid Metal and I’ll never use another type unless it does better in thermals. Also I have my house around 13-15c when I’m benching bc I have an A\C vent right below my desk in the floor and the air all around my desk stays chilly and I just wear a hoodie. Ambient temps make a huge difference in temps but yeah, aside from all of that you are running abnormally hot. It could just be improper installation of the water cooler. Happened to me before also.


----------



## polkfan

I guess i will post this here does anyone have an idea of what is going on when it boots from sleep


----------



## rdr09

Got a 2700 from a local Micro Center for 214$. Here's hoping it works.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

rdr09 said:


> Got a 2700 from a local Micro Center for 214$. Here's hoping it works.


by all means let us know... mines mediocrity at its finest... does what it says and not a bit more lol... except for extreme loads it actually overclocks itself past 4.2ghz a lot.


----------



## rdr09

Minotaurtoo said:


> by all means let us know... mines mediocrity at its finest... does what it says and not a bit more lol... except for extreme loads it actually overclocks itself past 4.2ghz a lot.


I'll certainly will. Would be glad to get the same behavior from this cpu. Three more weeks of vacay, then this cpu will be installed. Can't wait.


----------



## zenstrive

I Upgraded my PC from R7 1700 to R7 2700x.
The stock performance using the Wraith Prism is good. Usually 3.85 to 3.95 Ghz loading the CPU with mining, with the voltage usually at 1.3-1.35v.
I now put the chip on 4.2 Ghz using 1.4v, the temp is still below 70 oC.
I do have two noctua casing fans blowing to and from the wraith prism, and there are five other casing fans, one of them is a silverstone AP181 to cool my GPUs.
The wraith prism is just pretty to look at 

I am now planning to get another R7 2700x and an ITX board and maybe ordering a custom acrylic case to mount that pc to a wall so that I can enjoy the Wraith Prism beauty on my living room 
The GPU would probably a sapphire RX 560.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

zenstrive said:


> I Upgraded my PC from R7 1700 to R7 2700x.
> The stock performance using the Wraith Prism is good. Usually 3.85 to 3.95 Ghz loading the CPU with mining, with the voltage usually at 1.3-1.35v.
> I now put the chip on 4.2 Ghz using 1.4v, the temp is still below 70 oC.
> I do have two noctua casing fans blowing to and from the wraith prism, and there are five other casing fans, one of them is a silverstone AP181 to cool my GPUs.
> The wraith prism is just pretty to look at
> 
> I am now planning to get another R7 2700x and an ITX board and maybe ordering a custom acrylic case to mount that pc to a wall so that I can enjoy the Wraith Prism beauty on my living room
> The GPU would probably a sapphire RX 560.


nice... I almost kept my prism... but needed the $$


----------



## Wuest3nFuchs

Hi all!


I got another CPU which i ordered online from germany.So good and it also lokks very different to what i've psoted about ~2weeks ago.


SO atm i got a Asus Prime X470 Board and @ stock it does OC to ~4.39ghz on all cores with 1.51v .


I know 1.51 is too much so i took the offset option and fixed the cores not go over 4ghz.



To my question ,is there something wrong or am i misinformed when all cores go up to ~4.39ghz,shouldn't it only be one core doing this?


Good night


----------



## Minotaurtoo

mine hits 4.35 ghz with voltages hitting 1.55 at times which is pretty normal for these chips... not sure if anyones has hit 4.39 on all cores though... sounds like that could be problematic... but if it's keeping cool and is stable heck I'd run it lol


----------



## Martin778

1.425V 4.2 on 2700x and 360aio gives peak 90c Tdie in X264...no idea whats wrong.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Martin778 said:


> 1.425V 4.2 on 2700x and 360aio gives peak 90c Tdie in X264...no idea whats wrong.



Where is the radiator mounted? What type of airflow setup do you have? Which thermal compound are you using? If those are all good then its either pump dying, air pockets in the loop or a clog, or a bad cpu.


----------



## Martin778

Bad CPU it is then, the rad is cool. Re-mounted the pump/block few times already.


----------



## rdr09

Martin778 said:


> Bad CPU it is then, the rad is cool. Re-mounted the pump/block few times already.


Rad should at least be warm as proof of heat transfer. Might not be enuf flow.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Martin778 said:


> Bad CPU it is then, the rad is cool. Re-mounted the pump/block few times already.





rdr09 said:


> Rad should at least be warm as proof of heat transfer. Might not be enuf flow.



I would slap the wraith on it and compare temps to the liquid cooler. If the wraith is doing better or even matching the cooling capacity then Id say the pump is screwed. but without a pressure test that would be hard to say 100% Pumps do sometimes malfunction or a seal inside the pump blew out and it doesnt have pressure to move the water anymore. Dont automatically assume its the cpu. Do a bit of troubleshooting as i suggested. Providing you have another cpu cooler lying around to compare it to.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

bad cpu isn't likely to cause that kind of heat... sounds like low flow in the pump.... I agree with cjmitsuki check the wraith cooler out.


----------



## Martin778

If I didn't sell it right after i got the CPU  I have an EVGA CLC280 sitting in a box since 4 months, will try that one. The temps jump from 40 to 70 so I guess a bad CPU / temp sensor.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

Martin778 said:


> If I didn't sell it right after i got the CPU  I have an EVGA CLC280 sitting in a box since 4 months, will try that one. The temps jump from 40 to 70 so I guess a bad CPU / temp sensor.


 actually temps can jump pretty quick that's not unusual especially if cooling is failing or not adequate... mine jump 20C in just a second or two going from idle to full stress then slowly climb from there slowly before leveling out when the loop hits equilibrium.


----------



## usoldier

Hey guys i would like to know if its ok to use Liquid Metal paste on the 2700X iam currently using KRYONAUT thermal paste but would like to drop temp another 2 or 3 cº i think liquid metal can do it .


----------



## tekjunkie28

usoldier said:


> Hey guys i would like to know if its ok to use Liquid Metal paste on the 2700X iam currently using KRYONAUT thermal paste but would like to drop temp another 2 or 3 cº i think liquid metal can do it .


Sure. Just use all the precautions you would on any other install.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## brenopapito

What voltages should I try to get 4.2/4.3? I had an 1800x and now I have to start over again.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

brenopapito said:


> What voltages should I try to get 4.2/4.3? I had an 1800x and now I have to start over again.



1.4 is a good place to start on 4.2...may not be stable but usually will run on the 2700x (depending on how much vdroop your board has really) 4.3 will be iffy at best...even at 1.45v that wasn't stable for me... tried 1.5 and it still wasn't "fully" stable on all 8 cores.. could cut out a few of my worst cores and get 4.3 at 1.45v easy and if I only use my best 2 cores 1.45 will net 4.35


----------



## The Sandman

brenopapito said:


> What voltages should I try to get 4.2/4.3? I had an 1800x and now I have to start over again.


As an alternative to a manual OC my C6H/2700x has a PE3 setting which with HandBrake for example runs all cores at 4.2GHz @ 1.262v (SV12) with memory 3466MHz C14. Vcore set to +Offset and auto.
Single core loads at 4350MHz, idles normal both freq and voltage wise, life is good  
Very stable, no temp issues (max 53.1 under load) no cold boot bug etc.

I've run this since day one and have a hard time finding those that are any higher performance wise.
Not all chips react the same with the PE settings but I always recommend giving it a try. At least with an Asus mobo.


----------



## VPII

brenopapito said:


> What voltages should I try to get 4.2/4.3? I had an 1800x and now I have to start over again.


Hi there..... Look I do not use offset voltages when I overclock my cpu, you could use the performance enhancer 3 as stated by @The Sandman but if you prefer to manually overclock I'd suggest you start by setting the multiplier to 4.2ghz and startup with the vcore set to 1.3v. If all good then slowly drop the vcore and try until you find what the lowest vcore is that works with your cpu.


----------



## brenopapito

Minotaurtoo said:


> 1.4 is a good place to start on 4.2...may not be stable but usually will run on the 2700x (depending on how much vdroop your board has really) 4.3 will be iffy at best...even at 1.45v that wasn't stable for me... tried 1.5 and it still wasn't "fully" stable on all 8 cores.. could cut out a few of my worst cores and get 4.3 at 1.45v easy and if I only use my best 2 cores 1.45 will net 4.35





The Sandman said:


> As an alternative to a manual OC my C6H/2700x has a PE3 setting which with HandBrake for example runs all cores at 4.2GHz @ 1.262v (SV12) with memory 3466MHz C14. Vcore set to +Offset and auto.
> Single core loads at 4350MHz, idles normal both freq and voltage wise, life is good
> Very stable, no temp issues (max 53.1 under load) no cold boot bug etc.
> 
> I've run this since day one and have a hard time finding those that are any higher performance wise.
> Not all chips react the same with the PE settings but I always recommend giving it a try. At least with an Asus mobo.





VPII said:


> Hi there..... Look I do not use offset voltages when I overclock my cpu, you could use the performance enhancer 3 as stated by @The Sandman but if you prefer to manually overclock I'd suggest you start by setting the multiplier to 4.2ghz and startup with the vcore set to 1.3v. If all good then slowly drop the vcore and try until you find what the lowest vcore is that works with your cpu.


Thank you guys! I'll try to stabilize at 4.2 with the lowest voltage possible and then I report my results.


----------



## CJMitsuki

brenopapito said:


> What voltages should I try to get 4.2/4.3? I had an 1800x and now I have to start over again.



1.4v should get you 4.25ghz all day if you have a decent chip, 1.425v should get you 4.3ghz, 1.45v around 4.35ghz, and 1.5v maybe a tad over that should get you 4.4ghz+. If you get those voltages or better (fully stable of course) then you have a good chip. I havent tried to go past 4.45ghz bc Im just not wanting to push past 1.55v for obvious reasons. Also, dont run above 1.45v for daily use.




The Sandman said:


> As an alternative to a manual OC my C6H/2700x has a PE3 setting which with HandBrake for example runs all cores at 4.2GHz @ 1.262v (SV12) with memory 3466MHz C14. Vcore set to +Offset and auto.
> Single core loads at 4350MHz, idles normal both freq and voltage wise, life is good
> Very stable, no temp issues (max 53.1 under load) no cold boot bug etc.
> 
> I've run this since day one and have a hard time finding those that are any higher performance wise.
> Not all chips react the same with the PE settings but I always recommend giving it a try. At least with an Asus mobo.



I havent had much luck with XFR + PBO, what are your cpu benches looking like on multicore as thats where I saw it lacking? 4.4ghz gets me around a 2058 in Cinebench on multi and about 183-185 single. Ive ran a PState OC as with my setup it gave me the most consistent performance.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

I think you have a golden chip... mine is about on par with what the reviewers were getting with 4.275 being my max possible linepack stable OC with it taking 1.45v with very high LLC levels... but my LLC is broken... even extreme level still has vdroop of .02 under load. May be my board though... I have a B350 I reused from my first Ryzen build... but it has a 4+2 phase vrm's with 60 amp capability on each... so far no overheat issues what so ever on it so I don't know... I just figure my chip is mediocrity at its finest.


----------



## brenopapito

I tried at 4.2 and 4.1 but no success. I'm running OCCT and my computer reboots in less than 15 minutes. I also tried in stock (default bios settings) and I had the same result. I'm starting to think my cpu/motherboard have some issues. What else should I try?

@4.2
Vcore: 1.35v/1.4v (fixed)
SOC: 1.10v/1.15v (fixed)
LLC: Level 1

@4.1
Vcore: 1.375v (fixed)
SOC: 1.10v (fixed)
LLC: Level 1

Mobo: X370 Taichi
Bios: 4.72 (beta)
C-States: Disable
Core Performance Boost: Disable
Cool 'n' Quiet: Disable


----------



## Minotaurtoo

how are your temps? vrm temps, cpu and all... hwinfo64 screenshot after it's been running for about 10 mins would be helpful... also that will show us if vdroop is getting you.


----------



## brenopapito

Minotaurtoo said:


> how are your temps? vrm temps, cpu and all... hwinfo64 screenshot after it's been running for about 10 mins would be helpful... also that will show us if vdroop is getting you.


Screenshot during my test (yesterday), 2s before OCCT crash. I have a custom water cooler and I think I'm ok with temps.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Minotaurtoo said:


> I think you have a golden chip... mine is about on par with what the reviewers were getting with 4.275 being my max possible linepack stable OC with it taking 1.45v with very high LLC levels... but my LLC is broken... even extreme level still has vdroop of .02 under load. May be my board though... I have a B350 I reused from my first Ryzen build... but it has a 4+2 phase vrm's with 60 amp capability on each... so far no overheat issues what so ever on it so I don't know... I just figure my chip is mediocrity at its finest.



It is 100% your board LLC works like a charm on C7H, I can run LLC 4 which isnt even max and at 4.4ghz and 1.5v I get no droop. VRMs stay cool, everything runs pretty well as far as I can tell. I started out with a B350 and I just couldnt deal with it. They make everything difficult to accomplish.




brenopapito said:


> Screenshot during my test (yesterday), 2s before OCCT crash. I have a custom water cooler and I think I'm ok with temps.



Have you ran a thorough test on your memory? Thats a likely culprit as well, you could be getting crashes due to unstable memory.
Edit: If those memory timings are correct I already spot a problem with your timings. You are running 14-14-14-26-39 your Trc should never be below Tcl+Tras so 39 is too low. Needs to be at least 40 or you are not only making your memory inefficient, you are inviting problems.


----------



## brenopapito

CJMitsuki said:


> It is 100% your board LLC works like a charm on C7H, I can run LLC 4 which isnt even max and at 4.4ghz and 1.5v I get no droop. VRMs stay cool, everything runs pretty well as far as I can tell. I started out with a B350 and I just couldnt deal with it. They make everything difficult to accomplish.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Have you ran a thorough test on your memory? Thats a likely culprit as well, you could be getting crashes due to unstable memory.
> Edit: If those memory timings are correct I already spot a problem with your timings. You are running 14-14-14-26-39 your Trc should never be below Tcl+Tras so 39 is too low. Needs to be at least 40 or you are not only making your memory inefficient, you are inviting problems.


I decided to remove and insert all psu cables, cmos battery and ram sticks. I did a quick test ([email protected]/LLC 1/SOC 1.15v) before going to work and now it seems like I have some stability. Tonight I'll do more tests, I'm very optimistic.


----------



## chroniclard

I am doing 4.2 @ 1.381V with LLC 3(if I recall correctly). 1.4V is quite high for 4.2


----------



## CJMitsuki

chroniclard said:


> I am doing 4.2 @ 1.381V with LLC 3(if I recall correctly). 1.4V is quite high for 4.2


Yes but once you proceed above 4.2ghz the voltage requirement is exponential. 4.3 needing 1.425v+ to be fully stable and 4.4ghz needing 1.475 at the vCore so at VRM is 1.5v or close to it.


----------



## Chargeit

Picked up a 2700 off amazon last night for my VR rig. Had a 2200g in there that I decided to upgrade once I started using the rig for VR. I planned on putting a 2600/2600x in there but the deal on the 2700 was too good to pass up. When all was said and done I paid $163 for the thing. 

My mobo is an AB350M-Gaming3. I plan on using the stock cooler. Any suggested reading for a good Q&D oc using the 2700?

Thanks!


----------



## Minotaurtoo

Chargeit said:


> Picked up a 2700 off amazon last night for my VR rig. Had a 2200g in there that I decided to upgrade once I started using the rig for VR. I planned on putting a 2600/2600x in there but the deal on the 2700 was too good to pass up. When all was said and done I paid $163 for the thing.
> 
> My mobo is an AB350M-Gaming3. I plan on using the stock cooler. Any suggested reading for a good Q&D oc using the 2700?
> 
> Thanks!


On my B350 I just turned on precision boost overdrive and left it... I couldn't get any significant overclock stable beyond what that did on mine without a lot voltage.


----------



## Chargeit

Minotaurtoo said:


> On my B350 I just turned on precision boost overdrive and left it... I couldn't get any significant overclock stable beyond what that did on mine without a lot voltage.


I'll play with it some and see what happens. If I can't pull much of an oc then I won't worry about it.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

Chargeit said:


> I'll play with it some and see what happens. If I can't pull much of an oc then I won't worry about it.


you can always give it a shot... but from my experience with the apps I use, I came out better at stock with precision overdrive turned on than all core OC of 4.2... 4.3 was as low as I could go and still get no loss of performance in some of my most common apps... and I never could get it fully stable... highest I got fully stable was 4.25 (probably vrm limited on B350)


----------



## bMind

Soo..I bit the bullet and after entire life of having Intel powered computers I switched to AMD  I replaced my dear Q6600 on P45 board with Ryzen 2700X and Croasshair VII Hero  As you can expect..night and day difference  I am at stock speeds, because I'm rockin' the box cooler, but I am planning to upgrade later this year in this department. So far? Happy AF


----------



## Chargeit

Minotaurtoo said:


> you can always give it a shot... but from my experience with the apps I use, I came out better at stock with precision overdrive turned on than all core OC of 4.2... 4.3 was as low as I could go and still get no loss of performance in some of my most common apps... and I never could get it fully stable... highest I got fully stable was 4.25 (probably vrm limited on B350)


What mobo/psu?


----------



## Chargeit

Got my cpu in.

Amazon didn't even bother putting any kind of packaging materiel in the box and just tossed the cpu in there floating around. 


https://photos.app.goo.gl/LbAfi72qTsm2NfD88


----------



## Chargeit

Minotaurtoo said:


> On my B350 I just turned on precision boost overdrive and left it... I couldn't get any significant overclock stable beyond what that did on mine without a lot voltage.


I got the cpu in yesterday. At first I couldn't get the thing stable. Then I realized I hadn't tested oc'ing without the xmp. I disabled the xmp and have since been able to get the 2700 stable at 1.3v 39. I did an hour of aida64 at this setting. 

Today I'm testing the memory and am currently manually oc'ing the ram. My ram kit is rated for 3200 but I'm starting with 2666 and will work my way up. Currently 34 min into aida64 with 39 all cores and 2666 on ram. 

Looks like this 2700/b350m will require a lot of tlc to get stable and oc'ed.


I don't have an option to enable Precision boost overdrive in my bios and it's greyed out when I tested Ryzen master. I'm doing my oc'ing through the bios which is pretty barren for this Ga-ab350m-gaming 3.

Hoping this works out.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

Chargeit said:


> What mobo/psu?


my mobo is the Asus tuf b350m gaming plus... PSU is a Rosewill modular 650w nothing special.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

I don't know why I did it... but I just ordered https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820232530 they had it on sale last night for 209$ US and for some stupid reason I had a discount code and looked up my old Geil potenza ram on ebay and saw that used it was selling for 150$ and just pulled the trigger... : ( I'm so weak when it comes to tech.... oh well... anyone interested in seeing the difference it makes if any?


----------



## tekjunkie28

Minotaurtoo said:


> I don't know why I did it... but I just ordered https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820232530 they had it on sale last night for 209$ US and for some stupid reason I had a discount code and looked up my old Geil potenza ram on ebay and saw that used it was selling for 150$ and just pulled the trigger... : ( I'm so weak when it comes to tech.... oh well... anyone interested in seeing the difference it makes if any?


I have that exact memory. What kind of difference are you looking for?

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Chargeit

Minotaurtoo said:


> my mobo is the Asus tuf b350m gaming plus... PSU is a Rosewill modular 650w nothing special.


My x299 mobo is a Tuf Mark 1. Pretty good board and Asus has a very feature rich bios. 

The mobo I'm running is a Gigabyte ga-ab350m-gaming 3. Gigabytes bios takes some getting used to. When I did the cpu swap I also swapped out the 500w psu I had in there for an 850w I had laying around. Overkill but I have it so might as well use it.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

tekjunkie28 said:


> I have that exact memory. What kind of difference are you looking for?
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


 primarily looking to improve gaming performance to the best I can get with Ryzen... I don't think there is much else I do that will really need the ram that fast or the tight timings...


----------



## tekjunkie28

Minotaurtoo said:


> primarily looking to improve gaming performance to the best I can get with Ryzen... I don't think there is much else I do that will really need the ram that fast or the tight timings...


I found some timing and I'll post them later tonight if I have time. They get me better performance at 3200 mhz then stilt st 3333 or 3400

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## beefdog

So has anyone in here been crazy enough to pair a 2700x with 1080ti sli + an m.2 ssd+ and internal capture card? Im thinking it should be fine but im not 100% sure of it


I "accidentally" sold my 1950x and i decided instead of buying another threadripper to just go mainstream until tr2 comes out


----------



## rdr09

Minotaurtoo said:


> I don't know why I did it... but I just ordered https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820232530 they had it on sale last night for 209$ US and for some stupid reason I had a discount code and looked up my old Geil potenza ram on ebay and saw that used it was selling for 150$ and just pulled the trigger... : ( I'm so weak when it comes to tech.... oh well... anyone interested in seeing the difference it makes if any?


Lovely. Pls do post. Thanks.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

rdr09 said:


> Lovely. Pls do post. Thanks.


I will be doing tests using cinebench, userbench, 3DMark, and Dirt4 since I have a pretty good baseline in these... Passmark too maybe...


----------



## Minotaurtoo

I know this isn't the 2400g thread, but for anyone interested here is the userbench results for bone stock 2400g build I made for a friend... overclock results to follow... well actually when I do them you'll be able to see them from history links on the page I'm linking... http://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/9829729


----------



## Minotaurtoo

first and second OC attempt was actually worse or nearly the same as the stock setup... but finally I settled on this.... the ASUS optimal settings... : ( oh well... not really testing it much just running it through the motions. Customer wants it all stock anyway and it's on the stock cooler too. http://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/9831463 Not bad for 2400g I think.


----------



## tekjunkie28

Minotaurtoo said:


> first and second OC attempt was actually worse or nearly the same as the stock setup... but finally I settled on this.... the ASUS optimal settings... : ( oh well... not really testing it much just running it through the motions. Customer wants it all stock anyway and it's on the stock cooler too. http://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/9831463 Not bad for 2400g I think.


I build a 2400G with asrock a320m and 8gb of some cheap memory for work. I built several of these machines and they performed great. Tested some PUBG and fortnite on them also. They are playable 

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Minotaurtoo

you know... in building the rig for my friend I discovered something.... the Tuf B350m plus gaming from ASUS is almost exactly the same bios wise and hardware wise as the Tuf X470 plus gaming... same VRM setup... same bios setup... only real differences physically is the addition of a few extra expansion slots and an extra m.2 slot mostly from it being atx not matx.... oh and a tiny heat sink on the +2 part of the vrm... in other words... so not worth the extra 40$ or so to get it unless you just want the 2nd gen out of the box compatibility or need the extra slots... Bios wise... seriously didn't find any difference... even the overclocking methods were the same using offsets and no base clock overclocking... The Tuf B350 is a great B350 board... very nice for a B350 with a very good vrm even if it's only 4+2 and the LLC is broken (barely makes a difference)... but for an X470 board to be the same... for 40$ more...not good ASUS..not good 



seriously ASUS I expected more.. the TUF branding has always to the best of my memory been associated with boards that could go beyond the normal board and wouldn't give out on you when being abused like the saberkittys... 



It's not that it's a bad board, just expected more on X470... I've had 4+2 vrm boards that I didn't even push as hard as this B350 not last a week through my testing... but this B350 took it and ran with it... pulling over 200w when testing high overclocks on this 2700x... I suppose that's what they were thinking...hey this will hold up just fine.. but seriously I hate seeing a brand name that has always been above average get put on a board that's below average... no wonder people were talking about the prime being better than the TUF board... my B350 is just as TUF... oh well...


----------



## rdr09

So, i installed my R7 2700 on my B350 Strix and testing Cine 15, only 5 out of the 8 cores boost to 4100MHz. The Tdie/Tctl temps was maxing out to 106C. My ambient is high and that could be a contributing factor. I'll be testing PUBG and if temps are these high, then I may have to get a 470 someday. 

The only thing i set in BIOS from Default is the RAM to 3200 Cl14. System is running fine using 4009 BIOS.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

rdr09 said:


> So, i installed my R7 2700 on my B350 Strix and testing Cine 15, only 5 out of the 8 cores boost to 4100MHz. The Tdie/Tctl temps was maxing out to 106C. My ambient is high and that could be a contributing factor. I'll be testing PUBG and if temps are these high, then I may have to get a 470 someday.
> 
> The only thing i set in BIOS from Default is the RAM to 3200 Cl14. System is running fine using 4009 BIOS.


Speeds seem to be ok for 2700 non x... those temps I'm betting are a fluke/glitch... the cpu temp on the motherboard listing isn't near as high... and I believe that it would have shut down for thermals if it actually reached 106C... but if those temps are real temps...I'd say your cooler needs a remount... my son had a problem like that once and it was a bad mount... see what the cpu temps are when you are in bios... if it reads high there then you may have a problem.


----------



## tekjunkie28

rdr09 said:


> So, i installed my R7 2700 on my B350 Strix and testing Cine 15, only 5 out of the 8 cores boost to 4100MHz. The Tdie/Tctl temps was maxing out to 106C. My ambient is high and that could be a contributing factor. I'll be testing PUBG and if temps are these high, then I may have to get a 470 someday.
> 
> The only thing i set in BIOS from Default is the RAM to 3200 Cl14. System is running fine using 4009 BIOS.


What cooler are u using. That's way too hot. What's your ambient temp?

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## rdr09

tekjunkie28 said:


> What cooler are u using. That's way too hot. What's your ambient temp?
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


Using the stock cooler. I believe that's the VRM temp. Not sure if it's accurate prolly HWINFO needs updating. Anyways, system ran fine in about 3 hrs of BF4 with only 4 cores hitting 4100MHz. The rest about 3600MHz. Haven't tried PUBG.

Ambient is around 25.


EDIT: Well, I updated to the latest version and it seems the temps are fine afterall.


----------



## Chargeit

Hey guys. I ran into an odd issue.

I'm benchmarking my 2700 at 3.9 on all cores, ram 2666. I did a run of Doom at the default settings 1080p and pulled 95 fps. I checked my notes running doom using the Ryzen 3 2200g at the same settings and had an avg fps of 124. Does anyone know if it's common for this game to run better on a stock 2200g?

I checked to see if something was wrong with my oc and ran a Fire strike benchmark and pulled 11,598 (11,000 listed on site). All results from fire strike were above the scores listed for a 2700/1060 6gb on the site. 


I'm going to have to go over the settings I used in doom and make sure everything was set correctly but man, this threw me off. Was getting some benchmarking done and it's always a buzzkill when something happens that throws your results into question. :/


----------



## white owl

Are you using Vulcan?


----------



## Chargeit

white owl said:


> Are you using Vulcan?


OpenGL


----------



## Chargeit

The only other different (difference) is with the Ryzen 3 2200g I ran the system with my ram set to the xmp profile of 3200. With the Ryzen 7 the xmp profile was unstable and I have the ram set to 2666. I didn't optimize the ram oc though I wouldn't think ram speed past a point would make such a huge difference in Doom. 

I also just checked the settings and every is set the same.


*I oc'ed the ram to 3200. Ran 1 hour of aida64 stress test. Tested doom again and came out a little lower this time. First test was 96 fps, second test was 94 fps (both within realm of error for in game benchmarking). I'm running fire strike again to see what I pull. 

Only other things I can think of is the b350 mobo I'm using is causing problems though it has no problems holding 3.9 while stress testing. Other then that I have my oculus rift plugged into the system though I do not have the oculus software running so the rift is basically sitting in a sleep state. 

One thing for sure. If someone puts out a solid x470 matx board I'd pick it up for this 2700 and sell the b350m I'm using. 

To clear things up I'm personally happy with the game running at 95 fps though I don't want my numbers tarnished by a shady mobo or other factors.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

one thing I'd try is to disable half the cores and turn off smt to see if it resembles your 2200g results... Ryzen master has all the functionality you need for that I believe.


----------



## rdr09

The newer bioses (bios 4009) are affecting ram stability. I had 0904 (Sep 2017) and 3200 MHz was easy to achieve. Having a blast on both BF4 and PUBG!
@Chargeit, i would look into what Minotaurtoo suggested.


----------



## Chargeit

Minotaurtoo said:


> one thing I'd try is to disable half the cores and turn off smt to see if it resembles your 2200g results... Ryzen master has all the functionality you need for that I believe.





rdr09 said:


> The newer bioses (bios 4009) are affecting ram stability. I had 0904 (Sep 2017) and 3200 MHz was easy to achieve. Having a blast on both BF4 and PUBG!
> 
> @Chargeit, i would look into what Minotaurtoo suggested.


I'll give that a try. You can disable cores or smt through the bios fairly easy.


It looks like the ram xmp is unstable for me but manually dialing in the ram speed and timings suggested works.


*I tested Doom with Smt off. I scored 91 fps avg so I lost some fps. I didn't disable cores for the run. I'll try disabling cores.


----------



## Johan45

One thing I have noticed that can affect FPS in games is HPET. Some it helps other it doesn't it's a mixed bag really


----------



## Chargeit

I tested the system at full stock and same thing. 91 fps. 

I set up afterburner to display stats on screen and gpu usage is all over the place. (really liked to run in the 40's - 50's though it would peak in the 80's or 90's)

I loaded up doom on my 7820x/1080 ti at 3440x1440 and my gpu usage was floating around be between 70% - 100%. The gpu usage tended to be much higher on this system favoring high 80's - 90's. 

I did test unplugging the rift to see if that did anything and it didn't. 




Johan45 said:


> One thing I have noticed that can affect FPS in games is HPET. Some it helps other it doesn't it's a mixed bag really


I'll test turning that off. 



Is there something at work like intel ring bus vs mesh? For instance coffee lake uses a ring bus and has really good gaming performance compared to x299 which uses mesh.


----------



## gupsterg

Minotaurtoo said:


> the TUF branding has always to the best of my memory been associated with boards that could go beyond the normal board and wouldn't give out on you when being abused like the saberkittys...


That was what I thought, but it has changed. This article has good info on segmentation.


----------



## Chargeit

I'm still getting inconsistent results. As far as I can tell my cpu and ram oc are stable. My clocks hold when stress testing. However, I can't benchmark and use my current numbers with certainty that something isn't messed up on my end. 

My current mobo is a Gigabyte AB350M-Gaming 3. This was a good mobo to pair with the Ryzen 3 2200g for a budget gaming build video I did but I don't think it's a great mobo to pair with a Ryzen 7 2700.

I want to try out a different mobo. Problem I currently have is my case is a micro atx case. I don't think there are matx x370/x470 mobo currently available. 

Does anyone have suggestions for b350 matx mobo with beefy power delivery that would be good for oc'ing this 2700 with?


----------



## rdr09

Chargeit said:


> I'm still getting inconsistent results. As far as I can tell my cpu and ram oc are stable. My clocks hold when stress testing. However, I can't benchmark and use my current numbers with certainty that something isn't messed up on my end.
> 
> My current mobo is a Gigabyte AB350M-Gaming 3. This was a good mobo to pair with the Ryzen 3 2200g for a budget gaming build video I did but I don't think it's a great mobo to pair with a Ryzen 7 2700.
> 
> I want to try out a different mobo. Problem I currently have is my case is a micro atx case. I don't think there are matx x370/x470 mobo currently available.
> 
> Does anyone have suggestions for b350 matx mobo with beefy power delivery that would be good for oc'ing this 2700 with?
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NJ2STOBLpNQ&t=



If you are dead set in oc'ing an 8 core i'd suggest a X470. With my B350 Strix, 3900MHz CPU Oc requires 1.35V. When Loaded the Tctl/Tdie reaches 72 deg. Any higher OC will get that temp over 80 which i am not willing to happen. Shame cause the cpu temp stays under 60 underload with the stock cooler of a R5 1600. But, i really like how this Strix handles all stock in gaming.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

new ram results: http://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/9883515 better than before which was : http://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/9831710 What is weird to me is how it affected the SSD score so much... the ram score I expected... tested cinebench and as expected no change... no change on fire strike either... going to try passmark and some actual game testing later.



as for the newer bios affecting ram.. .I noticed my SOC voltage went from 1.15 to 1.10 on the last bios update when left to auto... I manually set it back to 1.15 and 3200mhz was stable... but before it wasn't... I was about to send this kit back to newegg too lol.. just happened to see that and remembered some online videos talking about the DOCP voltage boost was to 1.15 with the second gen ryzen and was only 1.10 before and them thinking that was responsible for the extended ram compatibility... well that's all it took to get mine stable... so maybe something to that.


----------



## Chargeit

It's going to take more then 80c on vrm to get me squeamish. I'm limited to matx because my case is matx. I really like this case so I'm not replacing it. I'll run the vrm like a dog if I have to. 

Going to keep an eye out for B450m mobo's and maybe see if a x470m mobo comes out. 

Though I noticed benching userbenchmark that my ram is under-performing. The xmp profile isn't stable so I had to manually put in timings. I contacted GB about their beta bios which is supposed to offer better xmp support. I'm going to see where that goes.


----------



## rdr09

Minotaurtoo said:


> new ram results: http://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/9883515 better than before which was : http://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/9831710 What is weird to me is how it affected the SSD score so much... the ram score I expected... tested cinebench and as expected no change... no change on fire strike either... going to try passmark and some actual game testing later.
> 
> 
> 
> as for the newer bios affecting ram.. .I noticed my SOC voltage went from 1.15 to 1.10 on the last bios update when left to auto... I manually set it back to 1.15 and 3200mhz was stable... but before it wasn't... I was about to send this kit back to newegg too lol.. just happened to see that and remembered some online videos talking about the DOCP voltage boost was to 1.15 with the second gen ryzen and was only 1.10 before and them thinking that was responsible for the extended ram compatibility... well that's all it took to get mine stable... so maybe something to that.


Thanks for sharing these tests. Yes, indeed my SOC is in auto. 



Chargeit said:


> It's going to take more then 80c on vrm to get me squeamish. I'm limited to matx because my case is matx. I really like this case so I'm not replacing it. I'll run the vrm like a dog if I have to.
> 
> Going to keep an eye out for B450m mobo's and maybe see if a x470m mobo comes out.
> 
> Though I noticed benching userbenchmark that my ram is under-performing. The xmp profile isn't stable so I had to manually put in timings. I contacted GB about their beta bios which is supposed to offer better xmp support. I'm going to see where that goes.


I read somewhere to keep the Tdie under 80 or the whole system will get sluggish. 

Off topic: I know you have a GTX 1060 and i wanted to ask is 80 deg on the core affect its performance? Not familiar with nVidia cards. I may have to install Afterburner to check if core clock is consistent. Thanks.


----------



## Chargeit

rdr09 said:


> Thanks for sharing these tests. Yes, indeed my SOC is in auto.
> 
> 
> 
> I read somewhere to keep the Tdie under 80 or the whole system will get sluggish.
> 
> Off topic: I know you have a GTX 1060 and i wanted to ask is 80 deg on the core affect its performance? Not familiar with nVidia cards. I may have to install Afterburner to check if core clock is consistent. Thanks.


Pascal throttles at 84c. I personally try and stay 78c and under.

*Interesting about the Tdie. I'll look into it more.


----------



## minal

Chargeit said:


> It's going to take more then 80c on vrm to get me squeamish.





rdr09 said:


> I read somewhere to keep the Tdie under 80 or the whole system will get sluggish.


I think you're talking about two different things. Tdie != vrm

For the CPU, yes, 80C (Tdie) would be high. I vaguely remember reading that past 60C the CPU might start reducing how much it boosts.


----------



## Chargeit

minal said:


> I think you're talking about two different things. Tdie != vrm
> 
> For the CPU, yes, 80C (Tdie) would be high. I vaguely remember reading that past 60C the CPU might start reducing how much it boosts.


He was talking about Vrm. I thought. 

Nothing under my settings says Tdie so I figured his mobo called the vrm Tdie under hwmonitor or something. 

I wouldn't be concerned with 80c on the cpu unless putting it under long term stress. I don't think they throttle until 95c. I wouldn't run it at 90c+ long term though.


----------



## rdr09

Chargeit said:


> Pascal throttles at 84c. I personally try and stay 78c and under.
> 
> *Interesting about the Tdie. I'll look into it more.


The gpu core maxes out at 80 and no higher. Guess the fan is working fine.


----------



## rdr09

minal said:


> I think you're talking about two different things. Tdie != vrm
> 
> For the CPU, yes, 80C (Tdie) would be high. I vaguely remember reading that past 60C the CPU might start reducing how much it boosts.


Oh noes, not much room if thats the case. My board’s tdie idles at 40.


----------



## minal

Chargeit said:


> He was talking about Vrm. I thought.
> 
> Nothing under my settings says Tdie so I figured his mobo called the vrm Tdie under hwmonitor or something.
> 
> I wouldn't be concerned with 80c on the cpu unless putting it under long term stress. I don't think they throttle until 95c. I wouldn't run it at 90c+ long term though.





rdr09 said:


> Oh noes, not much room if thats the case. My board’s tdie idles at 40.


 I'm not clear on when they throttle (85C+ ?) but throttling is not the same as reducing boosting (XFR, PBO, etc) which is optimized by the CPU partly based on temperatures. I think this is what AMD refers to when saying that enthusiasts with better cooling can be rewarded with higher performance.


----------



## rdr09

minal said:


> I'm not clear on when they throttle (85C+ ?) but throttling is not the same as reducing boosting (XFR, PBO, etc) which is optimized by the CPU partly based on temperatures. I think this is what AMD refers to when saying that enthusiasts with better cooling can be rewarded with higher performance.


Going by HWINFO64 Gaming temp readings. CPU (Tdie) temp rdg 3900MHz OC vs All Stock . . .


EDIT: @Minotaurtoo, setting the SOC in manual with an offset of 0.05 for 3200 RAM speed is working so far and no crashes in BF4 and PUBG. Will test with HCI soon. Thank you.


----------



## tekjunkie28

minal said:


> I'm not clear on when they throttle (85C+ ?) but throttling is not the same as reducing boosting (XFR, PBO, etc) which is optimized by the CPU partly based on temperatures. I think this is what AMD refers to when saying that enthusiasts with better cooling can be rewarded with higher performance.


I have heard better cooling can yield better performance but has it been tested? 

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Lif3isinfinite

I think I have a problem with my Ryzen 2700x. All the cores have been to a max of 6.3GHZ. Maybe XFR??? Anyone else experienced this??


----------



## Chargeit

Lif3isinfinite said:


> I think I have a problem with my Ryzen 2700x. All the cores have been to a max of 6.3GHZ. Maybe XFR??? Anyone else experienced this??


Hey.

Hwmonitor reads the incorrect max sometimes. My ryzen 2700 manually oc'ed to 3900 will read hitting into the 5000's at times. I've seen it on other systems also.


----------



## minal

tekjunkie28 said:


> I have heard better cooling can yield better performance but has it been tested?


Anecdotally, those with liquid cooling typically report higher sustained frequencies under load. It would be cool to see rigorous testing on the performance impact of cooling, and temperature thresholds for boosting and throttling.


----------



## Chargeit

Ok. I figured a few things out though I'm still not getting the results I expected.

I benchmarked userbenchmark and my ram was under performing. I used ryzen Dram calculator to come up with timings. Used said timings and ended up having to settle on 2866 on my ram. I ran userbenchmark again and this time everything scored great. 

I preceded to benchmark Doom again and pull 104 fps with 3.9 on the cores and 2866 ram. I tested various other things same results. I removed the cpu oc setting ram back to 2866 and same results.

It's looking like nothing I can do will get this cpu running as I want it on this mobo. I now have a few options. 

I can buy a new x470 mobo but I'd also need to replace the case. Realistically I'd be looking at spending $250+ for this. I'm not spending that much. I'd return the cpu and just buy an 8700k/z370 before I did that. 

I can just deal with the cpu under-performing on the mobo. That ain't happening.

Lastly, I can switch the cpu out for a 2600x which is likely a better fit for the mobo. I'm leaning towards this right now. I can use the extra cores but this isn't my main rig so it's not critical that I have an 8/16 cpu. 

Sucks because Amazon just had the 2600x on sale for $188 and they're not back to $225.


----------



## tekjunkie28

Chargeit said:


> Ok. I figured a few things out though I'm still not getting the results I expected.
> 
> I benchmarked userbenchmark and my ram was under performing. I used ryzen Dram calculator to come up with timings. Used said timings and ended up having to settle on 2866 on my ram. I ran userbenchmark again and this time everything scored great.
> 
> I preceded to benchmark Doom again and pull 104 fps with 3.9 on the cores and 2866 ram. I tested various other things same results. I removed the cpu oc setting ram back to 2866 and same results.
> 
> It's looking like nothing I can do will get this cpu running as I want it on this mobo. I now have a few options.
> 
> I can buy a new x470 mobo but I'd also need to replace the case. Realistically I'd be looking at spending $250+ for this. I'm not spending that much. I'd return the cpu and just buy an 8700k/z370 before I did that.
> 
> I can just deal with the cpu under-performing on the mobo. That ain't happening.
> 
> Lastly, I can switch the cpu out for a 2600x which is likely a better fit for the mobo. I'm leaning towards this right now. I can use the extra cores but this isn't my main rig so it's not critical that I have an 8/16 cpu.
> 
> Sucks because Amazon just had the 2600x on sale for $188 and they're not back to $225.


Before you pull the trigger on anything what exactly are you trying to do? I read a few posts back to try and catch up and help you. Is 2866mhz all your getting in your ram. And your processor is a 2200G?

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Chargeit

tekjunkie28 said:


> Before you pull the trigger on anything what exactly are you trying to do? I read a few posts back to try and catch up and help you. Is 2866mhz all your getting in your ram. And your processor is a 2200G?
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


My previous processor was a Ryzen 3 2200g. I bought it for a benchmark video along with a AB350M-Gaming 3 mobo.

After finishing the benchmark video I decided to keep the Ryzen 3 2200g. I did not have a use for the system at the time and used it to look stuff up while gaming on my main rig.

I ended up picking up an oculus rift. I didn't want the rift cords cluttering up my main rig so I decided to use the Ryzen 3 system as a vr system. It worked pretty well though I felt like I could use more cores for headroom. I also record and stream video at times so it would be nice to use the cpu instead of the gpu for encoding. 

I ordered the Ryzen 7 2700 from Amazon when it went on sale for $225. Used a coupon also so got it for $170. 

Got the 2700 in and sold the ryzen 3 (much quicker then I thought it would sell).

Installed the 2700 xmp profile was unstable. Messed with various things and had bad results. Ended up using that Dram calculator to find stable settings at 2866. My ram is 3200 but I'm not too worried about running at the rated speed as long as it runs above stock. 

So, my plans for this 2700 are a few things. I need to benchmark the system for use in a youtube video. I need to use the system as a dedicated VR system. I also need to use the system for benchmarking gpu's. 

In my gaming benchmarks I realized Doom is under-performing compared to the Ryzen 3. Take a look,

------------------------------------------------------------------
Ryzen 3 2200g - Doom results

04-06-2018, 15:43:07 DOOMx64.exe benchmark completed, 43301 frames rendered in 346.422 s
Average framerate : 124.9 FPS
Minimum framerate : 93.5 FPS
Maximum framerate : 161.1 FPS
1% low framerate : 90.8 FPS
0.1% low framerate : 19.5 FPS
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ryzen 7 2700 - Doom results

25-07-2018, 14:31:03 DOOMx64.exe benchmark completed, 27010 frames rendered in 262.047 s
Average framerate : 103.0 FPS
Minimum framerate : 58.8 FPS
Maximum framerate : 163.2 FPS
1% low framerate : 47.3 FPS
0.1% low framerate : 9.4 FPS
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Fx 6300 @ 4.2 - Doom results

26-06-2018, 00:22:01 DOOMx64.exe benchmark completed, 26509 frames rendered in 255.765 s
Average framerate : 103.6 FPS
Minimum framerate : 61.8 FPS
Maximum framerate : 149.2 FPS
1% low framerate : 53.9 FPS
0.1% low framerate : 12.6 FPS
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Typing that I just realized something. I used the same psu for the Ryzen 7 2700 results as I did with the fx 6300 results. I used a different psu for the Ryzen 3 2200g results. Seeing how close the fx and ryzen 7 doom results are I have to question if something is up with that psu. I might have to test out another psu in the system. 



I'm going to try another psu but I'm currently thinking the mobo just can't handle the ryzen 7. Though, now that I've seen the fx and ryzen doom numbers right next to each other, I'm starting to think about that psu.


----------



## tekjunkie28

Chargeit said:


> My previous processor was a Ryzen 3 2200g. I bought it for a benchmark video along with a AB350M-Gaming 3 mobo.
> 
> After finishing the benchmark video I decided to keep the Ryzen 3 2200g. I did not have a use for the system at the time and used it to look stuff up while gaming on my main rig.
> 
> I ended up picking up an oculus rift. I didn't want the rift cords cluttering up my main rig so I decided to use the Ryzen 3 system as a vr system. It worked pretty well though I felt like I could use more cores for headroom. I also record and stream video at times so it would be nice to use the cpu instead of the gpu for encoding.
> 
> I ordered the Ryzen 7 2700 from Amazon when it went on sale for $225. Used a coupon also so got it for $170.
> 
> Got the 2700 in and sold the ryzen 3 (much quicker then I thought it would sell).
> 
> Installed the 2700 xmp profile was unstable. Messed with various things and had bad results. Ended up using that Dram calculator to find stable settings at 2866. My ram is 3200 but I'm not too worried about running at the rated speed as long as it runs above stock.
> 
> So, my plans for this 2700 are a few things. I need to benchmark the system for use in a youtube video. I need to use the system as a dedicated VR system. I also need to use the system for benchmarking gpu's.
> 
> In my gaming benchmarks I realized Doom is under-performing compared to the Ryzen 3. Take a look,
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> Ryzen 3 2200g - Doom results
> 
> 04-06-2018, 15:43:07 DOOMx64.exe benchmark completed, 43301 frames rendered in 346.422 s
> Average framerate : 124.9 FPS
> Minimum framerate : 93.5 FPS
> Maximum framerate : 161.1 FPS
> 1% low framerate : 90.8 FPS
> 0.1% low framerate : 19.5 FPS
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Ryzen 7 2700 - Doom results
> 
> 25-07-2018, 14:31:03 DOOMx64.exe benchmark completed, 27010 frames rendered in 262.047 s
> Average framerate : 103.0 FPS
> Minimum framerate : 58.8 FPS
> Maximum framerate : 163.2 FPS
> 1% low framerate : 47.3 FPS
> 0.1% low framerate : 9.4 FPS
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Fx 6300 @ 4.2 - Doom results
> 
> 26-06-2018, 00:22:01 DOOMx64.exe benchmark completed, 26509 frames rendered in 255.765 s
> Average framerate : 103.6 FPS
> Minimum framerate : 61.8 FPS
> Maximum framerate : 149.2 FPS
> 1% low framerate : 53.9 FPS
> 0.1% low framerate : 12.6 FPS
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Typing that I just realized something. I used the same psu for the Ryzen 7 2700 results as I did with the fx 6300 results. I used a different psu for the Ryzen 3 2200g results. Seeing how close the fx and ryzen 7 doom results are I have to question if something is up with that psu. I might have to test out another psu in the system.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm going to try another psu but I'm currently thinking the mobo just can't handle the ryzen 7. Though, now that I've seen the fx and ryzen doom numbers right next to each other, I'm starting to think about that psu.


Dude that is weird, really weird. Are you sure it's not a software issue.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Minotaurtoo

not to interrupt the flow or anything, but I just discovered my 3200mhz gskill flarex wasn't fully stable at 3200.... it's my board though... I was able to get 3133 stable with 14,14,14,34 timings so close enough... wasn't even enough to affect benchmarks... just irritating. but that's what I get for having a B350 board... thinking of getting a new crosshair x470 board later anyway to try for better overclocking on the cpu and also because I heard a rumor or two that Zen2 would have more cores : ) *fingers crossed*


----------



## Chargeit

I benched Far Cry 5. This is at 1080p high preset.

-------------------------------------------------------
Ryzen 3 2200g - Stock, 3200 ram

04-06-2018, 23:31:08 FarCry5.exe benchmark completed, 58033 frames rendered in 706.531 s
Average framerate : 82.1 FPS
Minimum framerate : 57.7 FPS
Maximum framerate : 94.9 FPS
1% low framerate : 54.0 FPS
0.1% low framerate : 27.7 FPS
-------------------------------------------------------
Ryzen 7 - Stock, 2866 ram

25-07-2018, 20:11:55 FarCry5.exe benchmark completed, 60524 frames rendered in 706.375 s
Average framerate : 85.6 FPS
Minimum framerate : 62.2 FPS
Maximum framerate : 95.9 FPS
1% low framerate : 50.8 FPS
0.1% low framerate : 18.2 FPS
-------------------------------------------------------

My Civ 6 results are about 10 fps better on the Ryzen 7. Maybe something is up with Doom. It was suggested to me to try setting core affinities with Doom. I'll give it a go.


----------



## tekjunkie28

Minotaurtoo said:


> not to interrupt the flow or anything, but I just discovered my 3200mhz gskill flarex wasn't fully stable at 3200.... it's my board though... I was able to get 3133 stable with 14,14,14,34 timings so close enough... wasn't even enough to affect benchmarks... just irritating. but that's what I get for having a B350 board... thinking of getting a new crosshair x470 board later anyway to try for better overclocking on the cpu and also because I heard a rumor or two that Zen2 would have more cores : ) *fingers crossed*


Try these timings. These are flare X AMD certified 3200CL14 sticks. 100% stable









Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## tekjunkie28

Chargeit said:


> I benched Far Cry 5. This is at 1080p high preset.
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> Ryzen 3 2200g - Stock, 3200 ram
> 
> 04-06-2018, 23:31:08 FarCry5.exe benchmark completed, 58033 frames rendered in 706.531 s
> Average framerate : 82.1 FPS
> Minimum framerate : 57.7 FPS
> Maximum framerate : 94.9 FPS
> 1% low framerate : 54.0 FPS
> 0.1% low framerate : 27.7 FPS
> -------------------------------------------------------
> Ryzen 7 - Stock, 2866 ram
> 
> 25-07-2018, 20:11:55 FarCry5.exe benchmark completed, 60524 frames rendered in 706.375 s
> Average framerate : 85.6 FPS
> Minimum framerate : 62.2 FPS
> Maximum framerate : 95.9 FPS
> 1% low framerate : 50.8 FPS
> 0.1% low framerate : 18.2 FPS
> -------------------------------------------------------
> 
> My Civ 6 results are about 10 fps better on the Ryzen 7. Maybe something is up with Doom. It was suggested to me to try setting core affinities with Doom. I'll give it a go.


What video card?

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Chargeit

tekjunkie28 said:


> What video card?
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


A gtx 1060 6gb. 




Minotaurtoo said:


> not to interrupt the flow or anything, but I just discovered my 3200mhz gskill flarex wasn't fully stable at 3200.... it's my board though... I was able to get 3133 stable with 14,14,14,34 timings so close enough... wasn't even enough to affect benchmarks... just irritating. but that's what I get for having a B350 board... thinking of getting a new crosshair x470 board later anyway to try for better overclocking on the cpu and also because I heard a rumor or two that Zen2 would have more cores : ) *fingers crossed*


Not sure if you've used this,

https://www.overclock.net/forum/13-...lator-1-1-0-beta-2-overclocking-dram-am4.html

Worth checking out.


----------



## tekjunkie28

Chargeit said:


> I benched Far Cry 5. This is at 1080p high preset.
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> Ryzen 3 2200g - Stock, 3200 ram
> 
> 04-06-2018, 23:31:08 FarCry5.exe benchmark completed, 58033 frames rendered in 706.531 s
> Average framerate : 82.1 FPS
> Minimum framerate : 57.7 FPS
> Maximum framerate : 94.9 FPS
> 1% low framerate : 54.0 FPS
> 0.1% low framerate : 27.7 FPS
> -------------------------------------------------------
> Ryzen 7 - Stock, 2866 ram
> 
> 25-07-2018, 20:11:55 FarCry5.exe benchmark completed, 60524 frames rendered in 706.375 s
> Average framerate : 85.6 FPS
> Minimum framerate : 62.2 FPS
> Maximum framerate : 95.9 FPS
> 1% low framerate : 50.8 FPS
> 0.1% low framerate : 18.2 FPS
> -------------------------------------------------------
> 
> My Civ 6 results are about 10 fps better on the Ryzen 7. Maybe something is up with Doom. It was suggested to me to try setting core affinities with Doom. I'll give it a go.


Oh yea lol. Ram that slow will definitely destroy performance of a 2700. The 12nm 2000 series processors dont even stretch their legs until 3400mhz+ or tight timings at 3200mhz-3333mhz.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Chargeit

tekjunkie28 said:


> Oh yea lol. Ram that slow will definitely destroy performance of a 2700. The 12nm 2000 series processors dont even stretch their legs until 3400mhz+ or tight timings at 3200mhz-3333mhz.
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


I've got a nice 32gb (4x8) 3600 kit in my x299 rig. Thought about testing it out but I really don't want to pull parts out of my main system. 

I'll see if bumping the ram up to 3200 has any affect. When I tested 3200 it was unstable after 20 min in aida64. Likely just needed some tweaking to get there.

*I set ram to 3200 using dram calculator. Did not test for stability. Did seem to run smoother. 

25-07-2018, 22:25:23 DOOMx64.exe benchmark completed, 33095 frames rendered in 327.375 s
Average framerate : 101.0 FPS
Minimum framerate : 64.4 FPS
Maximum framerate : 163.7 FPS
1% low framerate : 48.8 FPS
0.1% low framerate : 12.9 FPS



Guys. Part of me is happy Doom is the game I'm testing since it's action packed but I've ran through that first UAC mission at least 30 times in the last few days.


Ran Gta V
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ryzen 3 stock 3200 ram

05-06-2018, 00:04:05 GTA5.exe benchmark completed, 61756 frames rendered in 615.235 s
Average framerate : 100.3 FPS
Minimum framerate : 71.3 FPS
Maximum framerate : 137.3 FPS
1% low framerate : 70.1 FPS
0.1% low framerate : 60.9 FPS
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ryzen 7 2700 stock 3200 ram

25-07-2018, 23:14:32 GTA5.exe benchmark completed, 63591 frames rendered in 614.547 s
Average framerate : 103.4 FPS
Minimum framerate : 69.7 FPS
Maximum framerate : 143.5 FPS
1% low framerate : 69.7 FPS
0.1% low framerate : 55.7 FPS
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

That's looking ok. Slightly better avg, worse min and 1%/0.1% lows though that could be the fact the ryzen 3 has a higher base clock and likely has less troubles hitting its boost clocks with this mobo. 


Yeah I just don't get the Doom benchmark. I know I'm running the same settings because I took screen shots of the settings I used on the Ryzen 3 that are dated the same day as the benchmark results. 

I'm thinking I'm just going to keep this Ryzen 7 and hope they put out some good matx mobo. If all else fails I'll just bite the bullet and move to a x470 atx and new case. I'm also going to pick up an aftermarket cooler. Though these stock Ryzen coolers look great.


----------



## minal

Some details on thermal limits from The Stilt: 



> With stock configuration:
> 
> - 85°C target temperature.
> - 115°C shutdown temperature.
> 
> Both relative to tDie, i.e. 95°C & 125°C tCTL e.g. on 2700X (10°C offset).
> 
> In normal operating mode these CPUs don't hard throttle, they pull back.
> Meaning they will reduce the frequency until the temperature stays at or below the threshold.
> For example if the CPU maintains 3950MHz average frequency on all cores at 80°C tDie, at 85°C tDie the average frequency will be slightly lower.
> 
> If the CPU is running in OC-Mode then the temperature target becomes obsolete.
> In OC-Mode the shutdown temperature of 115°C is the only temperature related limit, unless the ODM chooses to manually include a separate "hard throttling" limit.
> When the "hard throttling" threshold is reached, the CPU frequency drops to the minimum frequency state, which typically is 550MHz.
> By default such limit is not used.
> 
> The shutdown temperature cannot be changed, however the temperature target can be changed through the bios (typically CBS menu).


https://forums.anandtech.com/threads/ryzen-strictly-technical.2500572/page-82#post-39445007


And a great resource specific to the C7H but also useful to Zen+ owners: https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?101617-Crosshair-VII-Hero-Essential-Info-Thread


----------



## Minotaurtoo

tekjunkie28 said:


> Try these timings. These are flare X AMD certified 3200CL14 sticks. 100% stable
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


I'll give it a shot, but keep in mind I have the flare x with ryzen certification... but my board's qvl list suggest that it can't handle anything with tight timings over 2933mhz... all the 3200kits approved for it have cas 16 or higher with even higher timings after that one was 16,18,18,36... but I'll give those a try when I get home after work...


----------



## Minotaurtoo

ok, went ahead and did a quick dirty test and wow the improvement those timings made... I didn't push the speed back to 3200 though... I'll try that one later when I have more time... one thing though.... some of those settings my bios didn't have options for.. I just changed the ones I had... thanks... wish I could + rep you for that but it's still not working I see... oh well.. maybe next year lol.


----------



## rdr09

Minotaurtoo said:


> ok, went ahead and did a quick dirty test and wow the improvement those timings made... I didn't push the speed back to 3200 though... I'll try that one later when I have more time... one thing though.... some of those settings my bios didn't have options for.. I just changed the ones I had... thanks... wish I could + rep you for that but it's still not working I see... oh well.. maybe next year lol.


Check out this thread . . .

https://www.overclock.net/forum/10-amd-cpus/1702864-amd-ryzen-5-2600-unstable.html

I haven not really tested my RAM setting of 3200MHz for stability. Just the games I play. BF4 is most sensitive to unstable oc. I still use HCI for testing purposes, though. BTW, 3200 MHz on my previous R5 1600 was rock stable. You did remind me that I have to play with SOC. When I flashed to the latest BIOS version - my oc profiles were all gone.


----------



## Chargeit

Hey guys. I made an instruction video on how to use the Ryzen Dram Calculator. Should help someone who has no idea what's going to to get their ram stable.


----------



## rdr09

Chargeit said:


> Hey guys. I made an instruction video on how to use the Ryzen Dram Calculator. Should help someone who has no idea what's going to to get their ram stable.
> 
> https://youtu.be/Q9bekQTRnzY



Thank you. Who came up with the Calculator? I've seen it before just too lazy to follow. Your vid might change that. 


Anyway, tried 4000 Mhz on my 2700 and pulled an 1830 in C15. Made a number of runs and no crashes. It's a tad better than my R5 which can only reach 3900. May try 4100 next.


----------



## Chargeit

rdr09 said:


> Thank you. Who came up with the Calculator? I've seen it before just too lazy to follow. Your vid might change that.
> 
> 
> Anyway, tried 4000 Mhz on my 2700 and pulled an 1830 in C15. Made a number of runs and no crashes. It's a tad better than my R5 which can only reach 3900. May try 4100 next.


The thread for it is here,

https://www.overclock.net/forum/13-...lator-1-1-0-beta-2-overclocking-dram-am4.html

1usmus made the program.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

well... if I want 3200mhz ram I need another board... but honestly 3133 is stable and with the timings set proper now it really screams... I can't believe that the last 66mhz will make much difference.... I tried a lot of things like super sloppy loose timings, adjusting ram volts, soc volts... and still 3200mhz wasn't stable... only things I didn't try was the command rate to 2t and fooling around with drive strengths/ohms other than what was put in the timings I was given.


----------



## rdr09

Minotaurtoo said:


> well... if I want 3200mhz ram I need another board... but honestly 3133 is stable and with the timings set proper now it really screams... I can't believe that the last 66mhz will make much difference.... I tried a lot of things like super sloppy loose timings, adjusting ram volts, soc volts... and still 3200mhz wasn't stable... only things I didn't try was the command rate to 2t and fooling around with drive strengths/ohms other than what was put in the timings I was given.


A new BIOS might help. Or, make it worst. But true another 66 will have little impact.


----------



## gupsterg

Lif3isinfinite said:


> I think I have a problem with my Ryzen 2700x. All the cores have been to a max of 6.3GHZ. Maybe XFR??? Anyone else experienced this??


As stated my another member HWmonitor will give incorrect monitoring information, so don't use it.

IMO use HWINFO.

As Ryzen gen 1 and gen 2 does not have hardware for accurate BCLK read back, you should disable periodic reading of it in HWINFO settings. See OP of this thread.



Minotaurtoo said:


> well... if I want 3200mhz ram I need another board... but honestly 3133 is stable and with the timings set proper now it really screams... *I can't believe that the last 66mhz will make much difference....* I tried a lot of things like super sloppy loose timings, adjusting ram volts, soc volts... and still 3200mhz wasn't stable... only things I didn't try was the command rate to 2t and fooling around with drive strengths/ohms other than what was put in the timings I was given.


Know that feeling.

Twice I've spent about 2 days at a time trying to gain 3533MHz on 2700X+C7H or C6H. I can't attain it. RAM at 3466MHz, the CPU cruises it needing SOC of 0.968V to 0.981V (depending on RAM sticks used). I have tried 10 sticks of Samsung B die 3200MHz C14 8GB. Bounced SOC all the way to 1.05V. Played with ProcODT, CAD Bus, RTT settings, DRAM Tune, etc, etc.

So yeah that 1 extra step can be a breaker  .


----------



## Minotaurtoo

rdr09 said:


> A new BIOS might help. Or, make it worst. But true another 66 will have little impact.



I actually did try the latest bios and the one before... same results... funny bit though... the latest bios lowered my clock speeds ever so slightly under full load... but performance stayed the same in all benchmarks I tested...strange.





gupsterg said:


> As stated my another member HWmonitor will give incorrect monitoring information, so don't use it.
> 
> IMO use HWINFO.
> 
> As Ryzen gen 1 and gen 2 does not have hardware for accurate BCLK read back, you should disable periodic reading of it in HWINFO settings. See OP of this thread.
> 
> 
> 
> Know that feeling.
> 
> Twice I've spent about 2 days at a time trying to gain 3533MHz on 2700X+C7H or C6H. I can't attain it. RAM at 3466MHz, the CPU cruises it needing SOC of 0.968V to 0.981V (depending on RAM sticks used). I have tried 10 sticks of Samsung B die 3200MHz C14 8GB. Bounced SOC all the way to 1.05V. Played with ProcODT, CAD Bus, RTT settings, DRAM Tune, etc, etc.
> 
> So yeah that 1 extra step can be a breaker  .



in all honesty I've been contemplating a mother board upgrade... my father-in-law needs a new pc and I've been considering getting a crosshair board anyway... giving him this board and my old ram paired with a 2200G would be a nice combo for him... I'd recycle the rest of his parts in to the new build... not certain of doing this yet though.... not actually sure I can even with this PSU I have...well not without using a 8 pin eps splitter...


----------



## Chargeit

I've been playing with my 2700 and ram over the last few days.

I've settled in on 3.9 on cores with 1.3v and 3066 on the ram. The mobo seems fully capable of running these speeds/voltages. Where I'm noticing I'm limited is on thermal's. Stress testing my power usage is at 115 - 120w and thermals can hit over 100c (though they tend to settle in at 90c).

I ordered an aftermarket cooler for the cpu which will be here Monday. I went with a "Hyper 212 Led Turbo Black Top". Normal 212 evo's have been my go-to budget cooler for a few builds so I figured I'd stick with that. Went with the black top model since I wanted to go more stealth then chrome. I think I'll end up physically disabling the led's on the fans. 

One thing I also want to do is mod my case. It's not a very good case for airflow and I'm thinking of taking a hole saw to the thing and cutting out a top exhaust in the rear. Only hold up here is I'd have to even tape the inside of the computer up or remove everything to do this since it's going to make a lot of metal shavings. Might also add some kind of ventilation to the bottom of the case.


----------



## miklkit

Absolutely do open up the back of the case, but you should take out the guts first. If you don't, at least have a DataVac handy to blow out all the metal shavings because they will get everywhere.


----------



## Chargeit

miklkit said:


> Absolutely do open up the back of the case, but you should take out the guts first. If you don't, at least have a DataVac handy to blow out all the metal shavings because they will get everywhere.


I do have a DataVac. That thing was $60 well spent.

Thing allows me to clean my components in ways I otherwise wouldn't. 






Krud Kutter, warm water and Datavac'ing the hell out of parts will make them look like new.

*All those parts had been smoked around.


----------



## rdr09

Chargeit said:


> I've been playing with my 2700 and ram over the last few days.
> 
> I've settled in on 3.9 on cores with 1.3v and 3066 on the ram. The mobo seems fully capable of running these speeds/voltages. Where I'm noticing I'm limited is on thermal's. Stress testing my power usage is at 115 - 120w and thermals can hit over 100c (though they tend to settle in at 90c).
> 
> I ordered an aftermarket cooler for the cpu which will be here Monday. I went with a "Hyper 212 Led Turbo Black Top". Normal 212 evo's have been my go-to budget cooler for a few builds so I figured I'd stick with that. Went with the black top model since I wanted to go more stealth then chrome. I think I'll end up physically disabling the led's on the fans.
> 
> One thing I also want to do is mod my case. It's not a very good case for airflow and I'm thinking of taking a hole saw to the thing and cutting out a top exhaust in the rear. Only hold up here is I'd have to even tape the inside of the computer up or remove everything to do this since it's going to make a lot of metal shavings. Might also add some kind of ventilation to the bottom of the case.


The 212 should do it even with an 3900 OC. This Air 540 is like an open case, so i'd like to see the results of your mods. Due to your "prodding", using the Calc, 3333MHz is running fine but have not tested it in games. So far it has increased C15 score by about 30pts all STOCK except the RAM OC (2333>3333). Now, to merge these setting with a cpu oc at a later time. Thanks to you and the creator of the Calc.

EDIT: An hour into BF4 game froze


----------



## Chargeit

rdr09 said:


> The 212 should do it even with an 3900 OC. This Air 540 is like an open case, so i'd like to see the results of your mods. Due to your "prodding", using the Calc, 3333MHz is running fine but have not tested it in games. So far it has increased C15 score by about 30pts all STOCK except the RAM OC (2333>3333). Now, to merge these setting with a cpu oc at a later time. Thanks to you and the creator of the Calc.
> 
> EDIT: An hour into BF4 game froze


If you made it an hour into the game sounds like the ram oc is close to being stable. May want to drop just a little more voltage on it or lower the speed a step. Though as far as ram oc'ing goes I'm no expert so you might want to ask the creator of Ryzen Dram Calculator what he thinks you should adjust. Maybe post a picture of your timings.

I owed an Air 540 a few years back. Was a really good case for cooling. Ended up needing to slim my case down so I moved to a Fractal Design R5. My thermals did get worse compared to the Air 540 though I expected that. Sadly I sold the Air 540. Really wish I had kept the thing. 

This is the case I have that ryzen system in, 

Cooler Master MasterBox Lite 3.1 TG mATX Case
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B075MYYFC8/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o00_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

Thing has terrible cooling and I mainly picked it up because it was cheap and had a TG side panel. Looks pretty good though. I hadn't planned on putting a Ryzen 7 in the system or using the system for playing VR games. 

*Case is really cheap now. I bought it for $39 and now they're selling for $29. That's crazy cheap. I removed the front for better airflow since I display the case's side.


----------



## Chargeit

So noticed something with Doom.

I did a test recording gameplay footage over my network. I loaded up doom. With OBS on and recording Doom was running high fps, where I expected to be (Like 160+ with drops down to the 120's.).

I'm assuming using obs and the gpu to record Doom somehow was stopping it from going into low gpu usage. 

So yeah, whatever the problem is with Doom and this Ryzen 7 2700 looks to be software and not hardware.


----------



## tekjunkie28

Minotaurtoo said:


> I'll give it a shot, but keep in mind I have the flare x with ryzen certification... but my board's qvl list suggest that it can't handle anything with tight timings over 2933mhz... all the 3200kits approved for it have cas 16 or higher with even higher timings after that one was 16,18,18,36... but I'll give those a try when I get home after work...


Remind me what board you have. Also I have had great success changing the RTT values.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Chargeit

I was running my benchmarks for the 2700. For a last benchmark I decided to test the temps. Ran aida64 and the thing failed. I had tested for an hour the other day and played various games so this was a bit of a shock. Also I just spent a few hours running benchmarks so yeah.

I decided to switch out the psu, cooler, and fans tonight. It's late so I wasn't able to add the top ventilation like I wanted to. 

Basically I,

RM850 -> Cx500M (This Cx500M has saved my butt many times) This should let me see if the psu was faulty. 

Removed the 3 case fans I had in the case and replaced them with 2 of the black industrial nocuta 120mm (left over from my old h100i), one as intake and one as exhaust. I was going to do them as front intakes but I couldn't find my pwm splitters so doing it like this. 

I replaced the stock cooler with a "Hyper 212 LED Turbo Black Top".

Pretty much gave the thing a killer cooling overhaul (comparative). Before at current settings the system topped out at 100c after 10 min of aida64. Currently 20 min in. The cpu is running at 31c, max 39c at 1.3v 3.9. 

*The system is much louder now though I can optimize that later in the bios.

**It's running at 71c. Hwmonitor froze.  Used to seeing those kinds of numbers on my fx system with a 212 evo so wasn't too surprised.


----------



## polkfan

Chargeit said:


> I was running my benchmarks for the 2700. For a last benchmark I decided to test the temps. Ran aida64 and the thing failed. I had tested for an hour the other day and played various games so this was a bit of a shock. Also I just spent a few hours running benchmarks so yeah.
> 
> I decided to switch out the psu, cooler, and fans tonight. It's late so I wasn't able to add the top ventilation like I wanted to.
> 
> Basically I,
> 
> RM850 -> Cx500M (This Cx500M has saved my butt many times) This should let me see if the psu was faulty.
> 
> Removed the 3 case fans I had in the case and replaced them with 2 of the black industrial nocuta 120mm (left over from my old h100i), one as intake and one as exhaust. I was going to do them as front intakes but I couldn't find my pwm splitters so doing it like this.
> 
> I replaced the stock cooler with a "Hyper 212 LED Turbo Black Top".
> 
> Pretty much gave the thing a killer cooling overhaul (comparative). Before at current settings the system topped out at 100c after 10 min of aida64. Currently 20 min in. The cpu is running at 31c, max 39c at 1.3v 3.9.
> 
> *The system is much louder now though I can optimize that later in the bios.
> 
> **It's running at 71c. Hwmonitor froze.  Used to seeing those kinds of numbers on my fx system with a 212 evo so wasn't too surprised.


71C is fine. Probably a unstable OC. 95C is when it will crash.


----------



## Chargeit

polkfan said:


> 71C is fine. Probably a unstable OC. 95C is when it will crash.


I wasn't worried about it hitting 71c. Just thought it was doing better. It was 5am and I was feeling a little delirious. 

It looks like I can oc or go with faster ram speeds with my current kit. Not both. I'm currently running 3.9 @1.3v on the core and 2666 on ram. For the ram I had to get aggressive and used timings suggested for 2866 ram. My kit is 4 sticks 4x4gb (3200) and really poor quality (E die) which is not going over well with the 2700/b350 mobo. 

I've reran all my benchmarks at my new settings. Lost a few fps by settings my ram slower with worse timings but everything appears stable.


----------



## rdr09

Chargeit said:


> I wasn't worried about it hitting 71c. Just thought it was doing better. It was 5am and I was feeling a little delirious.
> 
> It looks like I can oc or go with faster ram speeds with my current kit. Not both. I'm currently running 3.9 @1.3v on the core and 2666 on ram. For the ram I had to get aggressive and used timings suggested for 2866 ram. My kit is 4 sticks 4x4gb (3200) and really poor quality (E die) which is not going over well with the 2700/b350 mobo.
> 
> I've reran all my benchmarks at my new settings. Lost a few fps by settings my ram slower with worse timings but everything appears stable.


With the mod, your CPU temp shld go lower even more.


----------



## tekjunkie28

Chargeit said:


> I wasn't worried about it hitting 71c. Just thought it was doing better. It was 5am and I was feeling a little delirious.
> 
> It looks like I can oc or go with faster ram speeds with my current kit. Not both. I'm currently running 3.9 @1.3v on the core and 2666 on ram. For the ram I had to get aggressive and used timings suggested for 2866 ram. My kit is 4 sticks 4x4gb (3200) and really poor quality (E die) which is not going over well with the 2700/b350 mobo.
> 
> I've reran all my benchmarks at my new settings. Lost a few fps by settings my ram slower with worse timings but everything appears stable.


Can u get better memory and sale what you have now? I feel like that mem should hit 3000mhz but idk. Making the memory faster is going to be your best bet. Also if your playing games no issues then I wouldn't worry about failing a stress test.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## VPII

Chargeit said:


> I wasn't worried about it hitting 71c. Just thought it was doing better. It was 5am and I was feeling a little delirious.
> 
> It looks like I can oc or go with faster ram speeds with my current kit. Not both. I'm currently running 3.9 @1.3v on the core and 2666 on ram. For the ram I had to get aggressive and used timings suggested for 2866 ram. My kit is 4 sticks 4x4gb (3200) and really poor quality (E die) which is not going over well with the 2700/b350 mobo.
> 
> I've reran all my benchmarks at my new settings. Lost a few fps by settings my ram slower with worse timings but everything appears stable.


I would say the biggest problem for you with memory speed is the 4 x 4 sticks. It puts a lot of stress on the IMC and it is difficult to high memory speed not to mention tight timings.


----------



## rdr09

VPII said:


> I would say the biggest problem for you with memory speed is the 4 x 4 sticks. It puts a lot of stress on the IMC and it is difficult to high memory speed not to mention tight timings.


True. The difference in performance between 2666 and 3200 is like prolly running 100MHz less CPU oc.


----------



## Chargeit

rdr09 said:


> With the mod, your CPU temp shld go lower even more.


Yeah that's what I'm thinking. The case has really poor airflow. Replacing the crappy fans I had in there with those 2 noctua have helped remove hot air. Before I couldn't really feel the fans pushing much air out. The cpu is cooler because of the Hyper 212 blacktop but my gpu is now running at 71c. Before switching the fans it ran at 78c - 80c.

I'm still planing on doing the mod.



tekjunkie28 said:


> Can u get better memory and sale what you have now? I feel like that mem should hit 3000mhz but idk. Making the memory faster is going to be your best bet. Also if your playing games no issues then I wouldn't worry about failing a stress test.
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


I can get whatever though I'd be stuck paying for it. 

I'm considering it no doubt. 



VPII said:


> I would say the biggest problem for you with memory speed is the 4 x 4 sticks. It puts a lot of stress on the IMC and it is difficult to high memory speed not to mention tight timings.


Yep. I bought two of the kits (total 8x8gb) for my x299 system. I ended up getting placebo and convincing myself that I'd be happier with a better kit. I returned one kit and picked up a 4x8gb 3600 kit leaving me with the 4x4gb kit I have in the Ryzen system.


----------



## rdr09

Chargeit said:


> Yeah that's what I'm thinking. The case has really poor airflow. Replacing the crappy fans I had in there with those 2 noctua have helped remove hot air. Before I couldn't really feel the fans pushing much air out. The cpu is cooler because of the Hyper 212 blacktop but my gpu is now running at 71c. Before switching the fans it ran at 78c - 80c.
> 
> I'm still planing on doing the mod.


Nice. My single fan 1060 fr evga was going higher than 80. Took it apart today and replaced the Tim with CLU(Leftover fr previous build). Cranked up C15 open gl test a number of times and saw temp went to 50. The fan did not even turn. I made a fan curve using afterburner just as an assurance. Case fans are enuf to cool GPU.


----------



## Chargeit

rdr09 said:


> Nice. My single fan 1060 fr evga was going higher than 80. Took it apart today and replaced the Tim with CLU(Leftover fr previous build). Cranked up C15 open gl test a number of times and saw temp went to 50. The fan did not even turn. I made a fan curve using afterburner just as an assurance. Case fans are enuf to cool GPU.


I might reapply the tim on this 1060. I bought it from an amazon warehouse deal at msrp when gpu prices were really bad. I think its warranty is expired so it wouldn't really hurt much to pull it apart and void the warranty. 


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


I cut holes out the top of the case.

Apparently the top of the case is more hardcore then I thought because it melted the teeth of my cheap 4 1/2" hole saw. Not to be deterred I used the hole saw to mark the area I wanted to cut and used a jigsaw to cut the holes out. Not as clean as I'd of liked but good enough and looks fine with my magnetic filters in place. 

Running aida64. The temps are jumping between 68c - 71c. Before it hit 71c and pretty much stayed there. Max temp is 79c. 

------

Aida64 - 10 min

Without holes,
Normal temp - 71c
Max temp - 81c
----
With holes
Normal temp 68c - 71c (floats around)
Max temp - 79c

Not sure a few c were worth cutting holes in the top though I can feel hot air exiting the rear hole and cool air entering the front one. I have to imagine that this will help the system stay cooler over longer loads of stress, especially when stressing the cpu and gpu.

I can't upload pics to the site but here is a link to a few pics of the finished product. 

https://photos.app.goo.gl/6pFjQ12qSZZmCg1i7


----------



## rx7racer

Does anyone have a 2700 that has oc'ed worth a crap?

I'm not getting anything above 4Ghz stable and from reading chargeit's posts I get the feeling that's all the poor little guy can do.

When I have googled around I don't actually see anyone oc'ing the 2700 as everyone went with the 2700X, which I understand but as Chargeit did I got the 2700 for $160 after a free $70 amazon gift card.

I bought a 2600 too cause it was only $100.00 but haven't opened it up yet, wondering if I should even bother with this type of result from the 2700.

Granted, from binning I didn't expect miracles like 4.3Ghz but I was hoping for 4.2Ghz haha.


----------



## Chargeit

rx7racer said:


> Does anyone have a 2700 that has oc'ed worth a crap?
> 
> I'm not getting anything above 4Ghz stable and from reading chargeit's posts I get the feeling that's all the poor little guy can do.
> 
> When I have googled around I don't actually see anyone oc'ing the 2700 as everyone went with the 2700X, which I understand but as Chargeit did I got the 2700 for $160 after a free $70 amazon gift card.
> 
> I bought a 2600 too cause it was only $100.00 but haven't opened it up yet, wondering if I should even bother with this type of result from the 2700.
> 
> Granted, from binning I didn't expect miracles like 4.3Ghz but I was hoping for 4.2Ghz haha.


Hello.

I think my oc is limited by two things,

First, using 4 sticks of poor quality ram. The memory support on ryzen is a weak point. Using 4 sticks of poor quality ram isn't helping me.

My mobo is a B350m. The mobo bios only allows me to set a voltage of 1.3v on the cpu. If I could up the voltage the chip would likely oc to 4.0 or better. 

If I owned a ram kit that played nice with Ryzen and had a good x470 mobo I'd likely see 4.0 -4.1 on the chip. 


----

I've played with my oc some more. Currently doing 3.9 (1.3v) and 3200 (1.38v) on the ram. I passed an hour of aida64. This doesn't really mean it's 100% stable, as I've found out but I think it's as good as I'm going to get with my current set up. I'm going to rerun my benchmarks with the current oc and see how it goes.


----------



## rx7racer

True, you have a couple more things going against you.

If you switch anything up I wish you luck.


----------



## Chargeit

rx7racer said:


> True, you have a couple more things going against you.
> 
> If you switch anything up I wish you luck.


Yeah this was more of a makeshift system I used a lot of parts I already owned then picked up a 2200g and B350m mobo to review. Added the 2700 because it better fits my usage. Was starting to regret that move. 

Thanks. Will be swapping the mobo and ram out sooner or later. Though I'm hoping for a good matx x470.


----------



## tekjunkie28

Chargeit said:


> Yeah this was more of a makeshift system I used a lot of parts I already owned then picked up a 2200g and B350m mobo to review. Added the 2700 because it better fits my usage. Was starting to regret that move.
> 
> Thanks. Will be swapping the mobo and ram out sooner or later. Though I'm hoping for a good matx x470.


Dumb question but why not Intel?

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## bhelmouth

hi guys, 
i just finished my build. 
but somehow just running stock clock with oc memory 3000mhz tested with aida64. its temp reach over 85c just in less than 1 min test. 
i use kraken x62

with 100% pump and 100% fan.
running aida64 for 2min. max temp 80c

is this normal ? or something wrong with my aio.? im using h200i case.

*liquid temps stay at 35c even under load.. is it normal ?


----------



## Chargeit

tekjunkie28 said:


> Dumb question but why not Intel?
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


I wanted to try Ryzen. 

My main rig is a 7820x/1080ti. Also have a 4790k/gtx950 (Ol'ladys rig) rig along with a Fx6300/1050ti. Like spreading my rigs around when possible. Though as far as gpu's go I own 2 Gsync monitors so I pretty much stick to Nvidia now. Last AMD gpu I owned was a 270x. Pretty good gpu. Sold it and my old 980 ti right before the mining craze hit and gpu prices jacked up. :/


----------



## Minotaurtoo

bhelmouth said:


> hi guys,
> i just finished my build.
> but somehow just running stock clock with oc memory 3000mhz tested with aida64. its temp reach over 85c just in less than 1 min test.
> i use kraken x62
> 
> with 100% pump and 100% fan.
> running aida64 for 2min. max temp 80c
> 
> is this normal ? or something wrong with my aio.? im using h200i case.
> 
> *liquid temps stay at 35c even under load.. is it normal ?


sounds like a bad mount... or a bad pump.


----------



## rdr09

Chargeit said:


> Not sure a few c were worth cutting holes in the top though I can feel hot air exiting the rear hole and cool air entering the front one. I have to imagine that this will help the system stay cooler over longer loads of stress, especially when stressing the cpu and gpu.
> 
> I can't upload pics to the site but here is a link to a few pics of the finished product.
> 
> https://photos.app.goo.gl/6pFjQ12qSZZmCg1i7


I doesn't look like a mod. Good job. I can't see clearly the inside with the window on but still looks like cramped in there. 

Here is my setup with 3 fans frt blowing in (got rid of the 360 rad) and 2 fan up top all blowing in. The rear exhausts. I included a ss of my gaming temp with ambient @ 22.

The gpu is at a constant 30% fan setting and the other side window off


----------



## Chargeit

rdr09 said:


> I doesn't look like a mod. Good job. I can't see clearly the inside with the window on but still looks like cramped in there.
> 
> Here is my setup with 3 fans frt blowing in (got rid of the 360 rad) and 2 fan up top all blowing in. The rear exhausts. I included a ss of my gaming temp with ambient @ 22.
> 
> The gpu is at a constant 30% fan setting and the other side window off


Thanks. It came out pretty good. I should of picked up a high quality hole saw before doing it. Though, hole saws can get expensive. A Lenox 4 1/2" bi-metal hole saw is $40 at lowe's (The case was $40). The jigsaw did alright with a metal cutting blade on it. 

Yeah it's a little hard to get a picture of the rig with the tinted TG side panel. Looks really good though. It's cramped. That 212 black top and RM850 psu really fills the case up. 


Seeing your Air 540 makes me miss mine even more. That thing will keep a system cool. 


*I took some pictures of the case with a HD7950 I'm benchmarking in it. Now that sob is really cramped!


----------



## Minotaurtoo

If you want to see a mod job gone wrong look at my rig.... horrid, definitely eye broccoli... problem was... it started out as a simple build... 1 gpu, 1SSD, stock cpu cooler... simple... now it has 1 liquid cooled gpu using AIO with all sorts of attatched crap I can't take off or get out of the way... custom cpu loop in a case not capable of handling it... and about 5 hard drives including 1 nvme.... a major eye sore ... but it stays cool and runs great.


the sad part... is I really tried to route things out of view...there is no room behind the tray, no room in the bay area (its where my pump, res and a boat load of HDD's sit) there are fans behind the front cover...on the side cover... and a smattering of them in the case blowing across critical components... it's built to run, but not see lol... only weighs 40 or so pounds....well that may be an exageration


----------



## Chargeit

Yeah you kind of look like you've got a few cable issues going on there. 

You could probably mod a case to allow for spots to route cables. Use a dremel or "hole saw/stepping drill bit" to cut out spots to run the cables. Sand down edges. Run mounting holes through the rear of the case. Tap for screws. Use something to create space/standoffs. Run cables = No freaking way it will come out how I'm picturing it.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

Chargeit said:


> Yeah you kind of look like you've got a few cable issues going on there.
> 
> You could probably mod a case to allow for spots to route cables. Use a dremel or "hole saw/stepping drill bit" to cut out spots to run the cables. Sand down edges. Run mounting holes through the rear of the case. Tap for screws. Use something to create space/standoffs. Run cables = No freaking way it will come out how I'm picturing it.


I had the thing on the bench for about 2 hours trying to figure how to get it better...but without stacking stand offs and running cables behind the motherboard there was no way to get room back there... and since the I/O panel would miss the location doing that I couldn't move the board out... basically I had a very poor case choice for a complex build like mine... but I never intended it to get this complex when I bought the case in 2012... for 30$... it actually looked reasonably neat back then... sigh... oh well.. there is a couple cables I could manage a little better in it... like the last two hdd cables I put in... but I had given up already by that point... its my frankenbuild now anyway with that huge rad sitting on top and wires/tubes coming out it's side... at least it's quiet and cool


----------



## Chargeit

Minotaurtoo said:


> I had the thing on the bench for about 2 hours trying to figure how to get it better...but without stacking stand offs and running cables behind the motherboard there was no way to get room back there... and since the I/O panel would miss the location doing that I couldn't move the board out... basically I had a very poor case choice for a complex build like mine... but I never intended it to get this complex when I bought the case in 2012... for 30$... it actually looked reasonably neat back then... sigh... oh well.. there is a couple cables I could manage a little better in it... like the last two hdd cables I put in... but I had given up already by that point... its my frankenbuild now anyway with that huge rad sitting on top and wires/tubes coming out it's side... at least it's quiet and cool


Yep. That's how it happens to you. If you keep your eyes open there are some really good deals on modern mid-tower cases with tg. 

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

I just finished installing "FuzeDriver Basic" on my Ryzen Rig. Used my 256gb samsung 850 pro ssd and a 1tb hdd. 

Spent hours messing with it. Had it give me a ton of issues at first and I installed windows 4 times tonight. Time before last was a real killer. I figured out the issue (I think, the problem may of been random). I installed windows and realized windows installed my system files on the ssd instead of the hdd I was using as a boot drive. The ssd has to be blank... That was about 2am. Did the process over again and now it's working and I'm installing all my games.

So far it's ok though being a person used to having at least the os and programs installed on an ssd I can tell there's some funny business going on. Though it's still too early to judge. I'm getting all my games installed tonight. Will play with it more after work tomorrow. 

I need to crash out and get my 3 hours of sleep.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

This is the earliest photo I could find of it... this was taken just after I added some usb ports on the back and thats those two cables that look so horrible right next to the fan... I did route them better later, I just took the picture to show how they "glowed" in the blue light... I hadn't actually zip tied anything at this point yet and it looked better than it does now : ( oh well... and I noticed the date on the jpg file... turns out I built in this case first in 2011... soooo dated


----------



## Minotaurtoo

Chargeit said:


> Yep. That's how it happens to you. If you keep your eyes open there are some really good deals on modern mid-tower cases with tg.
> 
> ---------------
> 
> I just finished installing "FuzeDriver Basic" on my Ryzen Rig. Used my 256gb samsung 850 pro ssd and a 1tb hdd.
> 
> Spent hours messing with it. Had it give me a ton of issues at first and I installed windows 4 times tonight. Time before last was a real killer. I figured out the issue (I think, the problem may of been random). I installed windows and realized windows installed my system files on the ssd instead of the hdd I was using as a boot drive. The ssd has to be blank... That was about 2am. Did the process over again and now it's working and I'm installing all my games.
> 
> So far it's ok though being a person used to having at least the os and programs installed on an ssd I can tell there's some funny business going on. Though it's still too early to judge. I'm getting all my games installed tonight. Will play with it more after work tomorrow.
> 
> I need to crash out and get my 3 hours of sleep.


good luck, I know things like that can be a pain... I didn't bother with fuzedrive, I lazied my way out just setting default storage locations... only have 16TB of hdd space to browse through, how hard can it be *says the guy still looking for where he put the last vacay pics*


----------



## Chargeit

Yeah that looks a lot better.

It's amusing how systems "evolve" over time. I usually upgrade until my computer looks like crap and then cut back. Haven't really done much to my main rig lately but I've had it with wires, cables, and rads all over it.

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

I might end up reinstalling everything tonight. I'm not happy with the sounds the hdd I used is making. The drive is fat WD Black. I'm not sure what's up with it but it always underscored in benchmarks. It's making an unhealthy squeaking sound that I don't want coming from the system. 

I've got a 1tb Seagate barracuda in my fx system. Think I'll swap the drives out and see how it goes.


----------



## Plebbit

Hi everyone, complete newb here

I'm getting a gigabyte x470 aorus gaming 7 with 2700 next week, planning on overclocking it on the stock cooler to 2700x level... so 3.7ghz

Is this possible on the stock cooler? Will it be stable like that? What setting will I need to change beside the multiplier ?


----------



## Minotaurtoo

Plebbit said:


> Hi everyone, complete newb here
> 
> I'm getting a gigabyte x470 aorus gaming 7 with 2700 next week, planning on overclocking it on the stock cooler to 2700x level... so 3.7ghz
> 
> Is this possible on the stock cooler? Will it be stable like that? What setting will I need to change beside the multiplier ?


on a 2700x it'll overclock itself to 4ghz nearly if not just past via precision boost 2.0 and on lighter loads it'll hit in the 4.2 range with 4.3-4.35 happening under very light loads... manual OC's on stock cooler depend on a few factors... case ventilation, ambient temp, silicon quality and board quality... but most I've seen hitting between 4.0 to 4.2 for daily use... (4.2 is kinda rare though on stock coolers) Just try to keep temps under 80C and volts under 1.45.... although there is no definitive evidence that hotter will hurt, but generally cooler is better... as for volts the chips are pretty hardy and self volt to 1.55 for short times, but for daily use i was told that 1.45 was reasonable and for leaving on 24/7 1.4 max... again lower is better though. hope this helps


----------



## Plebbit

Minotaurtoo said:


> on a 2700x it'll overclock itself to 4ghz nearly if not just past via precision boost 2.0 and on lighter loads it'll hit in the 4.2 range with 4.3-4.35 happening under very light loads... manual OC's on stock cooler depend on a few factors... case ventilation, ambient temp, silicon quality and board quality... but most I've seen hitting between 4.0 to 4.2 for daily use... (4.2 is kinda rare though on stock coolers) Just try to keep temps under 80C and volts under 1.45.... although there is no definitive evidence that hotter will hurt, but generally cooler is better... as for volts the chips are pretty hardy and self volt to 1.55 for short times, but for daily use i was told that 1.45 was reasonable and for leaving on 24/7 1.4 max... again lower is better though. hope this helps


Yeah thanks! I have no illusions about the stock cooler thats why I tried to aim at a more conservative oc (since I see almost everyone aim for 4.0ghz+ range). I'd be pretty happy if I can hit 3.7 on stock and leave it like that until I can get my hands on a better cooler. I picked a case with two fans (front bottom + back top) and will only have a 1050 running alongside it so not much heat coming from that...

Where does stock Vcore voltage start on the 2700 ? I want to absolutely run it 24/7, often times I dont shut my pc down for weeks.


----------



## Chargeit

Plebbit said:


> Yeah thanks! I have no illusions about the stock cooler thats why I tried to aim at a more conservative oc (since I see almost everyone aim for 4.0ghz+ range). I'd be pretty happy if I can hit 3.7 on stock and leave it like that until I can get my hands on a better cooler. I picked a case with two fans (front bottom + back top) and will only have a 1050 running alongside it so not much heat coming from that...
> 
> Where does stock Vcore voltage start on the 2700 ? I want to absolutely run it 24/7, often times I dont shut my pc down for weeks.


I was able to pull 3.9 @ 1.3v on my 2700 on the stock cooler with a B350m mobo. The cpu got really hot stress testing (>100c max) but under normal use it would be much lower. 


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

Ok guys. This FuzeDrive really isn't so bad. Now that my computer has had a few restarts it's feeling much more responsive compared to just using the hdd. I'm still not 100% sold on it though. In my personal experience with ssd's, the biggest benefit comes from installing the OS/Programs on the ssd. Games, while nice to have on an ssd seem to be very hit and miss as to how much they benefit. It seems like the games you'd assume would benefit the most from ssd's don't or the affect is so minimal that it's basically placebo. 

My point here is the system is likely better off with the os/programs installed on an ssd and just installing games on an hdd. One thing that is nice is not having to manage where things go. All of my computers have at least a ssd and hdd. I'm constantly having to manage where things are installed. With FuzeDrive installed on this Ryzen rig I can just install games and let the system figure things out. 

I'd personally suggest that if you own a 4xx mobo that comes with the 256gb version of FuzeDrive (rebranded StoreMI) and have a 256gb ssd or smaller with a larger hdd that you should test it out to see how you like it. Just make sure to back up any data you aren't willing to lose. If you are hit with a blue screen boot and the system won't recognize your boot drive install windows on the other drive and use that install of windows to undo the FuzeDrive settings in the fresh install of windows. 

*If installing windows fresh, use the hdd for the os drive. Unplug your ssd while installing windows so windows doesn't try to install the boot partition on the ssd. Make sure the ssd is fully blank and not partitioned (Delete any volumes on the drive).


----------



## VPII

Minotaurtoo said:


> on a 2700x it'll overclock itself to 4ghz nearly if not just past via precision boost 2.0 and on lighter loads it'll hit in the 4.2 range with 4.3-4.35 happening under very light loads... manual OC's on stock cooler depend on a few factors... case ventilation, ambient temp, silicon quality and board quality... but most I've seen hitting between 4.0 to 4.2 for daily use... (4.2 is kinda rare though on stock coolers) Just try to keep temps under 80C and volts under 1.45.... although there is no definitive evidence that hotter will hurt, but generally cooler is better... as for volts the chips are pretty hardy and self volt to 1.55 for short times, but for daily use i was told that 1.45 was reasonable and for leaving on 24/7 1.4 max... again lower is better though. hope this helps



Maybe I'm a little causious but I try to keep my voltages as low as possible. I have a 2700X which I'm running at 4.258ghz at 1.3v for daily use.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

VPII said:


> Maybe I'm a little causious but I try to keep my voltages as low as possible. I have a 2700X which I'm running at 4.258ghz at 1.3v for daily use.


My chip at default would hold 1.4+ volts under load until loads neared 80% then it'd drop down a bit so I kinda figured they were made to take that voltage for pretty long durations... but I don't even manually overclock on mine... I just use the precision boost overdrive... I did do some testing though and found my chip is mediocrity at its finest... takes nearly 1.4v to hold 4.2 stable, ... sure it'll boot at much less and run fine, but its not stable...


----------



## chroniclard

VPII said:


> Maybe I'm a little causious but I try to keep my voltages as low as possible. I have a 2700X which I'm running at 4.258ghz at 1.3v for daily use.


Pretty good voltage, takes me 1.381 @ 4.2 to get IBT AVX very high stable!


----------



## chroniclard

Anyone think there would be any benefit going from a Crosshair VI to a Crosshair VII? (2700X)


----------



## Chargeit

chroniclard said:


> Anyone think there would be any benefit going from a Crosshair VI to a Crosshair VII? (2700X)


Doubtful outside of support for next gen Ryzen cpu's and free access to StoreMi.


----------



## tekjunkie28

chroniclard said:


> Anyone think there would be any benefit going from a Crosshair VI to a Crosshair VII? (2700X)


Maybe slightly faster memory capabilities. But asus does a great job of memory training according to gamers nexus. It's a interesting article 

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## gupsterg

chroniclard said:


> Anyone think there would be any benefit going from a Crosshair VI to a Crosshair VII? (2700X)


Don't waste your money IMO.

The C6H gains same changes as C7H in UEFI as far as I can tell. So it's not gimped or being left behind IMO.

For example the settings within AMD CBS became part of settings txt dump on C6H just as C7H gained it. The "Stealth mode" (ie no RGB/Q-Code display) was not part of C6H UEFI originally, near the time of C7H release it did happen for C6H as well. ASUS Performance Enhancer (aka Precision Boost Override) is no different between the 2 boards in my experience.

The C6H has ASUS T-Topology, where as C7H is daisy chain for RAM traces. I've attained higher RAM MHz posts on 4 dimms on C6H than C7H. So far the C6H seems also easier to stabilise 3333MHz on 4 dimms than C7H.

Only reason have the C7H is as it was given FOC. C7H is improved vs C6H only some aspects, but not enough/valued by me, to warrant purchase of it if you have C6H already IMO.


----------



## chroniclard

gupsterg said:


> Don't waste your money IMO.
> 
> The C6H gains same changes as C7H in UEFI as far as I can tell. So it's not gimped or being left behind IMO.
> 
> For example the settings within AMD CBS became part of settings txt dump on C6H just as C7H gained it. The "Stealth mode" (ie no RGB/Q-Code display) was not part of C6H UEFI originally, near the time of C7H release it did happen for C6H as well. ASUS Performance Enhancer (aka Precision Boost Override) is no different between the 2 boards in my experience.
> 
> The C6H has ASUS T-Topology, where as C7H is daisy chain for RAM traces. I've attained higher RAM MHz posts on 4 dimms on C6H than C7H. So far the C6H seems also easier to stabilise 3333MHz on 4 dimms than C7H.
> 
> Only reason have the C7H is as it was given FOC. C7H is improved vs C6H only some aspects, but not enough/valued by me, to warrant purchase of it if you have C6H already IMO.


Thanks. I dont really need it, PC is running great anyway, just could potentially get one nearly new/second hand and #becausenewstuff.


----------



## VPII

chroniclard said:


> Pretty good voltage, takes me 1.381 @ 4.2 to get IBT AVX very high stable!


I found that I need about 1.281v set in bios to have 4.2ghz stable running 50 iterations of IBT standard. I only set my memory to 3200mhz with Stilt's safe timings preset to make sure it is not memory that fails.


----------



## rdr09

Chargeit said:


> Thanks. It came out pretty good. I should of picked up a high quality hole saw before doing it. Though, hole saws can get expensive. A Lenox 4 1/2" bi-metal hole saw is $40 at lowe's (The case was $40). The jigsaw did alright with a metal cutting blade on it.
> 
> Yeah it's a little hard to get a picture of the rig with the tinted TG side panel. Looks really good though. It's cramped. That 212 black top and RM850 psu really fills the case up.
> 
> 
> Seeing your Air 540 makes me miss mine even more. That thing will keep a system cool.
> 
> 
> *I took some pictures of the case with a HD7950 I'm benchmarking in it. Now that sob is really cramped!


BTW, Why don't you add another fan in the frt? Bet it will drop your temp 5 or more. My 7950 died and i miss it. Replaced it with a GTX 1050.


----------



## Chargeit

rdr09 said:


> BTW, Why don't you add another fan in the frt? Bet it will drop your temp 5 or more. My 7950 died and i miss it. Replaced it with a GTX 1050.


My mobo only has 2 fan headers. When I installed them I couldn't find my pwm splitters so I installed one as a front and one as a rear. I didn't want to split two different fans off one mobo header. I also want to keep the fans consistent in general. 

Splitter
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00B46XKKQ/ref=ox_sc_sfl_title_4?ie=UTF8&smid=ATVPDKIKX0DER&th=1

Fans
https://www.amazon.com/Bearing-NF-F12-iPPC-2000-PWM/dp/B00KFCR5BA

With the mod, and 212 evo installed the system temps are good. I'm voltage limited through the mobo on the cpu, not temps. Though I'll likely add a 3rd fan in there. Sooner or later. 


The Hd 7950 did a lot better in my tests then I expected.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

I finally broke down and joined the rgb craze.... yeah... I finally went and done it... honestly though I didn't plan it... just saw this: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B071JDCG2M/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o00_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1 and needed a new keyboard...my old g510 was getting a bit long in the tooth and was in need of replacement... and I had been wanting to get a mech keyboard anyway... the old style typewriter buttons just won me over... at least I don't have to use the rgb part if I don't want to, but honestly its awesome looking so I'll probably use the rgb... something about that old retro look merged with new sold me on it... that and I had a half off coupon with amazon.


----------



## rdr09

Chargeit said:


> My mobo only has 2 fan headers. When I installed them I couldn't find my pwm splitters so I installed one as a front and one as a rear. I didn't want to split two different fans off one mobo header. I also want to keep the fans consistent in general.
> 
> Splitter
> https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00B46XKKQ/ref=ox_sc_sfl_title_4?ie=UTF8&smid=ATVPDKIKX0DER&th=1
> 
> Fans
> https://www.amazon.com/Bearing-NF-F12-iPPC-2000-PWM/dp/B00KFCR5BA
> 
> With the mod, and 212 evo installed the system temps are good. I'm voltage limited through the mobo on the cpu, not temps. Though I'll likely add a 3rd fan in there. Sooner or later.
> 
> 
> The Hd 7950 did a lot better in my tests then I expected.


I saw this in another thread . . .

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07416KLWJ?tag=overclockconvert-20

The fan is gorgeous.




Minotaurtoo said:


> I finally broke down and joined the rgb craze.... yeah... I finally went and done it... honestly though I didn't plan it... just saw this: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B071JDCG2M/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o00_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1 and needed a new keyboard...my old g510 was getting a bit long in the tooth and was in need of replacement... and I had been wanting to get a mech keyboard anyway... the old style typewriter buttons just won me over... at least I don't have to use the rgb part if I don't want to, but honestly its awesome looking so I'll probably use the rgb... something about that old retro look merged with new sold me on it... that and I had a half off coupon with amazon.


Hell yah, don't mind the rgb either as much as i don't care about the loud clicks but all red seems ideal. Nice looking retro. 

Still tweaking 3333 on the ram. Just takes too much time. tsk


----------



## Chargeit

rdr09 said:


> I saw this in another thread . . .
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07416KLWJ?tag=overclockconvert-20
> 
> The fan is gorgeous.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hell yah, don't mind the rgb either as much as i don't care about the loud clicks but all red seems ideal. Nice looking retro.
> 
> Still tweaking 3333 on the ram. Just takes too much time. tsk


Silverstone has one with a case for $14 on the same page as the splitter. Think it would be worth spending the extra $4 for aesthetics.

They're pretty good fans. A little on the loud side but they can move a lot of air.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

rdr09 said:


> I saw this in another thread . . .
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07416KLWJ?tag=overclockconvert-20
> 
> The fan is gorgeous.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hell yah, don't mind the rgb either as much as i don't care about the loud clicks but all red seems ideal. Nice looking retro.
> 
> Still tweaking 3333 on the ram. Just takes too much time. tsk



good luck with the ram... I gave in and settled... my board is limited to 3133 it seems... 



This keyboard ended up costing me big time... my wife and child were caught in here typing on it... they both want one now... and naturally I sold a kidney and got them one... their smiles were worth it though.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

busy installing office again... and a few other apps... just got a 970evo... yay... very fast little drive.... much faster than my old nvme drive... but honestly I don't think I can tell much difference...was already booting before the monitor was ready... just benchmarks improved and of coarse large file transfers.


----------



## chevy350

2700 and Asus ROG Strix X470-F, plus some cheapo Samsung 2133 that is currently running 2800. Once prices drop (from what I've been seeing here and there) I plan on getting some faster ram but so far pretty impressed.


----------



## rdr09

Minotaurtoo said:


> busy installing office again... and a few other apps... just got a 970evo... yay... very fast little drive.... much faster than my old nvme drive... but honestly I don't think I can tell much difference...was already booting before the monitor was ready... just benchmarks improved and of coarse large file transfers.



That's one thing I regret not buying when I went back to the states last month 



chevy350 said:


> 2700 and Asus ROG Strix X470-F, plus some cheapo Samsung 2133 that is currently running 2800. Once prices drop (from what I've been seeing here and there) I plan on getting some faster ram but so far pretty impressed.


Do you mind posting a screenshot of HWINFO of your system at stock? You can lv the ram oc'ed. Thank you. 

Make sure you use the newest version of HWINFO.


----------



## chevy350

Yup I can get ya something in the next couple days.


----------



## Chargeit

Minotaurtoo said:


> busy installing office again... and a few other apps... just got a 970evo... yay... very fast little drive.... much faster than my old nvme drive... but honestly I don't think I can tell much difference...was already booting before the monitor was ready... just benchmarks improved and of coarse large file transfers.


I think the raw speed of ssd's are just numbers to make things look better. The real benefit of ssd's/nvme comes from the fact they can handle doing a lot at the same time without bogging down like a normal hdd does. Just moving from a normal hdd to a sata ssd is enough to achieve that. 

When I upgraded my main rig to a 7820x I also moved from using a 256gb 850 pro as a boot drive to using a 500gb 960 evo as a boot drive and honestly I wasn't overly impressed. Hell, even the cheap 120gb Kingston ssd I have in my ol'ladys rig is enough to make the system feel worlds better then using a system with a normal hdd in it. 

My two work computers have a Skylake i7 and Kaby lake i5. They both have 12gb system ram and 2tb hdd's. For the most part they're pretty good systems but when there's an update or something the whole system can bog down. Even putting a cheap, $40 sata ssd in such a system would be enough to not notice the systems updating. Really sucks seeing such nice systems relying on hdd's. :L


----------



## rdr09

chevy350 said:


> Yup I can get ya something in the next couple days.


Thank you. I lv mine at stock. I'm trying to figure out if I can undervolt and maintain the boost.


----------



## PhatSV6

*Errors on Performance Enhancer level 3 and 4*

Is anyone else getting these errors even when stock but with PE level 3 or 4 enabled.


I do not get these on level 1 or 2.

all other settings are stock.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

I'd be interesting in seeing other's scores in pcmark10... the demo version is free... I'm a bit weak on gpu, but here is mine: https://www.3dmark.com/pcm10/27972841


----------



## chevy350

rdr09 said:


> Thank you. I lv mine at stock. I'm trying to figure out if I can undervolt and maintain the boost.



Here's the stock stuff, aside from ram


----------



## rdr09

chevy350 said:


> Here's the stock stuff, aside from ram


Nice. Your vcore is quite low compared to mine. Prolly why your temps are kinda low. I think you have your power plan set to High.


----------



## chevy350

Power plan is on High Performance with min cpu at 20%


----------



## rdr09

Has anyone tested the 2000 series for segfault? How is it done? I did not even test my 1600.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

I don't think the 2nd gen has had any issues with the seg fault.... I could be wrong, but none of the reviews or papers I have read say anything about it.


----------



## Chargeit

Looks like reinstalling windows fixed the issue I had with doom. I haven't properly benchmarked it but I just did a test run and it was running high fps and was not having sudden frame rate drops when things like explosions happened.


----------



## rdr09

Chargeit said:


> Looks like reinstalling windows fixed the issue I had with doom. I haven't properly benchmarked it but I just did a test run and it was running high fps and was not having sudden frame rate drops when things like explosions happened.


Thanks for the info on segfault. Anyway, was that run on doom with a 3.9 OC? Have you tried stock. I know you were having issue with the cpu not boosting. I think its the global c state setting. Also, i find Balance power setting keeps our cpu acting as designed with 2 cores boosting to 4.1.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Got my XFR setup optimized for the most part. Still experimenting but with 104 bclk during heavy load it will boost all cores to 4.5ghz and on 102 bclk its around 4.4ghz. VCore during full load boost is 1.52v max downvolting to .85v for the 4.5ghz setup and 1.48v max for the 4.4ghz setup. Single core on both setups is over 4.5ghz and the same with 2 and 4 core boosts with varying voltages depending on how many cores are boosting. Been running the 4.4 ghz setup daily for awhile and the downvolting is great, no heat issues or erratic behavior from what ive noticed. Below are some of the results and I can post my bios settings if anyone is interested in them.


User Benchmark




Spoiler



UserBenchmarks: Game 86%, Desk 104%, Work 105%
CPU: AMD Ryzen 7 2700X - *113.4%*
GPU: Nvidia GTX 1060-6GB - *81.5%*
SSD: Samsung 850 Evo 500GB - *132.5%*
SSD: Sandisk PLUS 120 GB 120GB - *55.1%*
RAM: G.SKILL F4 DDR4 3200 C14 2x8GB - *134.5%*
MBD: Asus ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO




Other various screenshots of settings and system info




Spoiler


----------



## rdr09

Minotaurtoo said:


> I don't think the 2nd gen has had any issues with the seg fault.... I could be wrong, but none of the reviews or papers I have read say anything about it.


I was going to do a test but it seems time consuming. My 1600 is 37th week, so it may have the fault. Never really impacted any task when i had it.

Anyway, i may have to go back to the 2600 club (kid kid), since i keep mine down to six cores. I find the boost better, cooler, and suits my use case just fine.

EDIT: They found more vulnerabilities affecting intel cpus. I can't remember the last time i hooked my Sandy up to the network. I'm just paranoid i guess. lol


----------



## Minotaurtoo

CJMitsuki said:


> Got my XFR setup optimized for the most part. Still experimenting but with 104 bclk during heavy load it will boost all cores to 4.5ghz and on 102 bclk its around 4.4ghz. VCore during full load boost is 1.52v max downvolting to .85v for the 4.5ghz setup and 1.48v max for the 4.4ghz setup. Single core on both setups is over 4.5ghz and the same with 2 and 4 core boosts with varying voltages depending on how many cores are boosting. Been running the 4.4 ghz setup daily for awhile and the downvolting is great, no heat issues or erratic behavior from what ive noticed. Below are some of the results and I can post my bios settings if anyone is interested in them.
> 
> 
> User Benchmark
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> UserBenchmarks: Game 86%, Desk 104%, Work 105%
> CPU: AMD Ryzen 7 2700X - *113.4%*
> GPU: Nvidia GTX 1060-6GB - *81.5%*
> SSD: Samsung 850 Evo 500GB - *132.5%*
> SSD: Sandisk PLUS 120 GB 120GB - *55.1%*
> RAM: G.SKILL F4 DDR4 3200 C14 2x8GB - *134.5%*
> MBD: Asus ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Other various screenshots of settings and system info
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 212266
> View attachment 212268
> View attachment 212270



nice results there... I can't get that high on my clocks... I'm pretty sure I'm limited by my board... I've been thinking of getting another board to play around with and see what happens... but I can't justify it lol.. I've spent too much on this rig lately anyway.


----------



## rdr09

CJMitsuki said:


> Got my XFR setup optimized for the most part. Still experimenting but with 104 bclk during heavy load it will boost all cores to 4.5ghz and on 102 bclk its around 4.4ghz. VCore during full load boost is 1.52v max downvolting to .85v for the 4.5ghz setup and 1.48v max for the 4.4ghz setup. Single core on both setups is over 4.5ghz and the same with 2 and 4 core boosts with varying voltages depending on how many cores are boosting. Been running the 4.4 ghz setup daily for awhile and the downvolting is great, no heat issues or erratic behavior from what ive noticed. Below are some of the results and I can post my bios settings if anyone is interested in them.
> 
> 
> User Benchmark
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> UserBenchmarks: Game 86%, Desk 104%, Work 105%
> CPU: AMD Ryzen 7 2700X - *113.4%*
> GPU: Nvidia GTX 1060-6GB - *81.5%*
> SSD: Samsung 850 Evo 500GB - *132.5%*
> SSD: Sandisk PLUS 120 GB 120GB - *55.1%*
> RAM: G.SKILL F4 DDR4 3200 C14 2x8GB - *134.5%*
> MBD: Asus ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Other various screenshots of settings and system info
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 212266
> View attachment 212268
> View attachment 212270


Not just your cpu but your ram is equally lovely. Must have played with them for hours. Great job!


----------



## CJMitsuki

rdr09 said:


> I was going to do a test but it seems time consuming. My 1600 is 37th week, so it may have the fault. Never really impacted any task when i had it.
> 
> Anyway, i may have to go back to the 2600 club (kid kid), since i keep mine down to six cores. I find the boost better, cooler, and suits my use case just fine.
> 
> EDIT: They found more vulnerabilities affecting intel cpus. I can't remember the last time i hooked my Sandy up to the network. I'm just paranoid i guess. lol


a segfault bugged cpu is basically a free rma from AMD. I still have my 1700x they sent for my mediocre segfault bugged cpu. Never even opened it, its been taking up space on my desk ever since. It never caused me any issues but I still proved it was segfault bugged and it wasnt a great chip so I was glad I had a free pass to try the silicon lottery again.


----------



## CJMitsuki

rdr09 said:


> Not just your cpu but your ram is equally lovely. Must have played with them for hours. Great job!


Thank You, I play with my ram everyday in my spare time for the past year or so. Ever since I got it when the 1700x was released. I have abused this ram and it hasnt given me much trouble at all. The only thing that every caused a problem was the RGB but I got rid of the software and dont care for the RGB and ever since then it is happy to take a beating while pushing it to Ryzens limits.


----------



## rx7racer

Minotaurtoo said:


> I'd be interesting in seeing other's scores in pcmark10... the demo version is free... I'm a bit weak on gpu, but here is mine: https://www.3dmark.com/pcm10/27972841



Had some time to waste and playing with ram a bit. Forgot how long this one takes. http://www.3dmark.com/pcm10b/330513


----------



## Minotaurtoo

rx7racer said:


> Had some time to waste and playing with ram a bit. Forgot how long this one takes. http://www.3dmark.com/pcm10b/330513


yeah test takes forever doesn't it... I'm not sure, but seems something is off... is pcmark installed on your ssd? I know that if it's not the score will be significantly lower... and that score seems pretty low for your hardware.... like mine before I realized it needed to be on the ssd. https://www.3dmark.com/pcm10b/326565


----------



## CJMitsuki

I ran one earlier as well. I need a better gpu apparently https://www.3dmark.com/pcm10b/330538


----------



## noobee

Are the 2700 and 2700X similar with power consumption and temps if the 2700X is not overclocked? Or is the power consumption on the latter chip quite excessive compared to the 2700? Can anyone tell me?

Can the 2700X be safe on an ITX mobo? I guess I am asking whether it's okay to consider either chip for a potential ITX build.


----------



## MNMadman

noobee said:


> Are the 2700 and 2700X similar with power consumption and temps if the 2700X is not overclocked? Or is the power consumption on the latter chip quite excessive compared to the 2700? Can anyone tell me?
> 
> Can the 2700X be safe on an ITX mobo? I guess I am asking whether it's okay to consider either chip for a potential ITX build.


The 2700X will boost higher by default so it will run a bit hotter. As long as you have good cooling (and the Wraith Prism qualifies) then it should be fine on an ITX mainboard.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

CJMitsuki said:


> I ran one earlier as well. I need a better gpu apparently https://www.3dmark.com/pcm10b/330538


me and you had about the same gpu in that other one... but yeah that ones much better.


----------



## Leftezog

CJMitsuki said:


> Got my XFR setup optimized for the most part. Still experimenting but with 104 bclk during heavy load it will boost all cores to 4.5ghz and on 102 bclk its around 4.4ghz. VCore during full load boost is 1.52v max downvolting to .85v for the 4.5ghz setup and 1.48v max for the 4.4ghz setup. Single core on both setups is over 4.5ghz and the same with 2 and 4 core boosts with varying voltages depending on how many cores are boosting. Been running the 4.4 ghz setup daily for awhile and the downvolting is great, no heat issues or erratic behavior from what ive noticed. Below are some of the results and I can post my bios settings if anyone is interested in them.
> 
> 
> User Benchmark
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> UserBenchmarks: Game 86%, Desk 104%, Work 105%
> CPU: AMD Ryzen 7 2700X - *113.4%*
> GPU: Nvidia GTX 1060-6GB - *81.5%*
> SSD: Samsung 850 Evo 500GB - *132.5%*
> SSD: Sandisk PLUS 120 GB 120GB - *55.1%*
> RAM: G.SKILL F4 DDR4 3200 C14 2x8GB - *134.5%*
> MBD: Asus ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Other various screenshots of settings and system info
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 212266
> View attachment 212268
> View attachment 212270


Man your rig is clocked like a beast but how the temps are so low? Even if you have an enormous custom loop in your cpu how the motherboard temp is so low? Only 14 degrees? Are the sensor readings correct?


----------



## CJMitsuki

Leftezog said:


> Man your rig is clocked like a beast but how the temps are so low? Even if you have an enormous custom loop in your cpu how the motherboard temp is so low? Only 14 degrees? Are the sensor readings correct?


 Yes, I route cold air from my A/C vent through the radiator and case. Ambient inside the case gets down to 9.5c sometimes lower




Spoiler


----------



## Leftezog

CJMitsuki said:


> Yes, I route cold air from my A/C vent through the radiator and case. Ambient inside the case gets down to 9.5c sometimes lower
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 212634
> View attachment 212636
> View attachment 212638
> View attachment 212640


No $%^^&^*%ing way man!!! OMG you are crazy!!! This thing is nuts!!!


----------



## tekjunkie28

CJMitsuki said:


> Yes, I route cold air from my A/C vent through the radiator and case. Ambient inside the case gets down to 9.5c sometimes lower
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 212634
> View attachment 212636
> View attachment 212638
> View attachment 212640


I have thought about doing this before. Back during the Pentium 4 days we actually just left the window open during the winter in the computer room while gaming.

My question is with ambient reaching that low what do you do for condensation on the parts?

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## CJMitsuki

tekjunkie28 said:


> I have thought about doing this before. Back during the Pentium 4 days we actually just left the window open during the winter in the computer room while gaming.
> 
> My question is with ambient reaching that low what do you do for condensation on the parts?
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


No, but that’s possibly due to the fans keeping it all dry. Condensation wouldn’t form fast enough until it was much colder. 9.5c isn’t that cold compared to using chillers and dry ice where condensation is a problem. I have the one in the side of the case blowing cold air and there is a fan mounted up against the socket so the back side of the cpu stays cold as well. I’ve ran it for 12 hours like that and never got any condensation benching all night on HWBoT. It’ll do until I macguyver a chiller or something out of an old window A/C unit or something. LN2 is too expensive for me right now so I won’t be getting into that for awhile.


----------



## tekjunkie28

CJMitsuki said:


> No, but that’s possibly due to the fans keeping it all dry. Condensation wouldn’t form fast enough until it was much colder. 9.5c isn’t that cold compared to using chillers and dry ice where condensation is a problem. I have the one in the side of the case blowing cold air and there is a fan mounted up against the socket so the back side of the cpu stays cold as well. I’ve ran it for 12 hours like that and never got any condensation benching all night on HWBoT. It’ll do until I macguyver a chiller or something out of an old window A/C unit or something. LN2 is too expensive for me right now so I won’t be getting into that for awhile.


How about an aquarium chiller ? Idk how cold they get but I have ran them on my salt tanks before. They are also fairly quiet for what they are as opposed to a window AC.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## CJMitsuki

they get really cold as well. I kinda want to go more in the direction of how it was done when it first started up. People just trying things and seeing how they worked. I saw someone took a dehumidifier apart and has it cooling his water to 9c and the cpu idles at 11c with 30c at load. Not sure if i believe the 9c water with no condensation unless the ambient in his home is near that as well. If it was 20c+ then definitely condensation with that much of a difference in ambient and hardware. Also been thinking of a fully insulated box with double walls so no condensation can form inside once case is closed since it would never contact the warm air if the double wall was insulated. It would be sick to have like a double wall, vacuum insulated case, condensation-free. I dont really want to go sub zero but I would like to hit single digit temps at idle.


----------



## brenopapito

Guys, what programs do you use to test the overclocking stability?


----------



## CJMitsuki

brenopapito said:


> Guys, what programs do you use to test the overclocking stability?


Depends on the level of stability you need. I suppose if you are doing everyday gaming and normal tasks then Prime95 would be fine. If you do very intensive rendering then maybe IBT AVX but it does seem unrealistic in the loads that it produces.


----------



## brenopapito

CJMitsuki said:


> Depends on the level of stability you need. I suppose if you are doing everyday gaming and normal tasks then Prime95 would be fine. If you do very intensive rendering then maybe IBT AVX but it does seem unrealistic in the loads that it produces.


Thanks!

Any specific version or settings to try Prime95?


----------



## CJMitsuki

brenopapito said:


> Thanks!
> 
> Any specific version or settings to try Prime95?


I’d do latest version with small fft settings as they will be the most taxing. It will make sure you are stable.


----------



## MNMadman

brenopapito said:


> Guys, what programs do you use to test the overclocking stability?


I do a full routine...

1. Eight hours of Prime95 v29.4b8 Small FFT preset
2. Eight hours of Prime95 v29.4b8 Blend preset
3. Eight hours of Y-Cruncher default stress test
4. Eight hours of RealBench v2.56 (stress test not benchmark) with your amount of system RAM selected
5. The games/programs you normally run

Why number five? Because sometimes the system will survive one through four but fail when using real games/programs. Or it might fail with one particular game or program. They all use the CPU/GPU/system differently.


----------



## Chargeit

brenopapito said:


> Guys, what programs do you use to test the overclocking stability?


I usually do an hour of aida64, realbench, and then use the system as I normally would. If everything feels right and there are no crashes then you should be good. Though I usually do come back and run aida64 and realbench a few more times. Sometimes you can catch stability issues you missed.


----------



## brenopapito

Thank you all !!


----------



## rdr09

I just saw the possible price of the i9. Pair that with the 2080 Ti. Wow. Imagine the pressure to win every time you play PUBG.

Sorry. Off topic


----------



## Chargeit

rdr09 said:


> I just saw the possible price of the i9. Pair that with the 2080 Ti. Wow. Imagine the pressure to win every time you play PUBG.
> 
> Sorry. Off topic


I figured the Coffee Lake i9 would be at least $500 - $600. Honestly with the gaming performance the thing should have combined with 8/16 it's going to be one hell of a gaming and productivity cpu.


----------



## rdr09

Chargeit said:


> I figured the Coffee Lake i9 would be at least $500 - $600. Honestly with the gaming performance the thing should have combined with 8/16 it's going to be one hell of a gaming and productivity cpu.


In gaming, for sure. But there are titles where the highest settings are not desired like PUBG. it becomes harder to see the enemy. 

In productivity, if the price holds, the 16 core Threadripper will be the choice.

Edit: But i doubt it will be leaps and bounds more productive than my 200$ 2700.:????


----------



## Chargeit

rdr09 said:


> In gaming, for sure. But there are titles where the highest settings are not desired like PUBG. it becomes harder to see the enemy.
> 
> In productivity, if the price holds, the 16 core Threadripper will be the choice.
> 
> Edit: But i doubt it will be leaps and bounds more productive than my 200$ 2700.:????


High fps would be where it shines. As for productivity you could pick up a higher core count cpu but it wouldn't have the same gaming performance. Which is the trade off. 

As for how it will compare to other 8/16 cpu's I'd compare the 8700k to the ryzen 2600x to get an idea. I doubt there would be a noticeable difference in productivity.


----------



## rdr09

Chargeit said:


> High fps would be where it shines. As for productivity you could pick up a higher core count cpu but it wouldn't have the same gaming performance. Which is the trade off.
> 
> As for how it will compare to other 8/16 cpu's I'd compare the 8700k to the ryzen 2600x to get an idea. I doubt there would be a noticeable difference in productivity.


Its time for AMD to bring out the 2800X.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

I'm betting the 2700x will be very close in some highly multi threaded production apps, but no where near in games and such... in other words same story as always... amd cheaper, but slightly lower performance over all core for core


----------



## Chargeit

Minotaurtoo said:


> I'm betting the 2700x will be very close in some highly multi threaded production apps, but no where near in games and such... in other words same story as always... amd cheaper, but slightly lower performance over all core for core


Pretty much. Though it's definitely not the same as the fx days.


----------



## rdr09

Minotaurtoo said:


> I'm betting the 2700x will be very close in some highly multi threaded production apps, but no where near in games and such... in other words same story as always... amd cheaper, but slightly lower performance over all core for core


What to do if AMD is not around? Had to bring my Phenom back online. I wont hook my last Intel rig to the internet.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

rdr09 said:


> What to do if AMD is not around? Had to bring my Phenom back online. I wont hook my last Intel rig to the internet.


 I don't know lol... I haven't bought intel, on purpose, in the last decade or so... think the last intel that I purposely bought was a 200mhz mmx chip from the late 90's... since then there have a been a couple that just happened to be in tablets and such. 



changing the subject a bit, here is my "office" needs a clean up... and before anyone says anything, that stuff on the floor is my UPS system, network hub and modem... well that and about a million wires... this is even the ground hub I made.. I put in a separate ground rod outside that all this is hooked to for extra protection... I actually have 3 grounds used around the house and one giant tower for a lightening rod outside...lightening is very bad here on the hill top...


----------



## rdr09

Minotaurtoo said:


> I don't know lol... I haven't bought intel, on purpose, in the last decade or so... think the last intel that I purposely bought was a 200mhz mmx chip from the late 90's... since then there have a been a couple that just happened to be in tablets and such.
> 
> 
> 
> changing the subject a bit, here is my "office" needs a clean up... and before anyone says anything, that stuff on the floor is my UPS system, network hub and modem... well that and about a million wires... this is even the ground hub I made.. I put in a separate ground rod outside that all this is hooked to for extra protection... I actually have 3 grounds used around the house and one giant tower for a lightening rod outside...lightening is very bad here on the hill top...


Is that a 40 inch TV? Can't wait to see after you clean up your "office". lol


----------



## Minotaurtoo

rdr09 said:


> Is that a 40 inch TV? Can't wait to see after you clean up your "office". lol


actually its a 49" UHD 178 deg viewing angle... great color reproduction... 6.5ms response time though... limited to 60hz @ 4k to... it's great for what I do, may not be suitable for first person shooters. specs can be found here... was really good for price when I got it... http://www.sceptre.com/overview-371.html


----------



## rdr09

Minotaurtoo said:


> actually its a 49" UHD 178 deg viewing angle... great color reproduction... 6.5ms response time though... limited to 60hz @ 4k to... it's great for what I do, may not be suitable for first person shooters. specs can be found here... was really good for price when I got it... http://www.sceptre.com/overview-371.html


Nice. You sit pretty close to it. Im currently in Africa and i don't see that brand here. I saw the reviews and they are pretty good. I have a 28in Acer 4K 60Hz that i bought 3yrs ago for like $350 and i've been using it at 1440 since i retired my Xfire 290s a month ago.

You have that extra monitor to the side. Thats the one for work? lol


----------



## tekjunkie28

Minotaurtoo said:


> I don't know lol... I haven't bought intel, on purpose, in the last decade or so... think the last intel that I purposely bought was a 200mhz mmx chip from the late 90's... since then there have a been a couple that just happened to be in tablets and such.
> 
> 
> 
> changing the subject a bit, here is my "office" needs a clean up... and before anyone says anything, that stuff on the floor is my UPS system, network hub and modem... well that and about a million wires... this is even the ground hub I made.. I put in a separate ground rod outside that all this is hooked to for extra protection... I actually have 3 grounds used around the house and one giant tower for a lightening rod outside...lightening is very bad here on the hill top...


Ypu need to be VERY CAREFUL about all those ground rods. I have been in homes where they complained that their appliances or whatever would fail quickly and often after storms or even just over time. Multiple grounding rods are always to blame. 

What happens is when lightning hits the ground it radiates back up into the house through grounding rods. Sounds crazy but we've seen it so much. 

Also it isnt code anymore but homes with electrical grounds grounded to copper pipe are actually better than grounding rods because the pipe travels through the ground a heck of a lot longer than a grounding rod. 

One reason you shouldn't shower is not lightning striking your home but because it can travel through the ground. 

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Chargeit

I think I just found the best excuse as to why a cpu doesn't oc well.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

tekjunkie28 said:


> Ypu need to be VERY CAREFUL about all those ground rods. I have been in homes where they complained that their appliances or whatever would fail quickly and often after storms or even just over time. Multiple grounding rods are always to blame.
> 
> What happens is when lightning hits the ground it radiates back up into the house through grounding rods. Sounds crazy but we've seen it so much.
> 
> Also it isnt code anymore but homes with electrical grounds grounded to copper pipe are actually better than grounding rods because the pipe travels through the ground a heck of a lot longer than a grounding rod.
> 
> One reason you shouldn't shower is not lightning striking your home but because it can travel through the ground.
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk



Interesting... the grounding system here isn't connected "directly" though... one serves the living room... one serves this room and the other is the main house ground hooked up through the electrical box.. in each case where the extra ground is used I am using a UPS box with the extra ground hookup on it... not sure if that isolates them fully or not, but before I hooked this system up I lost 2 tvs and a pc in less than 2 months after moving in... since then nothing has been lost.... the tower has been struck more times than I can count one time even was steaming when I looked out :bigeyedsm... I learned pretty quick at this place that I needed something to prevent lightening hits from getting stuff... I still remember the first tv it got... shot sparks out near the power button... that was scary... only about 2 weeks later lost another tv and my pc in 2 different rooms... that was when I decided to get a UPS system... got two actually and both had that extra ground connection option... so I said what the heck... I ran a wire our and pounded a ground rod in deep.... so far so good


edit.... in this room the ground is also hooked to the modem too... it also had the connection for an extra ground.


----------



## Chargeit

Minotaurtoo said:


> changing the subject a bit, here is my "office" needs a clean up... and before anyone says anything, that stuff on the floor is my UPS system, network hub and modem... well that and about a million wires... this is even the ground hub I made.. I put in a separate ground rod outside that all this is hooked to for extra protection... I actually have 3 grounds used around the house and one giant tower for a lightening rod outside...lightening is very bad here on the hill top...


Here's a pic of my setup. Nothing fancy just set up for use. My ol'lady get's annoyed just coming in here. 

Systems in order, left to right. Ryzen 7, 7820x, fx 6300. I usually don't run all 3 systems at the same time since they can produce a lot of heat.

*I need to get a better table for the Ryzen rig. I intend on changing the room layout around soon to better suit vr and recording.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

Chargeit said:


> Here's a pic of my setup. Nothing fancy just set up for use. My ol'lady get's annoyed just coming in here.
> 
> Systems in order, left to right. Ryzen 7, 7820x, fx 6300. I usually don't run all 3 systems at the same time since they can produce a lot of heat.
> 
> *I need to get a better table for the Ryzen rig. I intend on changing the room layout around soon to better suit vr and recording.


I can tell from the pic your room is much bigger than mine... I need a bigger room, but my house is a bit tiny... it's more of a Euro style house imo with 3 tiny bedrooms one living space that is open into the kitchen and dining area and only one bath... it's ok for us, but sometimes I wish I had more room to spread out in this room...


----------



## Chargeit

Minotaurtoo said:


> I can tell from the pic your room is much bigger than mine... I need a bigger room, but my house is a bit tiny... it's more of a Euro style house imo with 3 tiny bedrooms one living space that is open into the kitchen and dining area and only one bath... it's ok for us, but sometimes I wish I had more room to spread out in this room...


Yeah it's large room. Roughly 14'x13'. 

The problem with space is you start finding ways to fill it up.


----------



## rdr09

Minotaurtoo said:


> Interesting... the grounding system here isn't connected "directly" though... one serves the living room... one serves this room and the other is the main house ground hooked up through the electrical box.. in each case where the extra ground is used I am using a UPS box with the extra ground hookup on it... not sure if that isolates them fully or not, but before I hooked this system up I lost 2 tvs and a pc in less than 2 months after moving in... since then nothing has been lost.... the tower has been struck more times than I can count one time even was steaming when I looked out :bigeyedsm... I learned pretty quick at this place that I needed something to prevent lightening hits from getting stuff... I still remember the first tv it got... shot sparks out near the power button... that was scary... only about 2 weeks later lost another tv and my pc in 2 different rooms... that was when I decided to get a UPS system... got two actually and both had that extra ground connection option... so I said what the heck... I ran a wire our and pounded a ground rod in deep.... so far so good
> 
> 
> edit.... in this room the ground is also hooked to the modem too... it also had the connection for an extra ground.



You have home property insurance? They are pretty cheap. I think I pay like less than 15$ a month. Came in usefull when Sandy hit. Insurance paid for all the food we lost due to power lost.

So long as you and your family are safe. Others are easily replaceable.



Chargeit said:


> Here's a pic of my setup. Nothing fancy just set up for use. My ol'lady get's annoyed just coming in here.
> 
> Systems in order, left to right. Ryzen 7, 7820x, fx 6300. I usually don't run all 3 systems at the same time since they can produce a lot of heat.
> 
> *I need to get a better table for the Ryzen rig. I intend on changing the room layout around soon to better suit vr and recording.


Nice setup. That's where your YT stuff happens, rt?


----------



## Chargeit

rdr09 said:


> You have home property insurance? They are pretty cheap. I think I pay like less than 15$ a month. Came in usefull when Sandy hit. Insurance paid for all the food we lost due to power lost.
> 
> So long as you and your family are safe. Others are easily replaceable.
> 
> 
> 
> Nice setup. That's where your YT stuff happens, rt?


Hey thanks man. Yeah I really love the setup. 

Yeah that's where I've been doing my recording. Though I'm going to rearrange the room soon so it's easier to set up lighting and allow for a larger space for vr.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

rdr09 said:


> You have home property insurance? They are pretty cheap. I think I pay like less than 15$ a month. Came in usefull when Sandy hit. Insurance paid for all the food we lost due to power lost.
> 
> So long as you and your family are safe. Others are easily replaceable.
> 
> 
> 
> Nice setup. That's where your YT stuff happens, rt?


 oh yeah... what with at least 2 tornadoes a year coming near by and high winds pretty common insurance is a must. Since living here we've had one weak tornado come right overhead and I've saw 2 from my backyard... fortunately they tend to be on the weak side, but I have seen some bad ones come through near by that even ripped some of the pavement off the roads... that was a while back in Phil Campbell which is about an hours drive to the south.


The insurance paid for all our stuff, but that deductible was a pain... 1000$


----------



## polkfan

Chargeit said:


> Here's a pic of my setup. Nothing fancy just set up for use. My ol'lady get's annoyed just coming in here.
> 
> Systems in order, left to right. Ryzen 7, 7820x, fx 6300. I usually don't run all 3 systems at the same time since they can produce a lot of heat.
> 
> *I need to get a better table for the Ryzen rig. I intend on changing the room layout around soon to better suit vr and recording.


All i got to say is i LOVE those polk speakers! Nice sounding setup man!


----------



## Chargeit

polkfan said:


> All i got to say is i LOVE those polk speakers! Nice sounding setup man!


Thanks.

I picked the system up when the gtx 980's came out instead of buying one. Ended up working out well.

I have a center and two surrounds though I put them in storage since stereo sounds really good and is a lot less clutter.

*Also, noticed the name there.


----------



## polkfan

Chargeit said:


> Thanks.
> 
> I picked the system up when the gtx 980's came out instead of buying one. Ended up working out well.
> 
> I have a center and two surrounds though I put them in storage since stereo sounds really good and is a lot less clutter.
> 
> *Also, noticed the name there.


Yup i literary named myself off of Polk Audio haha I really love their speakers for the money i feel they are the best value.


----------



## Chargeit

polkfan said:


> Yup i literary named myself off of Polk Audio haha I really love their speakers for the money i feel they are the best value.


I've been happy with them. I forget what the full setup cost though with 5.1, A/V receiver, Stands/mounts and speaker wire I maybe spent $700 - $800. Not pocket change or anything but still a pretty impressive setup for the cost.


----------



## Kildar

OK, I have a question.

What voltage should I look at for max volts on my 2700x using HWinfo? Core # vid? SVI2 TFN? Or what the MB sensor reports CPU Core voltage?

@PE4 I have 1.3 on each Core vid, 1.425 on SVI2 TFN and the ASUS EC MB sensor reports 1.395.

TIA!


----------



## The Sandman

Kildar said:


> OK, I have a question.
> 
> What voltage should I look at for max volts on my 2700x using HWinfo? Core # vid? SVI2 TFN? Or what the MB sensor reports CPU Core voltage?
> 
> @PE4 I have 1.3 on each Core vid, 1.425 on SVI2 TFN and the ASUS EC MB sensor reports 1.395.
> 
> TIA!


SV12 TFN is most accurate.
Yes 6201 w latest HWInfo does have the CPU and Mobo sensors reversed on mine as well.

How stable is it? Just curious.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

ops


----------



## Kildar

The Sandman said:


> SV12 TFN is most accurate.
> Yes 6201 w latest HWInfo does have the CPU and Mobo sensors reversed on mine as well.
> 
> How stable is it? Just curious.


Well... @ PE4 It OC's all cores to 4232 Mhz when gaming or mining CNv7. Never had a crash other than when I'm playing with memory timings.

Down clocks to 1.9-2.2 Ghz @ idle, boosts 1-4 cores to 4383 on intermittent loads.

I could probably get it higher but I'm trying to keep the temps below 62.


----------



## nick name

Has anyone ever reduced Maximum Processor State under Power Plan to less than 100%? When I do then my CPU will only run at it's lowest speed. And I mean 2.2GHz lowest speed at anything less than 100%. I don't want to call it a bug, but it's certainly a quirk.


----------



## rdr09

nick name said:


> Has anyone ever reduced Maximum Processor State under Power Plan to less than 100%? When I do then my CPU will only run at it's lowest speed. And I mean 2.2GHz lowest speed at anything less than 100%. I don't want to call it a bug, but it's certainly a quirk.



I just tried it and it does same thing. Put it back to 100.


----------



## nick name

rdr09 said:


> I just tried it and it does same thing. Put it back to 100.


Well obviously. Lol.

But it would be nice if it did work as one would expect. Being able to reduce the top end when using a higher BCLK would be awesome.


----------



## rdr09

nick name said:


> Well obviously. Lol.
> 
> But it would be nice if it did work as one would expect. Being able to reduce the top end when using a higher BCLK would be awesome.


It would be a nice quirk if you can raise it to 110% or so.


----------



## nick name

rdr09 said:


> It would be a nice quirk if you can raise it to 110% or so.


Any form of actual control would be nice.


----------



## Velheibgnar

Hi guys, anyone on stock Wraith cooler and managed to do something with "wavy" fan speeds in idle/low load??








This is during youtube music, and some other non-work non-game stuff.
Same stuff happens with full idle + moving mouse pointer.


----------



## rdr09

Velheibgnar said:


> Hi guys, anyone on stock Wraith cooler and managed to do something with "wavy" fan speeds in idle/low load??
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is during youtube music, and some other non-work non-game stuff.
> Same stuff happens with full idle + moving mouse pointer.


That's really odd. Mine stays within 900 - 1100 (at 100% load). Is BIOS set to Load Optimized Default? No OC?

EDIT: Motherboard is an Asus B350. It has headers for the CPU fan and an AIO CPU cooler. Of course, I use the one for the fan.


----------



## chroniclard

Kildar said:


> Well... @ PE4 It OC's all cores to 4232 Mhz when gaming or mining CNv7. Never had a crash other than when I'm playing with memory timings.
> 
> Down clocks to 1.9-2.2 Ghz @ idle, boosts 1-4 cores to 4383 on intermittent loads.
> 
> I could probably get it higher but I'm trying to keep the temps below 62.


Does it not go over 62 in heavy multicore loads?

Im using PE4 and hit similar speeds, however it will reach 69-70 ish degrees doing heavy work. (Custom water loop)


----------



## Velheibgnar

@rdr09: Memory is OCed, and the fun runs up to 2300rpm in prime95. Wait, 1100 at 100% load is odd to me either from your side .
mobo crosshair vii 
I've found similar threads in google with same issue but no solution other that manual setting.


----------



## rdr09

Velheibgnar said:


> Memory is OCed, and the fun runns up to 2300rpm in prime95. Wait, 1100 at 100% load is odd to me either from your side .
> mobo crosshair vii
> I've found similar threads in google with same issue but no solution other that manual setting.


Yah, never seen it go over 1100. Unless HWINFO is wrong. This is Oc'ed at 3.9 all cores. I did replace the stock paste with MX-4. That's gaming temp.

EDIT: Test while LOAD Optimized Default. Use HWINFO. Close the other apps including Ryzen Master if you are using it.


----------



## rdr09

@Velheibgnar, Check your CPU Fan Profile under Monitor in BIOS. I might be set to Turbo. Before Loading Optimized save a profile of your OC if any. Make sure your fan is plugged in the CPU Fan header. AIO Fan header ramps up the fan to 1600rpm at standard setting


----------



## pez

Anyone here moved up to a 2700/2700X from a 1700+ chip? What benefits or improvements have you noticed (if any)? Bonus points for those that have retained their x370 board.


----------



## Velheibgnar

@rdr09 Wow, *what is that CPU frequency*? How do you reach that low ? I have MX-4 but didn't use it yet since temps are good. Also my ambient temps are nice (still summer tho).
If we differ so much for the frequency, looks like my frequency is boosting the temp in a spike, and this boosts rpm. 
Still wonder why you don't have more RPM for 60C+? 
BIGASS screen 1
All fans are either default or set to *PWM*.
BIGASS screen 2
I might use MX-4 just in a moment out of curiosity but still, damn lot's of difference. 
My rig is dead silent apart from CPU fan when 1200+1500+2500.
Also your max temp is similar to my prime95 max temp. But this is with 2900 rpm.

I've just changed to manual. Still it waves like crazy +-400rpm  even when at 400-900 rpm. (temps are high tho). Will change to what I was at since my ears still year the 'wave' damn.

Back to all optimized defaults, now it's even worse (since downvolt is gone). Now it spins 1200 to 1500 every 3 seconds, temps +10 -10 in 3 seconds (37 - 47). I might try to use warranty for it I guess :/ or wait another bios.


@pez - friend did it and while now we both have 2700x, yeah it's better but I'd say XFR2 and precision boost work crazy good.


----------



## The Sandman

pez said:


> Anyone here moved up to a 2700/2700X from a 1700+ chip? What benefits or improvements have you noticed (if any)? Bonus points for those that have retained their x370 board.


 1800x @ 3950MHz SV12 TFN average on HWInfo 1.384v running Prime95 for 8 hrs. 
Average temp was 58.5c. 
Memory 3466MHz 14-13-13-26-44-1T.

2700x running PE3 = all cores @ 4200MHz under load Prime95 SV12 TFN average reads 1.249v.
Average temp 59.6c and memory at 3466 cas14.
Single core/s run @ 4350MHz and I see SV12 reach max 1.406v (CPU Core Voltage reads max 1.461v)

Rig is in sig, yes a x370.
Hope this is of some help.


----------



## pez

Velheibgnar said:


> @rdr09 Wow, *what is that CPU frequency*? How do you reach that low ? I have MX-4 but didn't use it yet since temps are good. Also my ambient temps are nice (still summer tho).
> If we differ so much for the frequency, looks like my frequency is boosting the temp in a spike, and this boosts rpm.
> Still wonder why you don't have more RPM for 60C+?
> BIGASS screen 1
> All fans are either default or set to *PWM*.
> BIGASS screen 2
> I might use MX-4 just in a moment out of curiosity but still, damn lot's of difference.
> My rig is dead silent apart from CPU fan when 1200+1500+2500.
> Also your max temp is similar to my prime95 max temp. But this is with 2900 rpm.
> 
> I've just changed to manual. Still it waves like crazy +-400rpm  even when at 400-900 rpm. (temps are high tho). Will change to what I was at since my ears still year the 'wave' damn.
> 
> 
> @pez - friend did it and while now we both have 2700x, yeah it's better but I'd say XFR2 and precision boost work crazy good.


Nice! Thank you for the input! What would you say you notice the most with XFR2 and PB2? I've been scouring reviews and reading positives about it, but most reviewers aren't after the real world things we may or may not notice as people who 'daily' these things .



The Sandman said:


> 1800x @ 3950MHz SV12 TFN average on HWInfo 1.384v running Prime95 for 8 hrs.
> Average temp was 58.5c.
> Memory 3466MHz 14-13-13-26-44-1T.
> 
> 2700x running PE3 = all cores @ 4200MHz under load Prime95 SV12 TFN average reads 1.249v.
> Average temp 59.6c and memory at 3466 cas14.
> Single core/s run @ 4350MHz and I see SV12 reach max 1.406v (CPU Core Voltage reads max 1.461v)
> 
> Rig is in sig, yes a x370.
> Hope this is of some help.


Definitely does! Happy to see those OCs, too. I'm on the same board as you, but only 3.8GHz on my 1700. No complaints really, but I'm going to do Ryzen in my living room gaming build and decided I'd rather go with a 2700X on this board and 'recycle' my 1700 into the living room build than buy another Ryzen 1x00 chip. I've even got some 3600 B-die I've pulled the trigger on in the marketplace that should be a nice addition, too.


----------



## Kildar

chroniclard said:


> Does it not go over 62 in heavy multicore loads?
> 
> Im using PE4 and hit similar speeds, however it will reach 69-70 ish degrees doing heavy work. (Custom water loop)


Well.... It depends on what I have my AC set at. if I forget to turn it down when I'm not in here it may jump up to 65-69.

But gaming it usually doesn't go over 62.

Muscle relaxers are kicking in I'm having trouble typing... busted my knee... time for bed.


----------



## rdr09

Velheibgnar said:


> @rdr09 Wow, *what is that CPU frequency*? How do you reach that low ? I have MX-4 but didn't use it yet since temps are good.
> 
> Back to all optimized defaults, now it's even worse (since downvolt is gone). Now it spins 1200 to 1500 every 3 seconds, temps +10 -10 in 3 seconds (37 - 47). I might try to use warranty for it I guess :/ or wait another bios.


It does not down volt, maybe your Win power plan is set to High performance. Wait, mine is set to High but still down volts. Weird. Use the MX-4.

The low freq is caused by 20% setting in the Min processor state under Advance power setting in Win power plan.


----------



## Velheibgnar

@rdr09 already did swapped to MX-4 ... .-2C ide and stress. I surrendered with the temp jumps, so I disabled boost, set it to 3.7GHz with ofset -0.075 vcore (so a bit above 1V, setting 1.000V won't boot for me unlucky). Will wait another bios I guess since in last days I've found like 50 similar posts over internet but unsolved otherwise than saying "it's normal". Yep, damn power plans, AMD balanced is 90%, windows balanced is 5%. I've checked if this not recommended 5% will cause issue in games (it should in games). But no issues in LoL and WoW (I don't game apart from that). Just much lower temps.

Turning off boost solved it for now and I have sufficient power even at stock for now. My max temps, performance are great tho so a faulty ihs is probably not the case.


----------



## rdr09

Velheibgnar said:


> @rdr09 already did swapped to MX-4 ... .-2C ide and stress. I surrendered with the temp jumps, so I disabled boost, set it to 3.7GHz with ofset -0.075 vcore (so a bit above 1V, setting 1.000V won't boot for me unlucky). Will wait another bios I guess since in last days I've found like 50 similar posts over internet but unsolved otherwise than saying "it's normal". Yep, damn power plans, AMD balanced is 90%, windows balanced is 5%. I've checked if this not recommended 5% will cause issue in games (it should in games). But no issues in LoL and WoW (I don't game apart from that). Just much lower temps.
> 
> Turning off boost solved it for now and I have sufficient power even at stock for now. My max temps, performance are great tho so a faulty ihs is probably not the case.



Just curious, what is this AMD balance thing? Another power plan aside from Windows? Might be like AI suit that confuses the BIOS.


----------



## Velheibgnar

@rdr09 - Yes, a plan that won't impact top performance in benchmarks and games. Some guy AMD_Robert on reddit like 4 months ago (my guess) still recommended Ryzen balanced. This is for benchmark purposes, when windows was screwing up with results of AMD cpus = bad for media. 

https://community.amd.com/community/gaming/blog/2017/04/06/amd-ryzen-community-update-3

I can't find technical details why lower states was issue (parking was the issue tho) and why only 90% is for now achived as 'balanced, recommended'. 
Anyway, if someone can adjust ones p-states and all stuff in bios, it will not relate much. This is for basic user, and recommended out of box.


----------



## rdr09

Velheibgnar said:


> @rdr09 - Yes, a plan that won't impact top performance in benchmarks and games. Some guy AMD_Robert on reddit like 4 months ago (my guess) still recommended Ryzen balanced. This is for benchmark purposes, when windows was screwing up with results of AMD cpus = bad for media.
> 
> https://community.amd.com/community/gaming/blog/2017/04/06/amd-ryzen-community-update-3
> 
> I can't find technical details why lower states was issue (parking was the issue tho) and why only 90% is for now achived as 'balanced, recommended'.
> Anyway, if someone can adjust ones p-states and all stuff in bios, it will not relate much. This is for basic user, and recommended out of box.


I see. Good thing i never read about that. Don't use it.


----------



## martinhal

Hi everyone. Got a 2700x a week ago. Using it on my CH6 x370 . Using a fixed voltage of 1.417 v as auto voltage goes up to 1.5 v if left to its own devices . LLC set at 3 with boost profile ( 4 I think) . Clocks jump between 4.1 and 4.350. Will still play around a bit. My question is temps, with Cinebech 15 at 1.417 my temps are 65C ( ambeint 25C) using a H150i. Are my temps in the ballpark of ok ?


----------



## MNMadman

@Velheibgnar @rdr09
Ryzen Balanced is still recommended, as it disables core parking and it reacts faster to load changes so boost works better. You just have to change the Minimum Processor State to a lower value so it can down-clock and down-volt. You can set it to 50% or 5% and it will still only down-clock to 2.2GHz.


----------



## rdr09

MNMadman said:


> @Velheibgnar @rdr09
> Ryzen Balanced is still recommended, as it disables core parking and it reacts faster to load changes so boost works better. You just have to change the Minimum Processor State to a lower value so it can down-clock and down-volt. You can set it to 50% or 5% and it will still only down-clock to 2.2GHz.


Really. Never heard of it. Is it part of Ryzen Master?

Anyway, im so stupid. Cant really compare my temps his cause mine is a non-x.


----------



## Velheibgnar

@MNMadman - might be. Anyway times flies by I think either bioses or windows did something to improve 'old' issues. Task mng->perf->res.mon->cpu tab-> NO PARKING AT ALL even at crazy idle with windows recommended plan . Btw. good to know the down-clock is only to 2.2Ghz. I happend not to know it yesterday and was confused. 
@martinhal The 1.5v is for 4.3x GHz for some cores when all on auto. When you run cinebench the all-core volatage should be much lower, can't remember what was it. So if you run constantly at 1.417 , the rest on auto, that's a bit high for "average voltage". Try leaving it on auto and setting offsets (-) like -0.025, -0.050 if running ok, try -0.075 but might be not stable so test it. Maybe this will lovew the values that you were concerned about . Take in mind offset -0.1 is probably a lottery, sadly the code in case it won't boot is the one that will not revert bios, so will require cmos clear. For me -0.075 was stable. Or you're already at all core 4Ghz+ in cinebench and I misunderstood you. The temps are good.


----------



## MNMadman

rdr09 said:


> Really. Never heard of it. Is it part of Ryzen Master?


It's installed as part of the AMD chipset driver package.


----------



## martinhal

Will play with offset a bit. 4.175 is the speed it holds in Cinebench. Looking foward tp playing in the bios a bit over the weekend.


----------



## rdr09

MNMadman said:


> It's installed as part of the AMD chipset driver package.



I installed it and tested it with CPUZ Bench (ran quite a few times to make sure). It made the system a bit slower. I know its just CPUZ. I went ahead and uninstalled it.

Left is without the chipset driver.


----------



## nick name

martinhal said:


> Hi everyone. Got a 2700x a week ago. Using it on my CH6 x370 . Using a fixed voltage of 1.417 v as auto voltage goes up to 1.5 v if left to its own devices . LLC set at 3 with boost profile ( 4 I think) . Clocks jump between 4.1 and 4.350. Will still play around a bit. My question is temps, with Cinebech 15 at 1.417 my temps are 65C ( ambeint 25C) using a H150i. Are my temps in the ballpark of ok ?


That seems pretty good to me. My temps at 4.175GHz / 1.337V~1.344V get up to 73*C in Cinebench.


----------



## nick name

rdr09 said:


> I installed it and tested it with CPUZ Bench (ran quite a few times to make sure). It made the system a bit slower. I know its just CPUZ. I went ahead and uninstalled it.
> 
> Left is without the chipset driver.


Whoa. I don't think I've seen anyone's CPU multiplier go below 22.

What are you values under Processor Power Management?


----------



## rdr09

nick name said:


> Whoa. I don't think I've seen anyone's CPU multiplier go below 22.
> 
> What are you values under Processor Power Management?



Its the Minimum processor state set to 20%. If at 100%, the cores stay at 34 and volts above 1v even in Win Balance mode.


----------



## diggiddi

rdr09 said:


> Nice. You sit pretty close to it. Im currently in Africa and i don't see that brand here. I saw the reviews and they are pretty good. I have a 28in Acer 4K 60Hz that i bought 3yrs ago for like $350 and i've been using it at 1440 since i retired my Xfire 290s a month ago.
> 
> You have that extra monitor to the side. Thats the one for work? lol


Which country? SA?


----------



## nick name

rdr09 said:


> Its the Minimum processor state set to 20%. If at 100%, the cores stay at 34 and volts above 1v even in Win Balance mode.


How peculiar.


----------



## rdr09

diggiddi said:


> Which country? SA?


I wish im in Cape Town. Most beautiful place i've ever been. Ghana. Lovely weather this time of year. Not too warm nor cold.



nick name said:


> How peculiar.


Indeed. Win power plan works great with this cpu.


----------



## Fanu

after some fiddling in asus bios, are these good values:

memory oc: 3333MHz 14-14-14-28 @ 1.375V (all other values set using ryzen dram calc)
SOC voltage: 1.025V

2700X voltage: negative 0.1V offset (max it will go stable is -0.125V), temps with dark rock pro 4 dont go over 78C, max voltage is 1.44~V (cant remember from the top of my head but it doesnt go over 1.45V) 

max all core simultaneous boost: 4.060-4.090MHz
all cores are able to boost to 4.360MHz
in idle, it goes down to 2.2GHz

this is with PE level 2 (lvl3 and 4 just up the CPU voltage over 1.5V which makes the CPU run over 80C and thermal throttle) and core performance boost option enabled


----------



## Kildar

Some of my cores will drop down to 1943MHz fore just a second or two @ idle.


----------



## rdr09

Fanu said:


> after some fiddling in asus bios, are these good values:
> 
> memory oc: 3333MHz 14-14-14-28 @ 1.375V (all other values set using ryzen dram calc)
> SOC voltage: 1.025V
> 
> 2700X voltage: negative 0.1V offset (max it will go stable is -0.125V), temps with dark rock pro 4 dont go over 78C, max voltage is 1.44~V (cant remember from the top of my head but it doesnt go over 1.45V)
> 
> max all core simultaneous boost: 4.060-4.090MHz
> all cores are able to boost to 4.360MHz
> in idle, it goes down to 2.2GHz
> 
> this is with PE level 2 (lvl3 and 4 just up the CPU voltage over 1.5V which makes the CPU run over 80C and thermal throttle) and core performance boost option enabled


If it is with a X370 chip, then it is quite good.

EDIT: Saw your post in CVI thread and you are not experiencing any fan issue. Good for you and keep your BIOS. I mean saw one with fan stopping during full load. Another with the cpu fan ramping up and down. Guess the BIOS of high-end boards are harder to maintain. Too many features.



Kildar said:


> Some of my cores will drop down to 1943MHz fore just a second or two @ idle.


Nothing wrong with core freq dropping that low so long as the cpu boost as normal.


----------



## R1amddude

Hey guys just upgraded from a 1700 to a 2700. So far this thing is a nice step up, got a nice manual OC of 4.15 mhz at 1.39v. Tried 4.2 but was unstable at that voltage, will def push it harder later when the thermal paste settles and I add a bit more. 3464 mhz ram @14-14-14-14. Beast.


----------



## seawolfxix

R1amddude said:


> Hey guys just upgraded from a 1700 to a 2700. So far this thing is a nice step up, got a nice manual OC of 4.15 mhz at 3.9v. Tried 4.2 but was unstable at that voltage, will def push it harder later when the thermal paste settles and I add a bit more. 3464 mhz ram @14-14-14-14. Beast.


Do you mean 1.39V?


----------



## R1amddude

seawolfxix said:


> Do you mean 1.39V?



Yes, fixed


----------



## rdr09

R1amddude said:


> Hey guys just upgraded from a 1700 to a 2700. So far this thing is a nice step up, got a nice manual OC of 4.15 mhz at 1.39v. Tried 4.2 but was unstable at that voltage, will def push it harder later when the thermal paste settles and I add a bit more. 3464 mhz ram @14-14-14-14. Beast.


We have same cpu but yours is better. And your ram with those tight timings really helps.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Velheibgnar said:


> @rdr09 - Yes, a plan that won't impact top performance in benchmarks and games. Some guy AMD_Robert on reddit like 4 months ago (my guess) still recommended Ryzen balanced. This is for benchmark purposes, when windows was screwing up with results of AMD cpus = bad for media.
> 
> https://community.amd.com/community/gaming/blog/2017/04/06/amd-ryzen-community-update-3
> 
> I can't find technical details why lower states was issue (parking was the issue tho) and why only 90% is for now achived as 'balanced, recommended'.
> Anyway, if someone can adjust ones p-states and all stuff in bios, it will not relate much. This is for basic user, and recommended out of box.


All the windows power plans are trash and there are literally 40 or so settings that are hidden for core parking and how fast they respond to load and it really affects memory latency and performance. There are programs out there if you search that will make these hidden settings visible so you can check them out and tweak them. Balanced is one of the worst, if you must use a windows plan then use high perf and set minimum processor to something like 20% and you will have much better benches due to core parking not being as restrictive as balanced. I keep all cores Unparked and have them very sensitive to loads. I don’t want to processor to jump to max freq at just anything but it is very very adjustable to react very fast and still downclock quite nicely if you play around with it.

Be warned though, these programs adjust registry values on these hidden settings so just to be safe, make a backup of your registry and save to usb so you can just take it back to the way you had it in case you don’t remember the original values. Very very nice way to tweak performance that is laying dormant in the form of hidden power options for the cpu.


----------



## rdr09

CJMitsuki said:


> All the windows power plans are trash and there are literally 40 or so settings that are hidden for core parking and how fast they respond to load and it really affects memory latency and performance. There are programs out there if you search that will make these hidden settings visible so you can check them out and tweak them. Balanced is one of the worst, if you must use a windows plan then use high perf and set minimum processor to something like 20% and you will have much better benches due to core parking not being as restrictive as balanced. I keep all cores Unparked and have them very sensitive to loads. I don’t want to processor to jump to max freq at just anything but it is very very adjustable to react very fast and still downclock quite nicely if you play around with it.
> 
> Be warned though, these programs adjust registry values on these hidden settings so just to be safe, make a backup of your registry and save to usb so you can just take it back to the way you had it in case you don’t remember the original values. Very very nice way to tweak performance that is laying dormant in the form of hidden power options for the cpu.



CJ, Can you post here and try to beat Clukos . . .


https://www.overclock.net/forum/410...t-mips-screenshots-7-zip-built-benchmark.html


----------



## CJMitsuki

rdr09 said:


> CJ, Can you post here and try to beat Clukos . . .
> 
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/410...t-mips-screenshots-7-zip-built-benchmark.html


Sure, I have him beat ill post here in a sec.


----------



## ClashOfClans

should I upgrade to a 2700x from a 1800x? I'm not sure, what do you guys think.


----------



## pez

That's an impressive OC on that 2700X. I'm trying to wait for a deal on the 2700X to pull the trigger, but I'm very tempted to just get one at the current going price.


----------



## tekjunkie28

ClashOfClans said:


> should I upgrade to a 2700x from a 1800x? I'm not sure, what do you guys think.


Depends. If you game then yes but you wont see any benefits other then increased FPS. Or if your 1800x OCs well then I wouldn't.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## tekjunkie28

CJMitsuki said:


> All the windows power plans are trash and there are literally 40 or so settings that are hidden for core parking and how fast they respond to load and it really affects memory latency and performance. There are programs out there if you search that will make these hidden settings visible so you can check them out and tweak them. Balanced is one of the worst, if you must use a windows plan then use high perf and set minimum processor to something like 20% and you will have much better benches due to core parking not being as restrictive as balanced. I keep all cores Unparked and have them very sensitive to loads. I don’t want to processor to jump to max freq at just anything but it is very very adjustable to react very fast and still downclock quite nicely if you play around with it.
> 
> Be warned though, these programs adjust registry values on these hidden settings so just to be safe, make a backup of your registry and save to usb so you can just take it back to the way you had it in case you don’t remember the original values. Very very nice way to tweak performance that is laying dormant in the form of hidden power options for the cpu.


Now is this just for the 1000 series Ryzen or both? Bc high performance plan nets me lower performance in some gaming situations than balanced. And ryzen balanced is just garage for 2000 series afaik.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## pez

I need to test some new-to-me Ryzen parts this weekend, so I bit the bullet on the 2700X. Hope to able to post some positive results by the end of this weekend.


----------



## rdr09

CJMitsuki said:


> Sure, I have him beat ill post here in a sec.


I saw it. You almost touched the TR.


----------



## Velheibgnar

@CJMitsuki thanks for the info about hidden stuff in power plans... I'm not a "windows main". Prefer penguins. 
Btw. you have the same CPU, MOBO and RAM, what are your FAN settings and how it acts in full IDLE when it speeds up and down? 
Yep, I noticed your cooling solution, mine is stock kek, but still I'm curious as I want to change to Noctua but not witness speed ups/downs that will kill my mental stability. What Boost option do you use? For me, I turned it off to avoid crazy fan . Need to find some manual on how those levels work.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

Guys what you think about this screenie and ram kit????
i havent test hci yet on it, just receive today and im quick testing this kit but it did booted and i havent find yet weird behaviors around os or ram corruption YET...



Spoiler



theres a shocker this kit have hynix chips on it....!!!!


----------



## sblantipodi

is there someone who use Android Studio here?
I have heard that until recently Ryzen had some problems with the hardware acceleration and the AVDs from Android Studio.

Is there someone who has experience with this problem?
Is now all solved completely?
Do you still need HyperV to overcome the problem?

Thanks


----------



## CJMitsuki

Velheibgnar said:


> @CJMitsuki thanks for the info about hidden stuff in power plans... I'm not a "windows main". Prefer penguins.
> Btw. you have the same CPU, MOBO and RAM, what are your FAN settings and how it acts in full IDLE when it speeds up and down?
> Yep, I noticed your cooling solution, mine is stock kek, but still I'm curious as I want to change to Noctua but not witness speed ups/downs that will kill my mental stability. What Boost option do you use? For me, I turned it off to avoid crazy fan . Need to find some manual on how those levels work.


if you are having problems with your fans speeding up and slowing down quickly all the time you probably should use the "fan smoothing" option. I use 2.6 sec so it doesnt ramp up to the set rpms too fast. they really need more steps in the fan curve. 3 isnt near enough for a good custom curve. if its still a problem after that you can increase the fan smoothing or set that step a bit higher in temperature so the fan doesnt speed up and slow down as much. So it isnt necessarily your fan that is the problem, more likely Asus not giving enough steps for the fan curve. Noctua is the only fan I will use anymore, they really are the best and they arent really expensive and they are well built. You can tell that just holding one, nice and solid with no vibration and can go as fast or slow as you want. I like their 200mm and the 140mm industrial fans since they can hit 3000rpm if i ever wanted them to. Not that i do but they have to be more rugged to handle those rpms and bearing is more durable. i have 4 on my 280mm radiator in Push/Pull and one exhaust in the back and 2 exhaust up top. My fans run on PWM mode with no turbo and fan smoothing at 2.6 sec. i think I have them set to 35, 50, and 65 for temps and 30, 50, and 75 on the duty cycle but i rarely hit the 3rd duty cycle which is 2000 rpm. My "Pull" fans are controlled by Corsair link and set to use the coolant temps for their trigger and a custom curve is set within that app. Im also about to use a tiny case fan and attach to the ram for more direct air on those since one stick is always 2c hotter than the other since 1 stick blocks the air flow to the other.



zGunBLADEz said:


> Guys what you think about this screenie and ram kit????
> i havent test hci yet on it, just receive today and im quick testing this kit but it did booted and i havent find yet weird behaviors around os or ram corruption YET...
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> theres a shocker this kit have hynix chips on it....!!!!


The numbers look decent in Aida64 but that doesnt determine performance of the ram. Aida64 can never tell you anything about ram performance, those numbers are more for showing possibility of performance. Ram timings, settings, and of course most importantly memory errors will determing if it is a good setup. Just getting that frequency booting with Hynix chips show promise though so keep at it. Id say they will probably will be a good set once they are optimized.


----------



## R1amddude

Update : got my 4200 mhz with my 2700 at 1.41 voltage. Ram is amazing now with 3533 @ 14-14-14-14 1.43 voltage using a G skill 4133 mhz cl17 kit ( got it when I got the 1700 last year ). So far its game stable, will be pushing the cpu more soon to try for 4.3. I love this chip, this is what ryzen should have been at launch. Using an Asus crosshair Hero VI.


----------



## minal

CJMitsuki said:


> they really need more steps in the fan curve. 3 isnt near enough for a good custom curve.


 Damn right. Any chance Asus will add more steps in a BIOS upgrade? That would be really helpful.

I'm quite happy with the Noctua NH-D15 SE-AM4 cpu cooler. I got it mainly for silence. I have the cpu fan (NF-A15) curve set to (60C, 28%), (67C, 37%), (75C, 80%), along with using the low noise adapter. The cpu can get warmer thus sacrificing 100-200 MHz at the top end, but it's imperceptible at low/medium loads, and very quiet at many real world full loads. Noise at synthetic full loads is still unobtrusive.

An NF-A15 doesn't fit in the front fan position of the ND15 in my Define C, so I got a 120mm NF-A12x25PWM. This fan is like magic; it spins faster, seems to cool better, and is quieter. I have the fan curve for it set to (55C, 40%), (65C, 50%), (75C, 80%) again with the LNA. 

Overall it is possible to make a 2700X build completely inaudible at idle and low loads. Most people don't even realize my computer is turned on.


----------



## R1amddude

Update : ram was unstable, had to back down to 3466 cl 14 1.4 voltage. Highest game stable oc I can get is 4225 mhz at 1.43 voltage, couldent get any higher, and dont want to push vcore any higher than that. max temp is 69c, so I think ill keep this as my gaming setup. If im doing web browsing and taking a break from games ill just go back to 3900 mhz 1.29 voltage. What a great gaming cpu for the $$$ this has turned out to be. Great chip imo.


----------



## rdr09

R1amddude said:


> Update : ram was unstable, had to back down to 3466 cl 14 1.4 voltage. Highest game stable oc I can get is 4225 mhz at 1.43 voltage, couldent get any higher, and dont want to push vcore any higher than that. max temp is 69c, so I think ill keep this as my gaming setup. If im doing web browsing and taking a break from games ill just go back to 3900 mhz 1.29 voltage. What a great gaming cpu for the $$$ this has turned out to be. Great chip imo.



I read others use Ryzen Master to switch OC profiles on the fly. I think 3466 is now the ideal speed at CL14. But, of course, if you can get faster ram, guess it really helps with infinity fab.


----------



## CJMitsuki

rdr09 said:


> I read others use Ryzen Master to switch OC profiles on the fly. I think 3466 is now the ideal speed at CL14. But, of course, if you can get faster ram, guess it really helps with infinity fab.


3466 is nice and there isnt a huge gain at 3533 or 3600 over 3466 but it is more noticeable at high cpu frequencies and compiling benchmarks. In gaming? Youll never see the difference as well as everyday use.


----------



## pez

2700X got in today. Set the Performance Enhancer on this board to Level 4 (Performance Enhancer = PBO from what little research I've done) and the CPU is auto-boosting while playing Fortnite to 4.3-4.35GHz. I've noticed the Vcore is getting up to 1.45, but temps so far weren't surpassing 52C in game. RAM even seems to be happy at 3600CL16, but it could probably do for some more fine tuning.

I have to say I'm extremely pleased to be getting another 500MHz than what my 1700 was giving me. I may try to shoot for 4.4 and fine tune the voltage and LLC a bit, but I'll be happy to get 4.3 at a lower vcore than 1.45.


----------



## rdr09

pez said:


> 2700X got in today. Set the Performance Enhancer on this board to Level 4 (Performance Enhancer = PBO from what little research I've done) and the CPU is auto-boosting while playing Fortnite to 4.3-4.35GHz. I've noticed the Vcore is getting up to 1.45, but temps so far weren't surpassing 52C in game. RAM even seems to be happy at 3600CL16, but it could probably do for some more fine tuning.
> 
> I have to say I'm extremely pleased to be getting another 500MHz than what my 1700 was giving me. I may try to shoot for 4.4 and fine tune the voltage and LLC a bit, but I'll be happy to get 4.3 at a lower vcore than 1.45.



Fortnite? My machine for that is a Phenom Quad core with a GTX 1050. lol. My Ryzen is for PUBG. Actually, Forenite looks cool with a 55 or so 4K and PS4.


----------



## pez

Yeah it's far from a demanding title on the CPU, but was just the quickest thing I could load up that has meaningful performance ATM. I'm currently doing some Aida64 testing to ensure stability. That setting isn't stable once I updated to the latest Aida version, but I'm thinking it may be a RAM stability. 

Is 3600 still flaky? I'm thinking 3466 at CL14 or CL15 may be more likely here, but looking for some opinions. My 3200 RAM ran great at CL14, so I didn't really try to tweak it much beyond that.


----------



## nick name

pez said:


> 2700X got in today. Set the Performance Enhancer on this board to Level 4 (Performance Enhancer = PBO from what little research I've done) and the CPU is auto-boosting while playing Fortnite to 4.3-4.35GHz. I've noticed the Vcore is getting up to 1.45, but temps so far weren't surpassing 52C in game. RAM even seems to be happy at 3600CL16, but it could probably do for some more fine tuning.
> 
> I have to say I'm extremely pleased to be getting another 500MHz than what my 1700 was giving me. I may try to shoot for 4.4 and fine tune the voltage and LLC a bit, but I'll be happy to get 4.3 at a lower vcore than 1.45.


You can try increasing the BCLK if you have a Crosshair VII or another motherboard that can do it.


----------



## rdr09

pez said:


> Yeah it's far from a demanding title on the CPU, but was just the quickest thing I could load up that has meaningful performance ATM. I'm currently doing some Aida64 testing to ensure stability. That setting isn't stable once I updated to the latest Aida version, but I'm thinking it may be a RAM stability.
> 
> Is 3600 still flaky? I'm thinking 3466 at CL14 or CL15 may be more likely here, but looking for some opinions. My 3200 RAM ran great at CL14, so I didn't really try to tweak it much beyond that.


DOCP should work with 3200. But anything higher, you'll need two tools. The Thaiphoon RAM reader and the Ryzen DRAM Calculator created by 1usmus. You use the former to input stuff in the RDC. RDC will show you suggested inputs for the BIOS.


https://www.overclock.net/forum/13-...lator-1-1-0-beta-2-overclocking-dram-am4.html

http://www.softnology.biz/files.html

EDIT: You got to use these at your own risk, though. Turn off other apps like HWINFO before use.


----------



## pez

rdr09 said:


> DOCP should work with 3200. But anything higher, you'll need two tools. The Thaiphoon RAM reader and the Ryzen DRAM Calculator created by 1usmus. You use the former to input stuff in the RDC. RDC will show you suggested inputs for the BIOS.
> 
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/13-...lator-1-1-0-beta-2-overclocking-dram-am4.html
> 
> http://www.softnology.biz/files.html
> 
> EDIT: You got to use these at your own risk, though. Turn off other apps like HWINFO before use.


Strangely DOCP only picks up 3600 and not the several that showed up before with my 3200 RAM. I was hoping for an easy out that way to try 3466, but I don’t mind the extra leg work. 

I’ll check out those two tools and see what I can muster up today. Just curious since I don’t use HWInfo, but what issues does it cause? The only thing I’ve been using since I know it’s accurate is Ryzen Master, but I do normally have CoreTemp running for toolbar temps. Any recommended monitoring to use besides Ryzen Master?


----------



## rdr09

pez said:


> Strangely DOCP only picks up 3600 and not the several that showed up before with my 3200 RAM. I was hoping for an easy out that way to try 3466, but I don’t mind the extra leg work.
> 
> I’ll check out those two tools and see what I can muster up today. Just curious since I don’t use HWInfo, but what issues does it cause? The only thing I’ve been using since I know it’s accurate is Ryzen Master, but I do normally have CoreTemp running for toolbar temps. Any recommended monitoring to use besides Ryzen Master?


Thaiphoon might conflict with other apps that reads the same thing. Just Disable the rest to be on the safe side.


----------



## nick name

pez said:


> Strangely DOCP only picks up 3600 and not the several that showed up before with my 3200 RAM. I was hoping for an easy out that way to try 3466, but I don’t mind the extra leg work.
> 
> I’ll check out those two tools and see what I can muster up today. Just curious since I don’t use HWInfo, but what issues does it cause? The only thing I’ve been using since I know it’s accurate is Ryzen Master, but I do normally have CoreTemp running for toolbar temps. Any recommended monitoring to use besides Ryzen Master?


I think most RAM kits only have one DOCP/XMP profile so anything that isn't that profile or the standard 2133MHz JEDEC profile you will have to input values yourself. You can start with inputting the primary timings and leaving the rest on Auto to see what your motherboard does and then adjusting from there. 

And I think they were saying to close HWiNFO or other monitoring tools while using Thaiphoon Burner to prevent any conflicts and not so much to avoid using HWiNFO. I, personally, never had an issue using Thaiphoon Burner with HWiNFO running.


----------



## pez

nick name said:


> I think most RAM kits only have one DOCP/XMP profile so anything that isn't that profile or the standard 2133MHz JEDEC profile you will have to input values yourself. You can start with inputting the primary timings and leaving the rest on Auto to see what your motherboard does and then adjusting from there.
> 
> And I think they were saying to close HWiNFO or other monitoring tools while using Thaiphoon Burner to prevent any conflicts and not so much to avoid using HWiNFO. I, personally, never had an issue using Thaiphoon Burner with HWiNFO running.


Good to know and thanks for the additional input. 

If what I’m assuming is correct and my system will be stable at 4.3-4.35 with RAM at 3466 and tighter timings vs 4.15-4.2 with 3600, I’ll do some simple benchmarking to see which performs better and go for that. My thoughts is that 4.3 with tighter 3466 is going to be the winner, but I’ll have some fun with it. PB2 is making it hard to resist not just tuning the RAM and letting the CPU do its own thing.


----------



## sblantipodi

Hi guys, I want a good all rounder CPU and I am thinking in switching to Threadripper 2950X.
I will use it for VMs/developing and for gaming.

Since Threadripper as + or - the same performance of a Ryzen 7 while gaming I am here to ask to a bigger community how good this platform is.

Since I want a good all rounder CPU I'm not expecting best framerate in games, I tend to play GPU limited because I crank up the settings for quality over performance but this video made me worry:






It seems that Ryzen causes stuttering problems in some games...
Have you ever experienced stuttering problems in games?

It's sad to see that Battlefield V behave like this.


----------



## MNMadman

sblantipodi said:


> Hi guys, I want a good all rounder CPU and I am thinking in switching to Threadripper 2950X.
> I will use it for VMs/developing and for gaming.
> 
> Since Threadripper as + or - the same performance of a Ryzen 7 while gaming I am here to ask to a bigger community how good this platform is.
> 
> Since I want a good all rounder CPU I'm not expecting best framerate in games, I tend to play GPU limited because I crank up the settings for quality over performance but this video made me worry:
> 
> https://youtu.be/cAsyo8gIyys
> 
> It seems that Ryzen causes stuttering problems in some games...
> Have you ever experienced stuttering problems in games?
> 
> It's sad to see that Battlefield V behave like this.


Never had a stuttering problem with *Heatripper Threadkiller* (1950X + Titan Xp) or *Frankenstein's Monster* (2700X + Titan Xp). I have about 70 games that I've played with them both.


----------



## sblantipodi

MNMadman said:


> Never had a stuttering problem with *Heatripper Threadkiller* (1950X + Titan Xp) or *Frankenstein's Monster* (2700X + Titan Xp). I have about 70 games that I've played with them both.


have you tried Battlefield?
seems that many users have stuttering on that game.


----------



## rdr09

pez said:


> Good to know and thanks for the additional input.
> 
> If what I’m assuming is correct and my system will be stable at 4.3-4.35 with RAM at 3466 and tighter timings vs 4.15-4.2 with 3600, I’ll do some simple benchmarking to see which performs better and go for that. My thoughts is that 4.3 with tighter 3466 is going to be the winner, but I’ll have some fun with it. PB2 is making it hard to resist not just tuning the RAM and letting the CPU do its own thing.


Just to add to what nick mentioned, other apps might give you false rdgs in Thaiphoon and then enter those bad rdgs to RDC. Garbage in, garbage out. 

CPU oc, especially 100 or more MHz will still have the upper hand. Therefore, 4.3 and 3466 tight timing might give you better results.

Can you test with the RAM set at your motherboard's Load Optimized Default, too? Thank you.


----------



## MNMadman

sblantipodi said:


> have you tried Battlefield?
> seems that many users have stuttering on that game.


Nope. Never got into that series.


----------



## rdr09

sblantipodi said:


> have you tried Battlefield?
> seems that many users have stuttering on that game.


Found a couple of Vidz . . .











I saw one with RT enabled and that was bad.

To compare if you are interested . . .


----------



## pez

rdr09 said:


> Just to add to what nick mentioned, other apps might give you false rdgs in Thaiphoon and then enter those bad rdgs to RDC. Garbage in, garbage out.
> 
> CPU oc, especially 100 or more MHz will still have the upper hand. Therefore, 4.3 and 3466 tight timing might give you better results.
> 
> Can you test with the RAM set at your motherboard's Load Optimized Default, too? Thank you.


In one of my stability lockups, my RAM actually got reset to 2133CL16, so I’m currently running AIDA64 to ensure it’ll pass at least 30 minutes of that. I’m open to test out some more stuff as well if you have any recommendations. 4.3GHz at 1.375v (Ryzen Master is reading it as 1.38125v) and AIDA is happy now after about 9 minutes. I’m going to go to 4.4GHz after a 30 minute pass here, but I have a feeling it’s going to take much more voltage to stabilize. I don’t plan on running anymore than 1.4v daily, so what is stable at that vcore is what I will keep it at. Then I can focus on the RAM. 

I know AIDA isn’t the end all be all, but so far it’s pointed out instabilities for this CPU/system in less than 3 minutes each time.


----------



## tekjunkie28

sblantipodi said:


> have you tried Battlefield?
> seems that many users have stuttering on that game.


Played last night with my stock 2700x and 1070. On high settings I'm getting. 80-90 fps normally. Game runs amazingly smooth compared to the other bets I've seen. I have hear from several people with stutter but its probably drivers as I have no issue. My friend played last night on a 8700k and 1080ti system. It stuttered but I'm pretty sure he doesn't have the latest drivers. Hes not very tech savvy. He actually won this PC!

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## chroniclard

Had a few games of BFV, 2700X, 1440p, 1080 watercooled, ultra settings, hovered around 90 FPS and was very smooth. Did not notice any stutter or anything bad at all. 

Shame the game is awful.


----------



## MNMadman

sblantipodi said:


> have you tried Battlefield?
> seems that many users have stuttering on that game.


Update:

Decided to play the Beta. Downloaded the newest nVidia drivers first.

The game ran great at 1440p windowed borderless on *Frankenstein's Monster* with all Ultra/highest -- no stuttering or hitches in evidence.

I played for about half an hour, but I suck at it. Not sure I have the patience required to play it long-term.


----------



## sblantipodi

MNMadman said:


> Update:
> 
> Decided to play the Beta. Downloaded the newest nVidia drivers first.
> 
> The game ran great at 1440p windowed borderless on *Frankenstein's Monster* with all Ultra/highest -- no stuttering or hitches in evidence.
> 
> I played for about half an hour, but I suck at it. Not sure I have the patience required to play it long-term.


thanks for the feedback


----------



## nick name

sblantipodi said:


> Hi guys, I want a good all rounder CPU and I am thinking in switching to Threadripper 2950X.
> I will use it for VMs/developing and for gaming.
> 
> Since Threadripper as + or - the same performance of a Ryzen 7 while gaming I am here to ask to a bigger community how good this platform is.
> 
> Since I want a good all rounder CPU I'm not expecting best framerate in games, I tend to play GPU limited because I crank up the settings for quality over performance but this video made me worry:
> 
> -snip-
> 
> It seems that Ryzen causes stuttering problems in some games...
> Have you ever experienced stuttering problems in games?
> 
> It's sad to see that Battlefield V behave like this.


I've been playing the beta with a 2700X and a 1070 ti at 4k with no problems at all. I haven't checked fps, but it's playing at a rate that is high enough to be imperceptible.


----------



## CJMitsuki

pez said:


> In one of my stability lockups, my RAM actually got reset to 2133CL16, so I’m currently running AIDA64 to ensure it’ll pass at least 30 minutes of that. I’m open to test out some more stuff as well if you have any recommendations. 4.3GHz at 1.375v (Ryzen Master is reading it as 1.38125v) and AIDA is happy now after about 9 minutes. I’m going to go to 4.4GHz after a 30 minute pass here, but I have a feeling it’s going to take much more voltage to stabilize. I don’t plan on running anymore than 1.4v daily, so what is stable at that vcore is what I will keep it at. Then I can focus on the RAM.
> 
> I know AIDA isn’t the end all be all, but so far it’s pointed out instabilities for this CPU/system in less than 3 minutes each time.


I’d be surprised if you got 4.4ghz all Core stable below 1.45v. I’m betting it will need upwards of 1.48 to be stable in an intensive stress test. You also need some really decent cooling once you get up around 1.45v. I can get 4.5ghz stable at 1.55v and 4.525ghz is about 1.58v. Those voltages are for something like HWBoT h265 @ 4K render which is pretty damn intensive. For Cinebench and other benches it could be a little lower. If you get 4.4ghz all Core prime95 stable below 1.45v then you have a decent cpu :thumb:


----------



## Minotaurtoo

I'm just going to leave this here....dang rumors


----------



## Cyanold

*High Latency with 2700x*

Hi all,

Could some one have a look at my latency test result (https://imgur.com/NP8h3BV). I am seeing some strange results from In depth latency result during the course of troubleshooting stuttering issues in Dota2. 

I think my question is: is this normal after 3 minutes of running the test. I have windows 10 power plan set at maximum performance while processor minimum set at 5%. Core voltage offset at -0.1V with PB2 on.

I have also tried to run HPET on and off and it seems when I force it on, it will get errors in Latencymon. The screenshot test was done without HPET and was confirmed from WinTimerTester.

Any inputs are welcome if you have came across this issue.

Regards


----------



## rdr09

Cyanold said:


> Hi all,
> 
> Could some one have a look at my latency test result (https://imgur.com/NP8h3BV). I am seeing some strange results from In depth latency result during the course of troubleshooting stuttering issues in Dota2.
> 
> I think my question is: is this normal after 3 minutes of running the test. I have windows 10 power plan set at maximum performance while processor minimum set at 5%. Core voltage offset at -0.1V with PB2 on.
> 
> I have also tried to run HPET on and off and it seems when I force it on, it will get errors in Latencymon. The screenshot test was done without HPET and was confirmed from WinTimerTester.
> 
> Any inputs are welcome if you have came across this issue.
> 
> Regards


I ran the in-dept test and, although i did not get those high numbers you got, they are pretty high still. See first pic. Not really sure what the limit is that can cause problems. Maybe your numbers you got. Settings using Windows power plan is balanced with Min Proccessor set at 25%.

I suggest to run the other test (see pic2). Mine failed the first time after 6 mins when Minimum Processor State was set at 25%. Brought it back up to 100. Issue gone. But i will put it back to 25% since im not experiencing any problems in any of the games i play. I don't play Dota.

EDIT: I suggest you save a profile of your OC (if any), then Load Optimized Default in BIOS and run the tests again. Might be an unstable OC.

EDIT 2: I turned SMT off and ran the test. Pls see Pic 3. It seems it did not even read it. Similar thing happened to my i7 2700K. Rdgs were low with HT off like 7.0 across all cores. With HT on, around 130-140 across the cores and threads. 

EDIT3: Last Pic is my i7 2700K for comparison.


You definitely have a problem to solve in your system. Some hardware or software is kicking up the rdgs.


----------



## os2wiz

pez said:


> Good to know and thanks for the additional input.
> 
> If what I’m assuming is correct and my system will be stable at 4.3-4.35 with RAM at 3466 and tighter timings vs 4.15-4.2 with 3600, I’ll do some simple benchmarking to see which performs better and go for that. My thoughts is that 4.3 with tighter 3466 is going to be the winner, but I’ll have some fun with it. PB2 is making it hard to resist not just tuning the RAM and letting the CPU do its own thing.


 That is a pretty big assumption. Stability at 4.3 GHZ is a bit iffy at best. Stability at 4.35 GHZ is rare. You would need a golden chip in my opinion. My limit for stability based on trial and error is 4.25 to 4.275 GHZ. Voltages start getting to the degradation level above 4.25 GHZ for most users. I am speaking of using 4.275 or 4.3 GHZ over a period of over 6 months, I believe the voltages required would lead to chip degradation. Ryzen 2 chips are more voltage sensitive than the original Ryzeb chips. It may have something to due with the 12nm process, not sure.


----------



## Cyanold

rdr09 said:


> I ran the in-dept test and, although i did not get those high numbers you got, they are pretty high still. See first pic. Not really sure what the limit is that can cause problems. Maybe your numbers you got. Settings using Windows power plan is balanced with Min Proccessor set at 25%.
> 
> I suggest to run the other test (see pic2). Mine failed the first time after 6 mins when Minimum Processor State was set at 25%. Brought it back up to 100. Issue gone. But i will put it back to 25% since im not experiencing any problems in any of the games i play. I don't play Dota.
> 
> EDIT: I suggest you save a profile of your OC (if any), then Load Optimized Default in BIOS and run the tests again. Might be an unstable OC.
> 
> EDIT 2: I turned SMT off and ran the test. Pls see Pic 3. It seems it did not even read it. Similar thing happened to my i7 2700K. Rdgs were low with HT off like 7.0 across all cores. With HT on, around 130-140 across the cores and threads.
> 
> EDIT3: Last Pic is my i7 2700K for comparison.
> 
> 
> You definitely have a problem to solve in your system. Some hardware or software is kicking up the rdgs.


Technically I haven't manipulated or run manual overclock on my CPU, the only thing that i turned on is my PB2 and voltage offset -0.1V. But this stutter problem in Dota2 was always there.
I run the Latencymon no issues as per below. Only time i had issue was when i force HPET on in Win10.
What is rdgs?


----------



## rdr09

Cyanold said:


> Technically I haven't manipulated or run manual overclock on my CPU, the only thing that i turned on is my PB2 and voltage offset -0.1V. But this stutter problem in Dota2 was always there.
> I run the Latencymon no issues as per below. Only time i had issue was when i force HPET on in Win10.
> What is rdgs?



Sorry - rdgs (readings). I try to link a tool to make sure hpet is on or off but it does not work anymore.

EDIT: Well, went to check Task Manager and see what services can be disabled/stopped that i deem not needed like Touchpad services and two others. Ran the in-dept test and seems to help lower the latency.

I recommend you to do the same. Make sure you take a note of what you disable. Some may require you to go to properties to disable the service.


----------



## rdr09

So, the leaked Cinebench 15 multi-core cpu score of the new i9 9900K is 2166. Not sure if that is optimized. Prolly will be higher at same 5GHz oc once it gets into the hands of a member of OCN. Anyway, i've seen a member's 2700X scored 2100 at 4.5 GHz.


----------



## Johan45

At the same clock, Ryzen beats Intel in CB 11 and 15 everytime. SMT is much more efficient that HT which gives Ryzen the edge.
I think that member may have been me


----------



## rdr09

Johan45 said:


> At the same clock, Ryzen beats Intel in CB 11 and 15 everytime. SMT is much more efficient that HT which gives Ryzen the edge.
> I think that member may have been me


Nice. Did not even know you own an R7. Actually, it was CJMitsuki's 2700X that I saw. 

I became a fan of Hyperthreading when they finally fix the issue in BF3 stuttering using HT. Without HT, my Sandy was bottlenecking in that game.


BTW, when I disable SMT in my 2700, it does not boost to 4100MHz at stock.


----------



## chispy

Well my Ryzen 2700x scores exactly the same as this Intel cpu 9900k , 2166 points at 4.6Ghz Ryzen 2700x / versus Intel 9900k at 5.0Ghz - http://hwbot.org/submission/3935111_


----------



## CJMitsuki

Johan45 said:


> At the same clock, Ryzen beats Intel in CB 11 and 15 everytime. SMT is much more efficient that HT which gives Ryzen the edge.
> I think that member may have been me


Idk Johan, Couldve been me too


----------



## Cyanold

chispy said:


> Well my Ryzen 2700x scores exactly the same as this Intel cpu 9900k , 2166 points at 4.6Ghz Ryzen 2700x / versus Intel 9900k at 5.0Ghz - http://hwbot.org/submission/3935111_


It seems you have golden CPU and Memory. What cooling solution are you using. Would you mind sharing your ram checker with me wondering what I can do to tight my ram subtiming further down.


----------



## rdr09

chispy said:


> Well my Ryzen 2700x scores exactly the same as this Intel cpu 9900k , 2166 points at 4.6Ghz Ryzen 2700x / versus Intel 9900k at 5.0Ghz - http://hwbot.org/submission/3935111_


lol. You surely ruffled some feathers in another thread. 


I understand you are not the 'average' oc'er and thus can achieve such high oc. But for the rest of us that can only achieve 4GHz with our stock coolers should be just as delighted.


At 4GHz on my 2700 i get 1850 in C15 and that's like 15% less than both those cpus. Using the stock cooler from a R5 1600, though.


It's just C15 benchmark but as Johan stated . . . really shows the difference between SMT and HT.


----------



## mtrai

rdr09 said:


> lol. You surely ruffled some feathers in another thread.
> 
> 
> I understand you are not the 'average' oc'er and thus can achieve such high oc. But for the rest of us that can only achieve 4GHz with our stock coolers should be just as delighted.
> 
> 
> At 4GHz on my 2700 i get 1850 in C15 and that's like 15% less than both those cpus. Using the stock cooler from a R5 1600, though.
> 
> 
> It's just C15 benchmark but as Johan stated . . . really shows the difference between SMT and HT.


I am not really sure why he would be ruffling feathers...it is what it is. I am not extreme overclocker and only use Corsair H110i GT AIO for my 2700X and was getting 2000+ generally around 2020 to 2045. 2045 was my highest at around 4350 on the CPU with my ram at 3600.

Just one example on my 2700X https://imgur.com/kk4hKAl

I also got 2005 on my 1700X

Now if you mean certain fainbois...lol...then bring it on.

My Vega 64 is in 1080 and 1080 TI territories as well depending...what I mean it is trade blows, some places it does better and some places it does worse. It is air cooled with LC bios flashed. Powercolor Red Devil Vega 64. IF mine was actually liquid cooled it would be crushing even the 1080TI across the board as my card wants to even boost above 1800 but crashes since I do not give it the voltage due to temps and I just do not have the money to shell out for LC for it for a while.


----------



## GrimDoctor

Hi guys. Im brand new to using an AMD CPU and I've been playing around with overclocking it. I have the 2700X and so far I've managed 4150MHz @ 1.400V stable across stress testing, gaming and productivity use.

Is this about par for one of these? I don't really need any more performance to be honest. I'm running an AIO due to case size requirements otherwise I would have used the stock cooler.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

GrimDoctor said:


> Hi guys. Im brand new to using an AMD CPU and I've been playing around with overclocking it. I have the 2700X and so far I've managed 4150MHz @ 1.400V stable across stress testing, gaming and productivity use.
> 
> Is this about par for one of these? I don't really need any more performance to be honest. I'm running an AIO due to case size requirements otherwise I would have used the stock cooler.





depends on your board a bit too as far as overclocking goes... my poor b350 is just not up to the task, but it'll manage 4.2 ghz around 1.4v ... but I have a better cooler than you so that does make a difference too.... that being said, I've seen some here that could hold that clock speed with around 1.3v on x470 boards


----------



## GrimDoctor

Minotaurtoo said:


> GrimDoctor said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hi guys. Im brand new to using an AMD CPU and I've been playing around with overclocking it. I have the 2700X and so far I've managed 4150MHz @ 1.400V stable across stress testing, gaming and productivity use.
> 
> Is this about par for one of these? I don't really need any more performance to be honest. I'm running an AIO due to case size requirements otherwise I would have used the stock cooler.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> depends on your board a bit too as far as overclocking goes... my poor b350 is just not up to the task, but it'll manage 4.2 ghz around 1.4v ... but I have a better cooler than you so that does make a difference too.... that being said, I've seen some here that could hold that clock speed with around 1.3v on x470 boards
Click to expand...

I'm using the Asus ROG B450i motherboard and CM Master Liquid ML120R but with Noctua NF-F12 fans.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

GrimDoctor said:


> I'm using the Asus ROG B450i motherboard and CM Master Liquid ML120R but with Noctua NF-F12 fans.


don't really know that much about either that board or cooler, but I would suspect that the overclocking is a bit limited since it's a b450... maybe someone else will come along that can say for sure... anyway, I do know that with good x470's that I've seen on here 4.2ghz around 1.3 -1.4v is pretty normal...


----------



## tekjunkie28

chispy said:


> Well my Ryzen 2700x scores exactly the same as this Intel cpu 9900k , 2166 points at 4.6Ghz Ryzen 2700x / versus Intel 9900k at 5.0Ghz - http://hwbot.org/submission/3935111_


The leaked 9700k benchmarks are lackluster. I was really seriously thinking about upgrading to it from my 2700x and give that to my wife but I guess I'll hang onto it longer and use that opportunity to upgrade my GPU or get a better 144hz monitor. My monitor is great but it's the Dell s2716dg or whatever. Color can be bad at times depending on if the game let's me use a ICC profile.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## tekjunkie28

GrimDoctor said:


> Hi guys. Im brand new to using an AMD CPU and I've been playing around with overclocking it. I have the 2700X and so far I've managed 4150MHz @ 1.400V stable across stress testing, gaming and productivity use.
> 
> Is this about par for one of these? I don't really need any more performance to be honest. I'm running an AIO due to case size requirements otherwise I would have used the stock cooler.


What motherboard do you have? I have had much better results just using performance enhancer or PBO.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## pez

CJMitsuki said:


> I’d be surprised if you got 4.4ghz all Core stable below 1.45v. I’m betting it will need upwards of 1.48 to be stable in an intensive stress test. You also need some really decent cooling once you get up around 1.45v. I can get 4.5ghz stable at 1.55v and 4.525ghz is about 1.58v. Those voltages are for something like HWBoT h265 @ 4K render which is pretty damn intensive. For Cinebench and other benches it could be a little lower. If you get 4.4ghz all Core prime95 stable below 1.45v then you have a decent cpu :thumb:





os2wiz said:


> That is a pretty big assumption. Stability at 4.3 GHZ is a bit iffy at best. Stability at 4.35 GHZ is rare. You would need a golden chip in my opinion. My limit for stability based on trial and error is 4.25 to 4.275 GHZ. Voltages start getting to the degradation level above 4.25 GHZ for most users. I am speaking of using 4.275 or 4.3 GHZ over a period of over 6 months, I believe the voltages required would lead to chip degradation. Ryzen 2 chips are more voltage sensitive than the original Ryzeb chips. It may have something to due with the 12nm process, not sure.


You guys were most certainly right. Me assuming made a bit butt out of me . I was doing some game testing at the end of last weekend and earlier this past week, but our lovely hurricane (now tropical storm) has made the power inconsistent enough around here that I haven't had the time nor confidence to continue my OC'ing. 

That being said, I had enough time to realize that 4.3GHz wasn't stable at 1.45v or lower. Temps under real world tests weren't bad with it, but to put in perspective, 4.2GHz all-core OC is stable at 1.4v flat and I'm seeing better temps (obviously) there. That being said, I'm certainly happy with a 4.2GHz OC considering my 1700 wouldn't budge much past 3.8GHz. 

I still want to do some testing between this OC with different RAM speeds, and then once I do, dial in the vcore a bit better to see what the lowest I can do that plays nicely and doesn't cause any lockups or crashes. 'Preciate all of your guys' help so far and sorry it's taken me so long to respond and acknowledge that.


----------



## noobee

Power consumption for Ryzens - particularly, 2700X, is a lot more than comparative Intel Coffee Lake chips, e.g. i7-8700K - temps are similar - I wonder if temps improve with the i7-8700K, if you delid? If I'm building an itx system, is that a concern? Also, some reports of issues when using Linux - segfaults etc.

So?


----------



## noobee

Johan45 said:


> At the same clock, Ryzen beats Intel in CB 11 and 15 everytime. SMT is much more efficient that HT which gives Ryzen the edge.
> I think that member may have been me


Which Intel?



chispy said:


> Well my Ryzen 2700x scores exactly the same as this Intel cpu 9900k , 2166 points at 4.6Ghz Ryzen 2700x / versus Intel 9900k at 5.0Ghz - http://hwbot.org/submission/3935111_


The i9-9900K is not even released yet and the leaks show the new CL chip beating the 2700X.


----------



## noobee

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/core-i9-9900k-vs-ryzen-7-2700x,37795.html

https://wccftech.com/intel-core-i9-9900k-cinebench-5-ghz-performance-benchmark-leak/

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel...multi-core-performance-at-5-GHz.331616.0.html

https://www.hardocp.com/news/2018/09/14/intel_core_i99900k_5ghz_tested_cinebench_r15

What were you saying again?


----------



## mtrai

@noobee I am gonna guess your are the same person trying to stir up issues here as on guru3d and teckpowerup.

Let me just end this right here with a few HWBOT screenshots from this summers competition with Ryzen 2700X http://oc-esports.io/#!/round/roadtopro_challenger_season4_division4_round2 The 5th score is the Cinebench r15 part of the competition.

Best score was 2600 in Cinebench r15 
https://d1ebmxcfh8bf9c.cloudfront.net/u7189/image_id_2036756.png

Mine at just a measly 2045
https://d1ebmxcfh8bf9c.cloudfront.net/u117888/image_id_2031878.jpeg
http://hwbot.org/submission/3879143

Another user here @CJMitsuki score at 2102
https://d1ebmxcfh8bf9c.cloudfront.net/u275304/image_id_2043180.png

Me and @CJMitsuki were only in mid pack in Cinebench scores.

another one for giggles:
score 2179 
https://d1ebmxcfh8bf9c.cloudfront.net/u5933/image_id_2020068.jpeg

Anyhow...I will say it again...first we need to know if this was post or pre spectre and meltdown all patches...and so on.

Just based on what I am showing it is not beating the 2700X...just repeating something does not make it true.

@noobee So what were you saying again?


----------



## MNMadman

noobee said:


> Which Intel?
> 
> The i9-9900K is not even released yet and the leaks show the new CL chip beating the 2700X.


But no results at the same clocks, or even close to the same clocks. Those results are from a 5.0GHz all-core overclock on the 9900K.

Chispy was saying his *4.654GHz* 2700X and the other guy's 5.0GHz 9900K scored the same (2166), and Chispy posted his HWBot results.

By the way, all of your links are referencing the same overclocker's results -- you really only needed to post one link.


----------



## GrimDoctor

Asus ROG B450i Gaming


tekjunkie28 said:


> What motherboard do you have? I have had much better results just using performance enhancer or PBO.
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


Sent from my SM-N920I using Tapatalk


----------



## noobee

MNMadman said:


> But no results at the same clocks, or even close to the same clocks. Those results are from a 5.0GHz all-core overclock on the 9900K.
> 
> Chispy was saying his *4.654GHz* 2700X and the other guy's 5.0GHz 9900K scored the same (2166), and Chispy posted his HWBot results.
> 
> By the way, all of your links are referencing the same overclocker's results -- you really only needed to post one link.


All the links show that the i9-9900K is faster - that's my point. 

But, I'm not going to respond to these insults any longer - thrown my way for no good reason. I am not on any other forums 'causing any trouble.' I am just offering up those links and reports - of course, more tests will be done once the Intel chip is actually released. 

I have no horse in the race, btw, as I am still deciding on which chip to get. I probably would have bought the 2700X already but I'm trying to get a used chip and I don't know the seller and the sale is not local so it would cost $$ to travel there and is a risk if I have it shipped. 

The only concern I have with Ryzen chips (imho) is the power consumption - which is more than comparative Coffee Lake ones. 

Other than that, if it's likely to get good performance (like claimed), then that's great. I like to get good news.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

noobee said:


> All the links show that the i9-9900K is faster - that's my point.
> 
> But, I'm not going to respond to these insults any longer - thrown my way for no good reason. I am not on any other forums 'causing any trouble.' I am just offering up those links and reports - of course, more tests will be done once the Intel chip is actually released.
> 
> I have no horse in the race, btw, as I am still deciding on which chip to get. I probably would have bought the 2700X already but I'm trying to get a used chip and I don't know the seller and the sale is not local so it would cost $$ to travel there and is a risk if I have it shipped.
> 
> The only concern I have with Ryzen chips (imho) is the power consumption - which is more than comparative Coffee Lake ones.
> 
> Other than that, if it's likely to get good performance (like claimed), then that's great. I like to get good news.


 not sure where you are getting your power consumption numbers from... but from what I've seen its the other way round... performance per watt seems better on Ryzen. For instance at stock my 2700x pulls about 120 watts and scores 1824 cb points and the scores I could find for stock 8700k were around 1250 cb points... assuming it only pulls the rated wattage of 95 watts that would be 13.16 points per watt where as the 2700x gets 15.2 points per watt 



and here all but the idle shows the 2700x being far more power efficient than the 8700k

https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-7-2700x-review,5571-12.html


----------



## noobee

Minotaurtoo said:


> not sure where you are getting your power consumption numbers from... but from what I've seen its the other way round... performance per watt seems better on Ryzen. For instance at stock my 2700x pulls about 120 watts and scores 1824 cb points and the scores I could find for stock 8700k were around 1250 cb points... assuming it only pulls the rated wattage of 95 watts that would be 13.16 points per watt where as the 2700x gets 15.2 points per watt
> 
> and here all but the idle shows the 2700x being far more power efficient than the 8700k
> 
> https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-7-2700x-review,5571-12.html


Honestly, I've found both - some sources with 2700X being more power hungry and others with the opposite. 

Not sure which to believe. I think it you really research it, you will reach the same conclusion.


----------



## noobee

I thought you might not believe me so I found some sites:

https://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/amd-ryzen-7-2700x-review,7.html

https://www.vortez.net/articles_pages/amd_ryzen_2700x_review,7.html

https://www.pcper.com/reviews/Proce...ew-Zen-Matures/Power-Consumption-Overclocki-0

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Ryzen_7_2700X/18.html


----------



## minal

noobee said:


> Honestly, I've found both - some sources with 2700X being more power hungry and others with the opposite.





Minotaurtoo said:


> from what I've seen its the other way round... *performance per watt* seems better on Ryzen.





noobee said:


> I thought you might not believe me so I found some sites:
> 
> https://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/amd-ryzen-7-2700x-review,7.html
> 
> https://www.vortez.net/articles_pages/amd_ryzen_2700x_review,7.html
> 
> https://www.pcper.com/reviews/Proce...ew-Zen-Matures/Power-Consumption-Overclocki-0
> 
> https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Ryzen_7_2700X/18.html


Those are full system power draw. Are you concerned about total power draw, or efficiency?


----------



## tekjunkie28

noobee said:


> Power consumption for Ryzens - particularly, 2700X, is a lot more than comparative Intel Coffee Lake chips, e.g. i7-8700K - temps are similar - I wonder if temps improve with the i7-8700K, if you delid? If I'm building an itx system, is that a concern? Also, some reports of issues when using Linux - segfaults etc.
> 
> So?


A delid on a 8700K will yeild up to 20 degrees lower then non delid. Pretty amazing but then again all my Intel chips ran into unsafe voltage territory before being temp limited. Cooling solution was a H100i v1.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## kd5151

Undervolt 2700X. Save the watts.


----------



## mtrai

tekjunkie28 said:


> A delid on a 8700K will yeild up to 20 degrees lower then non delid. Pretty amazing but then again all my Intel chips ran into unsafe voltage territory before being temp limited. Cooling solution was a H100i v1.
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


Wait so your saying I should have to void my warranty to get the best performance..cause they, INTEL chooses to use toothpaste? But yeah I delided my Skylake, was my only option THEN!!! But that was then and this is now...many options.


----------



## mtrai

noobee said:


> All the links show that the i9-9900K is faster - that's my point.
> 
> But, I'm not going to respond to these insults any longer - thrown my way for no good reason. I am not on any other forums 'causing any trouble.' I am just offering up those links and reports - of course, more tests will be done once the Intel chip is actually released.
> 
> I have no horse in the race, btw, as I am still deciding on which chip to get. I probably would have bought the 2700X already but I'm trying to get a used chip and I don't know the seller and the sale is not local so it would cost $$ to travel there and is a risk if I have it shipped.
> 
> The only concern I have with Ryzen chips (imho) is the power consumption - which is more than comparative Coffee Lake ones.
> 
> Other than that, if it's likely to get good performance (like claimed), then that's great. I like to get good news.


Please...you said you were not going to respond but yet you do? What gives? Please do not feed the person anymore. He still is not showing any facts...other then the same unverified leak in 4 different links which was click bait.

Nor does he actually respond to me or others showing proof to the contrary. So as the saying goes...please do not feed the trolls.

Now if you have an actual question please ask it.

I do not wade into these kind conversation lightly....as a long time member 2009 with only 600ish post should say a lot...with also looking at stuff I post.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

noobee said:


> I thought you might not believe me so I found some sites:
> 
> https://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/amd-ryzen-7-2700x-review,7.html
> 
> https://www.vortez.net/articles_pages/amd_ryzen_2700x_review,7.html
> 
> https://www.pcper.com/reviews/Proce...ew-Zen-Matures/Power-Consumption-Overclocki-0
> 
> https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Ryzen_7_2700X/18.html



seems to be some discrepancies from various reviewers...


----------



## rdr09

Minotaurtoo said:


> seems to be some discrepancies from various reviewers...



lol. Techpowerdown is only good for searching bioses.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Heres a real world look at power draws at high frequency. CB15 2085 score and looks like around 151 watts max. Not sure about 9900k but I can assure you that a 2700x at 5ghz the 9900k wouldnt stand a chance in comparison. All you have to do is look at HWBOT.org and see whay the 8700k has to run at to even get close to 2700x. Its quite ridiculous. Then you can imagine the 9900k will be a bit closer with power draws much higher but it will not beat a 2700x clock for clock.


Edit: Wattage seemed a bit low so I ran CB with lower priority.


----------



## Johan45

noobee said:


> All the links show that the i9-9900K is faster - that's my point.
> 
> But, I'm not going to respond to these insults any longer - thrown my way for no good reason. I am not on any other forums 'causing any trouble.' I am just offering up those links and reports - of course, more tests will be done once the Intel chip is actually released.
> 
> I have no horse in the race, btw, as I am still deciding on which chip to get. I probably would have bought the 2700X already but I'm trying to get a used chip and I don't know the seller and the sale is not local so it would cost $$ to travel there and is a risk if I have it shipped.
> 
> The only concern I have with Ryzen chips (imho) is the power consumption - which is more than comparative Coffee Lake ones.
> 
> Other than that, if it's likely to get good performance (like claimed), then that's great. I like to get good news.


With decent ambient cooling, the Intel is going to clock higher than the Ryzen that's where Intel has the advantage. If you compare them at the same speed, Ryzen is slightly behind Intel in IPC (no SMT) but AMD's implementation of SMT is more efficient in many scenarios than Intel's HT this is what gives AMD the advantage and enables it to score higher at the same clock speed. The Achilles of the Ryzen is max ambient OC tops out at 4.2 ish on average and the Intel is capable of 4.8-5.0 GHz. In the end, the Intel will pull ahead in most day to day tasks. If you're comparing TDP remember that is based on their base speed and doesn't include any turbo or boost functions.


----------



## Cyanold

Johan45 said:


> With decent ambient cooling, the Intel is going to clock higher than the Ryzen that's where Intel has the advantage. If you compare them at the same speed, Ryzen is slightly behind Intel in IPC (no SMT) but AMD's implementation of SMT is more efficient in many scenarios than Intel's HT this is what gives AMD the advantage and enables it to score higher at the same clock speed. The Achilles of the Ryzen is max ambient OC tops out at 4.2 ish on average and the Intel is capable of 4.8-5.0 GHz. In the end, the Intel will pull ahead in most day to day tasks. If you're comparing TDP remember that is based on their base speed and doesn't include any turbo or boost functions.


Add on to that, Intel platform is not as picky for RAM so potentially people can have $50 save.


----------



## rdr09

Cyanold said:


> Add on to that, Intel platform is not as picky for RAM so potentially people can have $50 save.


Did you back far enuf to find out it is a comparison between a 450$ and a 320$ cpus?


----------



## VPII

noobee said:


> Honestly, I've found both - some sources with 2700X being more power hungry and others with the opposite.
> 
> Not sure which to believe. I think it you really research it, you will reach the same conclusion.


noobee, I'll tell you this. Soon after AMD's Phenom 2 I decided, well it is time for Intel. It was great and overclocking was a breeze. I used several Intel processors from Sandy Bridge to Haswell E. After my second 5930K failed it was about the same time AMD released Ryzen and I decided to get AMD Ryzen 1700. It was incredible finally getting a cpu you had to work with to get it overclocked. It is not that it cannot overclock but it is a little more selective with various settings as well as memory and the rewards is great. 

Below is my result on Hwbot with my 2700X running 4.928ghz for comparison.... yes Dry Ice but the speed is what I'm aiming at

http://hwbot.org/submission/3842626_vpii_cinebench___r15_ryzen_7_2700x_2253_cb

My best result when I finally manage to get the LN2 sorted and understood how to get the setup top run.

http://hwbot.org/submission/3900978_vpii_cinebench___r15_ryzen_7_2700x_2567_cb

I do not think for one second I'll go back. Having seen what AMD's new, not yet released 64 core server chip based on the 7nm Zen2 is doing, I'm happy where I am at present.


----------



## tekjunkie28

I game. I'm not some serious, head up my butt competitive gamer. Shoot I don't really even call myself a gamer, more of a techy. I bought my 2700x knowing that it was about 3-5%slower then a 8700k in gaming. What is interesting is that the more GPU demanding the title is the better the Ryzen performs and sometimes it even pulls a few fps higher then the 8700k at 1440p+ resolution. Yes there are 1 or 2 games that the 8700k blows the 2700x away but that's okay. Game developers need to optimize for AMD if possible and that's a good thing. I also bought into AMD because it's NOT Intel. We have been stuck with the same hardware for years because there was no competition. Before I upgraded to the 2700x it was 5 years since my last upgrade and quite frankly I didn't even need to upgrade. 

Now I'll be honest. The more I use my 2700x the more I enjoy it. In the beginning I felt like I had made a bad decision with all the issues I was having with performance and ram.. well let me just say that AMD does state that 2933mhz is the supported speed so anyone complaining really has no right bc I can easily hit that speed successfully ever stick of memory I try. Another point is that the 2700x really requires some research to get the most out of it. AMD has really revolutionized the way we should be building PCs. I enjoy the thoughts of a custom water cooling setup and what is so great is that Ryzen 2nd gen can actually take advantage of the extra work involved in it. 

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Minotaurtoo

tekjunkie28 said:


> I game. I'm not some serious, head up my butt competitive gamer. Shoot I don't really even call myself a gamer, more of a techy. I bought my 2700x knowing that it was about 3-5%slower then a 8700k in gaming. What is interesting is that the more GPU demanding the title is the better the Ryzen performs and sometimes it even pulls a few fps higher then the 8700k at 1440p+ resolution. Yes there are 1 or 2 games that the 8700k blows the 2700x away but that's okay. Game developers need to optimize for AMD if possible and that's a good thing. I also bought into AMD because it's NOT Intel. We have been stuck with the same hardware for years because there was no competition. Before I upgraded to the 2700x it was 5 years since my last upgrade and quite frankly I didn't even need to upgrade.
> 
> Now I'll be honest. The more I use my 2700x the more I enjoy it. In the beginning I felt like I had made a bad decision with all the issues I was having with performance and ram.. well let me just say that AMD does state that 2933mhz is the supported speed so anyone complaining really has no right bc I can easily hit that speed successfully ever stick of memory I try. A*nother point is that the 2700x really requires some research to get the most out of it.* AMD has really revolutionized the way we should be building PCs. I enjoy the thoughts of a custom water cooling setup and what is so great is that Ryzen 2nd gen can actually take advantage of the extra work involved in it.
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


I know right, I've managed to get the same performance out of cinebench at stock as I was getting at 4.1ghz just buy tinkering around in the bios... I bothered to get some flare x ram and used some tight timings on it and was truly impressed... I am still wondering if I can tighten the timings more... my board won't let me go over 3133mhz stable for nothing, but by twiddling with sub timings I've managed to get some serious boosts in games and such.... main timings are cas14, trcdwr14, trcded14, trp14, tras26, trc40 was thinking to trying to get to cas 12, but i've just reinstalled windows fresh and haven't gotten around to the timing calculator again yet.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Cyanold said:


> Add on to that, Intel platform is not as picky for RAM so potentially people can have $50 save.


I don’t disagree on anything Johan has said or this either. We are also comparing an architecture that is essentially still in its infancy and an architecture that is end of life. While Ryzen can only improve, Intel will need to develop a new architecture soon to stay competitive, and they will. I believe that Ryzen will be the forefront of driving processor technology forward. Intel has stagnated tech for far too long and it has been long overdue for that business tactic to be the two edged sword and bite Intel. They grew far too complacent and purposely held technology back instead of pushing innovation. We should be so much further right now but greed kept that in an idle state. Meanwhile, AMD wasn’t taken seriously with Ryzen. Probably their fault due to the steaming pile they conjured up before. However, Ryzen was a nice surprise and I believe we are going to see processor technology grow exponentially over the next 10 years unlike anything that has been seen before. Intel will have to come off with a massive chunk of that money they made by drip feeding their customers processors. I think they were legit caught off guard and it’s showing by them throwing the 9900k out there and after years of not soldering and lying about the benefits of it, they are now pretty much forced to solder and add cores to stay competitive. That’s only in a year and a half that Ryzen has been around. As I said, Intels architecture is past its golden years and they will have to make a successor while AMD doesn’t have that hurdle to overcome. They just have to focus on Ryzen and hopefully they can do something in the gpu side as well to drive Nvidia off of their monopoly. Either way, both Intel and AMD need to be good. We don’t ever want one to crush the other, that will only hurt us as the consumer. Where Intel was not long ago is where Nvidia is now. Dominating the market and forcing consumers into ridiculous prices bc we obviously want the fastest. I think Nvidia will get a wake up call as well with either Intel or AMD when either decide to quit playing around. Intel has the resources to do it and AMD is getting quite a bit of fuel from Ryzen going by how AMD stock has taken a massive leap in the past year. Can’t wait to see what things will be like in 5 years time. 
One thing I have been wondering is, will Intel still be able to keep a monolithic die in the coming years with core count growing? If they have to end up using multiple dies as I believe will be the case, how will they retain memory latency numbers and compatibility? I believe they will be forced away from the monolithic die with their next architecture, at least until dies shrink beyond 7nm. Unless they want cpus the size of a graham cracker that cost a ridiculous price. I mean more ridiculous than usual. They almost certainly will have to. Monolithic dies are great but they cost so much bc they are wasteful on the wafer. Meanwhile you can cut many smaller dies and utilize far more of the silicon with little waste comparatively. With them having to solder and develop new architecture and spending money left and right they will have to be more economical somewhere and it just makes sense that they will go that route. Ok, I’ve literally went off into my thoughts 😆 better get back to sorting these patch cords out in my little dungeon of a data closet.


----------



## tekjunkie28

CJMitsuki said:


> I don’t disagree on anything Johan has said or this either. We are also comparing an architecture that is essentially still in its infancy and an architecture that is end of life. While Ryzen can only improve, Intel will need to develop a new architecture soon to stay competitive, and they will. I believe that Ryzen will be the forefront of driving processor technology forward. Intel has stagnated tech for far too long and it has been long overdue for that business tactic to be the two edged sword and bite Intel. They grew far too complacent and purposely held technology back instead of pushing innovation. We should be so much further right now but greed kept that in an idle state. Meanwhile, AMD wasn’t taken seriously with Ryzen. Probably their fault due to the steaming pile they conjured up before. However, Ryzen was a nice surprise and I believe we are going to see processor technology grow exponentially over the next 10 years unlike anything that has been seen before. Intel will have to come off with a massive chunk of that money they made by drip feeding their customers processors. I think they were legit caught off guard and it’s showing by them throwing the 9900k out there and after years of not soldering and lying about the benefits of it, they are now pretty much forced to solder and add cores to stay competitive. That’s only in a year and a half that Ryzen has been around. As I said, Intels architecture is past its golden years and they will have to make a successor while AMD doesn’t have that hurdle to overcome. They just have to focus on Ryzen and hopefully they can do something in the gpu side as well to drive Nvidia off of their monopoly. Either way, both Intel and AMD need to be good. We don’t ever want one to crush the other, that will only hurt us as the consumer. Where Intel was not long ago is where Nvidia is now. Dominating the market and forcing consumers into ridiculous prices bc we obviously want the fastest. I think Nvidia will get a wake up call as well with either Intel or AMD when either decide to quit playing around. Intel has the resources to do it and AMD is getting quite a bit of fuel from Ryzen going by how AMD stock has taken a massive leap in the past year. Can’t wait to see what things will be like in 5 years time.
> One thing I have been wondering is, will Intel still be able to keep a monolithic die in the coming years with core count growing? If they have to end up using multiple dies as I believe will be the case, how will they retain memory latency numbers and compatibility? I believe they will be forced away from the monolithic die with their next architecture, at least until dies shrink beyond 7nm. Unless they want cpus the size of a graham cracker that cost a ridiculous price. I mean more ridiculous than usual. They almost certainly will have to. Monolithic dies are great but they cost so much bc they are wasteful on the wafer. Meanwhile you can cut many smaller dies and utilize far more of the silicon with little waste comparatively. With them having to solder and develop new architecture and spending money left and right they will have to be more economical somewhere and it just makes sense that they will go that route. Ok, I’ve literally went off into my thoughts ???? better get back to sorting these patch cords out in my little dungeon of a data closet.


I'm okay with AMD crushing Intel just enough to get their cash flow healthy and them able to truly be competitive for years and years to come. We haven't really seen competition or evolution of the PC industry for about 10 years. If we can keep making these strides we are now can really start to benefit from all this. I still think a personal PC will always have a place and it will become even more integrated with our lives. I'd like to have home automation be done through a PC and dumb devices rather then smart device. I enjoy the building and customizing also. 

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## tekjunkie28

CJMitsuki said:


> I don’t disagree on anything Johan has said or this either. We are also comparing an architecture that is essentially still in its infancy and an architecture that is end of life. While Ryzen can only improve, Intel will need to develop a new architecture soon to stay competitive, and they will. I believe that Ryzen will be the forefront of driving processor technology forward. Intel has stagnated tech for far too long and it has been long overdue for that business tactic to be the two edged sword and bite Intel. They grew far too complacent and purposely held technology back instead of pushing innovation. We should be so much further right now but greed kept that in an idle state. Meanwhile, AMD wasn’t taken seriously with Ryzen. Probably their fault due to the steaming pile they conjured up before. However, Ryzen was a nice surprise and I believe we are going to see processor technology grow exponentially over the next 10 years unlike anything that has been seen before. Intel will have to come off with a massive chunk of that money they made by drip feeding their customers processors. I think they were legit caught off guard and it’s showing by them throwing the 9900k out there and after years of not soldering and lying about the benefits of it, they are now pretty much forced to solder and add cores to stay competitive. That’s only in a year and a half that Ryzen has been around. As I said, Intels architecture is past its golden years and they will have to make a successor while AMD doesn’t have that hurdle to overcome. They just have to focus on Ryzen and hopefully they can do something in the gpu side as well to drive Nvidia off of their monopoly. Either way, both Intel and AMD need to be good. We don’t ever want one to crush the other, that will only hurt us as the consumer. Where Intel was not long ago is where Nvidia is now. Dominating the market and forcing consumers into ridiculous prices bc we obviously want the fastest. I think Nvidia will get a wake up call as well with either Intel or AMD when either decide to quit playing around. Intel has the resources to do it and AMD is getting quite a bit of fuel from Ryzen going by how AMD stock has taken a massive leap in the past year. Can’t wait to see what things will be like in 5 years time.
> One thing I have been wondering is, will Intel still be able to keep a monolithic die in the coming years with core count growing? If they have to end up using multiple dies as I believe will be the case, how will they retain memory latency numbers and compatibility? I believe they will be forced away from the monolithic die with their next architecture, at least until dies shrink beyond 7nm. Unless they want cpus the size of a graham cracker that cost a ridiculous price. I mean more ridiculous than usual. They almost certainly will have to. Monolithic dies are great but they cost so much bc they are wasteful on the wafer. Meanwhile you can cut many smaller dies and utilize far more of the silicon with little waste comparatively. With them having to solder and develop new architecture and spending money left and right they will have to be more economical somewhere and it just makes sense that they will go that route. Ok, I’ve literally went off into my thoughts ???? better get back to sorting these patch cords out in my little dungeon of a data closet.


What's scares me is the Jim Keller now works at Intel.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Johan45

tekjunkie28 said:


> What's scares me is the Jim Keller now works at Intel.
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


He just goes where the money/work is. He could go back to AMD when done at Intel again. Once the die is developed his work is done.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Johan45 said:


> He just goes where the money/work is. He could go back to AMD when done at Intel again. Once the die is developed his work is done.



Which is pushing me further toward Intel changing from their monolithic die on the next architecture. Im not sure how much bigger they can make the die for a mainstream processor without driving most of their customers away with the eventual price rape that would occur with using that amount of the wafer for a single die vs multiple. Especially since core count will start to matter soon in gaming with possible advancements in RT and DLSS. It would be fair to assume they would benefit using multiple cores in those workloads. They have to be competitive in price as well as cut down on costs to do so. They cant do that with the current architectures die. They will most likely come up with a similar solution as AMD did with their Infinity Fabric, just named differently. If that comes to be then Intel will likely no longer have a memory latency advantage over AMD and will likely face the same memory optimization hurdles with a completely new architecture. Thats when AMD will likely be on top since they will have the experience with that type of die structure. I would be truly surprised if Intel stuck with the same type of die structure with their mainstream lineup. It wouldnt make sense unless they just didnt want to compete at any price point besides the ultra high end and that wouldnt make sense for them to cut their own legs off. Calling it now, multiple CCX dies for next gen Intel processors with all new "Continuum Blanket" or some other nonsense :lachen:


----------



## Johan45

CJMitsuki said:


> Which is pushing me further toward Intel changing from their monolithic die on the next architecture. Im not sure how much bigger they can make the die for a mainstream processor without driving most of their customers away with the eventual price rape that would occur with using that amount of the wafer for a single die vs multiple. Especially since core count will start to matter soon in gaming with possible advancements in RT and DLSS. It would be fair to assume they would benefit using multiple cores in those workloads. They have to be competitive in price as well as cut down on costs to do so. They cant do that with the current architectures die. They will most likely come up with a similar solution as AMD did with their Infinity Fabric, just named differently. If that comes to be then Intel will likely no longer have a memory latency advantage over AMD and will likely face the same memory optimization hurdles with a completely new architecture. Thats when AMD will likely be on top since they will have the experience with that type of die structure. I would be truly surprised if Intel stuck with the same type of die structure with their mainstream lineup. It wouldnt make sense unless they just didnt want to compete at any price point besides the ultra high end and that wouldnt make sense for them to cut their own legs off. Calling it now, multiple CCX dies for next gen Intel processors with all new "Continuum Blanket" or some other nonsense :lachen:


Intel has been talking about/working on that for a while. They call it EMIB https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/foundry/emib.html


----------



## CJMitsuki

Johan45 said:


> Intel has been talking about/working on that for a while. They call it EMIB https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/foundry/emib.html



they couldve come up with a better name than that...


----------



## pez

tekjunkie28 said:


> I game. I'm not some serious, head up my butt competitive gamer. Shoot I don't really even call myself a gamer, more of a techy. I bought my 2700x knowing that it was about 3-5%slower then a 8700k in gaming. What is interesting is that the more GPU demanding the title is the better the Ryzen performs and sometimes it even pulls a few fps higher then the 8700k at 1440p+ resolution. Yes there are 1 or 2 games that the 8700k blows the 2700x away but that's okay. Game developers need to optimize for AMD if possible and that's a good thing. I also bought into AMD because it's NOT Intel. We have been stuck with the same hardware for years because there was no competition. Before I upgraded to the 2700x it was 5 years since my last upgrade and quite frankly I didn't even need to upgrade.
> 
> Now I'll be honest. The more I use my 2700x the more I enjoy it. In the beginning I felt like I had made a bad decision with all the issues I was having with performance and ram.. well let me just say that AMD does state that 2933mhz is the supported speed so anyone complaining really has no right bc I can easily hit that speed successfully ever stick of memory I try. Another point is that the 2700x really requires some research to get the most out of it. AMD has really revolutionized the way we should be building PCs. I enjoy the thoughts of a custom water cooling setup and what is so great is that Ryzen 2nd gen can actually take advantage of the extra work involved in it.
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


I chose to go Ryzen for a lot of the same reasons you're mentioning. It's the reason I bought my 2700X after having a 1700. I'd rather support the progress AMD is making rather than feed into what seems to be a gradually less-than-stellar Intel.

Sure I lost some gaming performance in a few titles I probably don't play, but ask me if I care .

That being said, the last time I had this much fun tweaking and OC'ing was my very first socket 939 system, so seeing Ryzen provide me motivation to relive those glorious days is a very special thing for me.


----------



## naifm92

Hello everyone,

i have a ryzen 2700X clocked at 4.00ghz with 1.30V, i did this because the temps are way too hight at idle, my cooler is MSI Forzer L, and i used GC Extreme thermal paste i did reapply the thermal paste and reinstall the cooler multiple times and made sure it's mounted probably, but it didn't work, i just want to know is this ok ?


----------



## rdr09

naifm92 said:


> Hello everyone,
> 
> i have a ryzen 2700X clocked at 4.00ghz with 1.30V, i did this because the temps are way too hight at idle, my cooler is MSI Forzer L, and i used GC Extreme thermal paste i did reapply the thermal paste and reinstall the cooler multiple times and made sure it's mounted probably, but it didn't work, i just want to know is this ok ?


check this out . . .

https://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/amd-ryzen-7-2700x-review,7.html

Also, make sure you are using the latest version of HWINFO64. That and try Ryzen Master to check your temp readings?


EDIT: Use Balanced power mode and see if it helps cool the cpu a bit.


----------



## pez

naifm92 said:


> Hello everyone,
> 
> i have a ryzen 2700X clocked at 4.00ghz with 1.30V, i did this because the temps are way too hight at idle, my cooler is MSI Forzer L, and i used GC Extreme thermal paste i did reapply the thermal paste and reinstall the cooler multiple times and made sure it's mounted probably, but it didn't work, i just want to know is this ok ?


What are you actual idle temps? 37C could be good or bad depending on case airflow and fanspeed. Where is 81C coming from? Are you seeing the same temps in Ryzen Master?


----------



## naifm92

rdr09 said:


> check this out . . .
> 
> https://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/amd-ryzen-7-2700x-review,7.html
> 
> Also, make sure you are using the latest version of HWINFO64. That and try Ryzen Master to check your temp readings?
> 
> 
> EDIT: Use Balanced power mode and see if it helps cool the cpu a bit.


thx for the link, it seems that my temps are way too high for idle, and yes i'm using the latest version of both HWiNFO64 and Ryzen master and both gives me the same temps



pez said:


> What are you actual idle temps? 37C could be good or bad depending on case airflow and fanspeed. Where is 81C coming from? Are you seeing the same temps in Ryzen Master?


my idle temp fluctuate between 40C and 55C, for the 37C reading it was only for about a sec and my case has really a good airflow a total of 6x 120mm fans in front, up, and rear all of them runnuing at ~1000rpm, for the 81C reading i was playing BF1 for about an hour and yes ryzen master gives me the same temp BTW i forget to mention that my ambient temp is 28C


----------



## pez

That’s a pretty high ambient (IMO) so that’s definitely part of the story. I can’t give a comparison that’s worthy since My ambient are 21-24C, but 4.2GHz at 1.4v maxes out at about 68C in gaming load. Not BF1 type load, so I’d probably add a few degrees. 

Your ambient plus a constant 1.3v vcore and 4GHz (if you’re not on balanced power plan and that’s your temp down locked) might only be a tad hotter than normal.


----------



## naifm92

pez said:


> That’s a pretty high ambient (IMO) so that’s definitely part of the story. I can’t give a comparison that’s worthy since My ambient are 21-24C, but 4.2GHz at 1.4v maxes out at about 68C in gaming load. Not BF1 type load, so I’d probably add a few degrees.
> 
> Your ambient plus a constant 1.3v vcore and 4GHz (if you’re not on balanced power plan and that’s your temp down locked) might only be a tad hotter than normal.


what? 28C is high? :'( , i have my Air conditioner working and if i set it to anything lower i'm afraid i will freeze to death xD, the temperature outside is between 40C and 55C(doesn't matter cuz my room is way cooler than that), so do you have any suggestion ? should i lower the speed? BTW if i set everything on auto the voltage is way too high, it fluctuates between 1.4V and 1.5V


----------



## smeroni68

pez said:


> That’s a pretty high ambient (IMO) so that’s definitely part of the story. I can’t give a comparison that’s worthy since My ambient are 21-24C, but 4.2GHz at 1.4v maxes out at about 68C in gaming load. Not BF1 type load, so I’d probably add a few degrees.
> 
> Your ambient plus a constant 1.3v vcore and 4GHz (if you’re not on balanced power plan and that’s your temp down locked) might only be a tad hotter than normal.


I'm on custom liquid cooling, 2700X at 4.15Ghz and vcore at 1.375v... This summer i had ambient temp at 30 degrees, water temp to 31 degrees and Cpu temp at 31 degrees in idle with performance plan.

On my settings I used on voltage a offset of +0.16v with fixed multiplier at 41.5x.

My case fans are managed by an aquaero xt controller and the 360 radiator has 3x140 noctua pull and 3x120 push...

Sorry for lenght of post, but the meaning is that cpu can be lower on temp, but with a good cooling. 

Inviato dal mio Xiaomi Mi5 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## pez

Oh for sure, I’m not saying it can be lower, but those temps he mentioned aren’t detrimental or anything he should over think.


----------



## smeroni68

pez said:


> Oh for sure, I’m not saying it can be lower, but those temps he mentioned aren’t detrimental or anything he should over think.


Yeah, sure... 37 degrees are not bad anyway. If there is a problem on cooling it appear under load.

Just to complete my info, under Aida64 stress test, my cpu come up to max 70 degrees... obviously thanks to the cooling controller really efficient. 

Inviato dal mio Xiaomi Mi5 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## sblantipodi

is there some leak of Zen 2?


----------



## noobee

Does anyone use Linux (with either of these processors)? I am reading horror stories about lockups that is discouraging my consideration in getting one and buiding a Ryzen system. It is leaning me towards an Intel/CL build. I know about the BIOS settings changes that some claim work - but, some also say they tried it and it didn't work. These include enabling typical current idle + disabling c6. Or maybe it's mostly Windows users here?


----------



## minal

noobee said:


> Does anyone use Linux (with either of these processors)? I am reading horror stories about lockups that is discouraging my consideration in getting one and buiding a Ryzen system. It is leaning me towards an Intel/CL build. I know about the BIOS settings changes that some claim work - but, some also say they tried it and it didn't work. These include enabling typical current idle + disabling c6. Or maybe it's mostly Windows users here?


Not sure what horror stories you're referring to. There are many linux users. I'm currently running Fedora 28 with my 2700X.



The problems I've heard of relate to Raven Ridge APUs, specifically with the Vega graphics side.


----------



## madbrayniak

is g.skill still the best ram for 2700X?

Has anything better popped up?

I was thinking about waiting to upgrade till the 9700K showed up but now I am seeing the prices and I would rather allocate those funds to better/more RAM and a new monitor.


----------



## tekjunkie28

madbrayniak said:


> is g.skill still the best ram for 2700X?
> 
> Has anything better popped up?
> 
> I was thinking about waiting to upgrade till the 9700K showed up but now I am seeing the prices and I would rather allocate those funds to better/more RAM and a new monitor.


Anything with Samsung B die is the best

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## madbrayniak

What about 2 sticks vs 4?

I'm looking to buy in next week or so...


----------



## MNMadman

madbrayniak said:


> What about 2 sticks vs 4?


Four sticks will always be more difficult to get running at higher speed. You want 2x8GB Samsung B-die for best results.


----------



## madbrayniak

MNMadman said:


> Four sticks will always be more difficult to get running at higher speed. You want 2x8GB Samsung B-die for best results.


Thanks!

I like the look of having all 4 DIMMs full but no need to spend the extra money if it is going to slow down the system...


----------



## MNMadman

madbrayniak said:


> I like the look of having all 4 DIMMs full but no need to spend the extra money if it is going to slow down the system...


I think Gigabyte has some kits where two are live DIMMs and two are dummies so you fill all four slots.


----------



## Struzzin

Amazon has the 2700 on sale today only for $220 !

If anyone was looking at getting one that is a great price.


----------



## Johan45

@CJMitsuki Just a little friendly competition hehe

http://hwbot.org/submission/3945651_johan45_pcmark_7_ryzen_7_2700x_9770_marks/


----------



## CJMitsuki

Johan45 said:


> @CJMitsuki Just a little friendly competition hehe
> 
> http://hwbot.org/submission/3945651_johan45_pcmark_7_ryzen_7_2700x_9770_marks/


Of course 😁 I’ll do my best, I’m severely limited with an AIO. I’ve been looking at small chillers as my next step toward better cooling. Right now I can get my idle temps to around 14c with my AIO and nice cold air fed into the rad and throughout my case as I don’t run on an open bench. I guess mine is what you call a “sleeper” since it looks unsuspecting and like a normal pc. Which it is, until I put the cold air adapter on the front. I’m starting to reach a limit on what that can support though and need to take the next step but I don’t want to jump into DICE or LN2 yet. I’m wanting to see how far I can go on a budget. So a cheap chiller or a homemade one sounds fun. Maybe make it from a worn out deep freezer or something. I can definitely compete with that score though Johan although PCMark 7 behaves oddly sometimes. It definitely is one of the more inconsistent benchmarks I’ve seen out there.


----------



## Offler

How much watts are your Ryzens chewing up?

This is a Threadripper 1900x, with average 95% effective PSU, and how much watts it draws from the wall:

Idle 77w
browser 89w (Overclock page)
youtube 114w (fullHd video)
Occt CPU Linpack 255w
3dmark firestrike 350w
MSI Kombustor 430w
(100% TDP - 150% TDP
tuned power for max FPS -19%: 377w)

Max power draw: 550w
(2 threads for kombustor, rest for Prime95)


----------



## rdr09

Offler said:


> How much watts are your Ryzens chewing up?
> 
> This is a Threadripper 1900x, with average 95% effective PSU, and how much watts it draws from the wall:
> 
> Idle 77w
> browser 89w (Overclock page)
> youtube 114w (fullHd video)
> Occt CPU Linpack 255w
> 3dmark firestrike 350w
> MSI Kombustor 430w
> (100% TDP - 150% TDP
> tuned power for max FPS -19%: 377w)
> 
> Max power draw: 550w
> (2 threads for kombustor, rest for Prime95)


Do you mind comparing your readings using HWINFO64/CPU Power Package or whatever reading that closely measure the cpu power consumption (however off). Whole system power draw will vary wildly on the components included in a system. Activities like watching videos, for example, will vary depending on the gpu used, isn't it?

Anyway, watching YT video with a 1060 and R7 2700 stock yields around 75w (GPU uses around 11w in HWINFO). 35w just browsing OCN. This was using UPS readings.
Playing Titanfall2, whole system uses around 200w as read from UPS.


----------



## Offler

rdr09 said:


> Do you mind comparing your readings using HWINFO64/CPU Power Package or whatever reading that closely measure the cpu power consumption (however off). Whole system power draw will vary wildly on the components included in a system. Activities like watching videos, for example, will vary depending on the gpu used, isn't it?
> 
> Anyway, watching YT video with a 1060 and R7 2700 stock yields around 75w (GPU uses around 11w in HWINFO). 35w just browsing OCN. This was using UPS readings.
> Playing Titanfall2, whole system uses around 200w as read from UPS.


Usually i would go into details for every component separately, but this time I am looking for comparison "as a whole". Its the system in my signature, and detailed and boring info can be found under "Build Log" link.

The thing is I compared Threadripper 1900x with Phenom II 1090t (old vs new system) and the powerconsumption is lower in every scenario by 60-100w, in some other scenarios its even more power saved. So it sparked a curiosity how much power requires R7 with 8 cores (dont mind the PCI-E lines and memory channels), and how much require TR 1950x and 1920x.

Most wattage calculators expected 650-700w when i added my hardware. Real power consumption is nowhere near to that, and even stress test is lower by 150w... Therefore I would rather ask here and not on youtube.


----------



## Johan45

CJMitsuki said:


> Of course 😁 I’ll do my best, I’m severely limited with an AIO. I’ve been looking at small chillers as my next step toward better cooling. Right now I can get my idle temps to around 14c with my AIO and nice cold air fed into the rad and throughout my case as I don’t run on an open bench. I guess mine is what you call a “sleeper” since it looks unsuspecting and like a normal pc. Which it is, until I put the cold air adapter on the front. I’m starting to reach a limit on what that can support though and need to take the next step but I don’t want to jump into DICE or LN2 yet. I’m wanting to see how far I can go on a budget. So a cheap chiller or a homemade one sounds fun. Maybe make it from a worn out deep freezer or something. I can definitely compete with that score though Johan although PCMark 7 behaves oddly sometimes. It definitely is one of the more inconsistent benchmarks I’ve seen out there.


My loop runs at -20C for a limited time and I'm almost at the end of my rope, maybe another 100 MHz would be possible. The Ryzens need to be much colder to go much faster. Natural progression is DICE LN2 you're just going to have to take the plunge CJ


----------



## rdr09

Offler said:


> Usually i would go into details for every component separately, but this time I am looking for comparison "as a whole". Its the system in my signature, and detailed and boring info can be found under "Build Log" link.
> 
> The thing is I compared Threadripper 1900x with Phenom II 1090t (old vs new system) and the powerconsumption is lower in every scenario by 60-100w, in some other scenarios its even more power saved. So it sparked a curiosity how much power requires R7 with 8 cores (dont mind the PCI-E lines and memory channels), and how much require TR 1950x and 1920x.
> 
> Most wattage calculators expected 650-700w when i added my hardware. Real power consumption is nowhere near to that, and even stress test is lower by 150w... Therefore I would rather ask here and not on youtube.


Here we go Offler - R7 2700 Stock . . .


My phenom II X 4 @ 3.7GHz was pulling 117W at load.


----------



## Offler

rdr09 said:


> Here we go Offler - R7 2700 Stock . . .
> 
> 
> My phenom II X 4 @ 3.7GHz was pulling 117W at load.


I guess i have to enable ability to underclock the CPUs when idle (power consumption might drop significantly). My readings of 70 watts at idle were done at 4GHz. Because Threadripper 1900x has 2 separate dies i would expect roughly 2x power consumption, but why its indicated at power consumption on the cores (mine up to 14 watts, yours 7)... kinda strange. I would expect roughly same power consumption in such scenario.


Edit:
Enabled powersaving features, CPU underclocked to 2.2Ghz... HWMon reported 10-12w decrease when idle... Wattmeter... No change at all - 70watts on idle.


----------



## rdr09

Offler said:


> I guess i have to enable ability to underclock the CPUs when idle (power consumption might drop significantly). My readings of 70 watts at idle were done at 4GHz. Because Threadripper 1900x has 2 separate dies i would expect roughly 2x power consumption, but why its indicated at power consumption on the cores (mine up to 14 watts, yours 7)... kinda strange. I would expect roughly same power consumption in such scenario.
> 
> 
> Edit:
> Enabled powersaving features, CPU underclocked to 2.2Ghz... HWMon reported 10-12w decrease when idle... Wattmeter... No change at all - 70watts on idle.


Try without underclocking but set Win Power Option to Balance with Minimum Power State set to 25% (random figure).

Running Prime at Custom Setting for longer period increased the Power Package to 80w on this 2700.


----------



## Offler

rdr09 said:


> Try without underclocking but set Win Power Option to Balance with Minimum Power State set to 25% (random figure).
> 
> Running Prime at Custom Setting for longer period increased the Power Package to 80w on this 2700.


Did that too, and little to no change in power draw. I guess 2 nodes/chips are the reason for that.


----------



## rdr09

Offler said:


> Did that too, and little to no change in power draw. I guess 2 nodes/chips are the reason for that.


Considering you have all cores at 4GHz, that is quite low indeed compared to a thuban at same clocks. Quite an upgrade.

EDIT: That Taichi board, how much pcie lanes it got? Will TR have a 7nm coming, too?


----------



## Johan45

CJMitsuki said:


> Of course 😁 I’ll do my best, I’m severely limited with an AIO. I’ve been looking at small chillers as my next step toward better cooling. Right now I can get my idle temps to around 14c with my AIO and nice cold air fed into the rad and throughout my case as I don’t run on an open bench. I guess mine is what you call a “sleeper” since it looks unsuspecting and like a normal pc. Which it is, until I put the cold air adapter on the front. I’m starting to reach a limit on what that can support though and need to take the next step but I don’t want to jump into DICE or LN2 yet. I’m wanting to see how far I can go on a budget. So a cheap chiller or a homemade one sounds fun. Maybe make it from a worn out deep freezer or something. I can definitely compete with that score though Johan although PCMark 7 behaves oddly sometimes. It definitely is one of the more inconsistent benchmarks I’ve seen out there.


I see you took another stab at it yesterday. I did again today at 4600 as well
http://hwbot.org/submission/3946888_


----------



## Truedeal

Is there anyway to get high boost clocks on the non x 2700

I decided to go from 4.2 ghz on all 8 cores to leaving everything on auto to get the single thread boost but the cpu will never boost past 4.1 at the most although I suppose that's the advertised max speed.

Got a 2700/Taichi x470
Are there some settings that allow you to change the range of xfr/pbo whatever it is called?


----------



## CJMitsuki

Johan45 said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> Of course 😁 I’ll do my best, I’m severely limited with an AIO. I’ve been looking at small chillers as my next step toward better cooling. Right now I can get my idle temps to around 14c with my AIO and nice cold air fed into the rad and throughout my case as I don’t run on an open bench. I guess mine is what you call a “sleeper” since it looks unsuspecting and like a normal pc. Which it is, until I put the cold air adapter on the front. I’m starting to reach a limit on what that can support though and need to take the next step but I don’t want to jump into DICE or LN2 yet. I’m wanting to see how far I can go on a budget. So a cheap chiller or a homemade one sounds fun. Maybe make it from a worn out deep freezer or something. I can definitely compete with that score though Johan although PCMark 7 behaves oddly sometimes. It definitely is one of the more inconsistent benchmarks I’ve seen out there.
> 
> 
> 
> I see you took another stab at it yesterday. I did again today at 4600 as well
> http://hwbot.org/submission/3946888_
Click to expand...

I’ve been trying everything to squeeze more out of 4.5ghz but I couldn’t get much more. What is your voltage looking like at 4.6? Even if I go above 4.5 by .25 it takes quite a bit more voltage all core but 4.5 and below is below 1.6v. Seems like something else is making my cpu unstable above 4.5ghz rather than lack of voltage as I’ve had it at 1.63v and it won’t push 4.525ghz but will do 4.5 at 1.57 easily.


----------



## Johan45

CJMitsuki said:


> I’ve been trying everything to squeeze more out of 4.5ghz but I couldn’t get much more. What is your voltage looking like at 4.6? Even if I go above 4.5 by .25 it takes quite a bit more voltage all core but 4.5 and below is below 1.6v. Seems like something else is making my cpu unstable above 4.5ghz rather than lack of voltage as I’ve had it at 1.63v and it won’t push 4.525ghz but will do 4.5 at 1.57 easily.


Using 1.55v at 4.6 GHz but that's the cold helping. I doubt I could get much more even with the lower temps. Plus I don't wanna damage anything. When using LN2 I can run up to 5.0 GHz with just 1.5V but it goes up quickly after that. At 5.5 GHz it's around 2.0V


----------



## CJMitsuki

Johan45 said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> I’ve been trying everything to squeeze more out of 4.5ghz but I couldn’t get much more. What is your voltage looking like at 4.6? Even if I go above 4.5 by .25 it takes quite a bit more voltage all core but 4.5 and below is below 1.6v. Seems like something else is making my cpu unstable above 4.5ghz rather than lack of voltage as I’ve had it at 1.63v and it won’t push 4.525ghz but will do 4.5 at 1.57 easily.
> 
> 
> 
> Using 1.55v at 4.6 GHz but that's the cold helping. I doubt I could get much more even with the lower temps. Plus I don't wanna damage anything. When using LN2 I can run up to 5.0 GHz with just 1.5V but it goes up quickly after that. At 5.5 GHz it's around 2.0V
Click to expand...

I guess it’s just a case of needing temps much lower to go above 4.5ghz all core. I can do XFR around 4.6ghz but that’s like 4 cores at that frequency and the rest at 4.35ghz. I’m limited to 104.8 ref clk though bc it’ll hurt my gpu score going any higher.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

geekbench 4 results: https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/10150225 not real sure what to make out of this... seems good compared to the cpu chart... curious to see others results, I'm pretty sure I saw someone else posting theirs on here before, but can't find it atm


----------



## tekjunkie28

rdr09 said:


> Do you mind comparing your readings using HWINFO64/CPU Power Package or whatever reading that closely measure the cpu power consumption (however off). Whole system power draw will vary wildly on the components included in a system. Activities like watching videos, for example, will vary depending on the gpu used, isn't it?
> 
> Anyway, watching YT video with a 1060 and R7 2700 stock yields around 75w (GPU uses around 11w in HWINFO). 35w just browsing OCN. This was using UPS readings.
> Playing Titanfall2, whole system uses around 200w as read from UPS.


Get you a kill a watt meter. They are cheap and it will freak you out if you start playing around with it on other devices in your home. I got to say some use A LOT more power than what I thought. Others use a lot less.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## rdr09

tekjunkie28 said:


> Get you a kill a watt meter. They are cheap and it will freak you out if you start playing around with it on other devices in your home. I got to say some use A LOT more power than what I thought. Others use a lot less.
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


Yah, that has been proven to work well. It's not so much about electric usage but more about heat. I gave up on my crossfire 290s because of the heat they put out and the need to watercool. The ups is unreliable as software app when measuring usage. 7nm shld lower the tdp even more.


----------



## sblantipodi

Do you think that zen2 will be able to reduce the intel's dominant position in gaming ?


----------



## Minotaurtoo

sblantipodi said:


> Do you think that zen2 will be able to reduce the intel's dominant position in gaming ?



short answer, not by much, a tie would be a stretch even


long answer,

From the research I've seen the Intel lead in gaming is more about their ring bus architecture having lower latency than the infinity fabric on AMD's side instead of the actual clock speeds themselves... so in order to get a lead on Intel AMD's chip will have to both improve on latency and clock speeds to beat Intel's current lineup... but personally, the difference is all but moot unless you are running the highest of the high end gpu's


----------



## Offler

Minotaurtoo said:


> short answer, not by much, a tie would be a stretch even
> 
> 
> long answer,
> 
> From the research I've seen the Intel lead in gaming is more about their ring bus architecture having lower latency than the infinity fabric on AMD's side instead of the actual clock speeds themselves... so in order to get a lead on Intel AMD's chip will have to both improve on latency and clock speeds to beat Intel's current lineup... but personally, the difference is all but moot unless you are running the highest of the high end gpu's


It tried an old benchmark on my 1900x. Apparently, MFlops were not increased that much compared to Phenom II, but the numerical operations took half of time on newer core. I would expect phase when CPUs will use less and less power consumption in next years, because the real upgrade in performance did not occured for Intel for few generations.


----------



## rdr09

Offler said:


> It tried an old benchmark on my 1900x. Apparently, MFlops were not increased that much compared to Phenom II, but the numerical operations took half of time on newer core. I would expect phase when CPUs will use less and less power consumption in next years, because the real upgrade in performance did not occured for Intel for few generations.


Offler, 130w at 3.9 OC on the 2700. 50w Browsing. CPU temp will surely go over 60c during games. This is using a cheap T4.

When full loaded, the ups read 185w.

EDIT: Raising the OC to 4GHz only netted 5w more - 135w.


----------



## noobee

Does it matter which bios version you're using or which brand of mobo? I am speculating but I think the best ones (X470s) are from Asus, ASRock and maybe MSI? What BIOS version are you at and which is the latest one that you've tried?

I read some alarming claims about trying AGESA 1.0.0.4.


----------



## Heidi

Guys....I am in doubt...need another machine and somehow I picked up brand new ROG Crosshair Extreme X370 for AU$265.00...alongside is on offer 1800x for 279.00 as well...now...shall I go for that CPU or the 2700x is really worth AU$200 extra...thanks


----------



## CJMitsuki

Heidi said:


> Guys....I am in doubt...need another machine and somehow I picked up brand new ROG Crosshair Extreme X370 for AU$265.00...alongside is on offer 1800x for 279.00 as well...now...shall I go for that CPU or the 2700x is really worth AU$200 extra...thanks


Depends on if you are ok with 4ghz and less performance. If so then go with the 1800x. Now if you want the best then 2700x it is.


----------



## madbrayniak

Welp,

Bought a 2700X. Went for the Crosshair Hero VII(non-wifi) and G.Skill 3200 cl14 RAM. 

Looking forward to it!

I'm still using a 955 Phenom...should be a YUGE upgrade!


----------



## rdr09

Anybody seen the 2080Ti tested with 2700X? 


Found one for the 2080 but that's pretty much equal to a 1080Ti. Here is one. I know its J2C. Haha. Watch him plugged the power to the gpu before securing it down.lol


----------



## Minotaurtoo

yes I just watched it last night... seems like it did pretty well...


----------



## rdr09

Minotaurtoo said:


> yes I just watched it last night... seems like it did pretty well...


At higher rez, the diff is negligible and we know that already. J2C prolly has a point about with an oc'ed 2700X, it can manage a gpu like a 2080Ti. Also, we can almost see the diff between the i9 and the R7 will be not that much either. Except for a few games like F1. But multi-threaded games would result to nearly equal at higher rez.

Intel cpu prices might go up and amd's holding or might even go down, its gonna be easy decision for new builders to decide once comparisons show up.


----------



## kazablanka

rdr09 said:


> Anybody seen the 2080Ti tested with 2700X?
> 
> 
> Found one for the 2080 but that's pretty much equal to a 1080Ti. Here is one. I know its J2C. Haha. Watch him plugged the power to the gpu before securing it down.lol
> 
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q7t0kA5VJ7o


----------



## LesPaulLover

PROBLEM:

I have a new R5 2600x CPU and everything seems fine. HWMonitor, HWinfo and Ryzen Master report roughly 60-70c core temps during AIDA64 stress test. HWmonitor reports the same 60-70c PACKAGE TEMPS during the stress tests.

However, OCCT is reporting PACKAGE TEMPS of 85c IDLE and shoots up to 105c+ when a stress test starts. Anyone know what's going on here?

I'm ASSUMING this is some kind of faulty reading but it's got me worried none the less.....


----------



## shaolin95

Hello guys!
Seriously considering the 2700x as my first AMD build since I moved from Phenom 2 to i7 920 which is not a Xeon X5650 on the same x58 platform. It has been the longest running same platform system I ever had...and at 4.2Ghz is still pretty good BUT its time for me to upgrade.
I was waiting for the 9900k before making a decision but once again the 2700x started tempting me. Then again, maybe is best to wait for Black Friday?
In any case, it seems that the right memory speed and timings can improve the 2700x performance in the situations where the 8700k OCed beats it like most games. 
Is this memory information still accurate?
https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/62vp2g/clearing_up_any_samsung_bdie_confusion_eg_on/
It seems the best memory is pretty expensive as well (the dual one 3200).
Just want to make sure if I go with 2700x that I feed it the best possible RAM to maximize its performance.
Thanks!


----------



## rdr09

kazablanka said:


> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xjI9k6kdfKA



Thanks. And for 200$, a 2600X will achieve similar performance, since not many games use more than 6 cores. With SMT, will last awhile. Pairing a 200$ cpu with a 1200$ gpu may seem unbalance though.


----------



## kazablanka

rdr09 said:


> Thanks. And for 200$, a 2600X will achieve similar performance, since not many games use more than 6 cores. With SMT, will last awhile. Pairing a 200$ cpu with a 1200$ gpu may seem unbalance though.


It depends on what monitor do you have. If you have a high refresh monitor /qsync ,may 8700k is a better choice imo


----------



## Minotaurtoo

shaolin95 said:


> Hello guys!
> Seriously considering the 2700x as my first AMD build since I moved from Phenom 2 to i7 920 which is not a Xeon X5650 on the same x58 platform. It has been the longest running same platform system I ever had...and at 4.2Ghz is still pretty good BUT its time for me to upgrade.
> I was waiting for the 9900k before making a decision but once again the 2700x started tempting me. Then again, maybe is best to wait for Black Friday?
> In any case, it seems that the right memory speed and timings can improve the 2700x performance in the situations where the 8700k OCed beats it like most games.
> Is this memory information still accurate?
> https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/62vp2g/clearing_up_any_samsung_bdie_confusion_eg_on/
> It seems the best memory is pretty expensive as well (the dual one 3200).
> Just want to make sure if I go with 2700x that I feed it the best possible RAM to maximize its performance.
> Thanks!


 honestly the gains from higher clocked ram are over hyped a bit... yes it does make a difference... in some games as much as 10% I've seen myself going from 3000 cas 16 to 3266 cas 14. In cinebench I only gained a few points though... and some games didn't gain any fps from the new ram... Gskill FlareX is what I have and from what I've heard pretty much a guarantee of higher clocks on ram.



Ryzen is a really good all around cpu and when compared with the 8700k the 2700x is the clear winner to me... with the only caveat being high frame rate gaming and even then it's marginal... now the 9900k would likely win out against the 2700x all around, but also would be much more expensive (if the rumors and prices leaked are true) I'd still go with Ryzen though... not that you'd wrong choosing Intel, just because of the price for performance and performance per watt you get with Ryzen... of coarse the 9900k could be more efficient than current cpu's... 



In short, you can't really go wrong with either... if you are paying 300$+ for a cpu then likely you'd be buying low latency ram anyway and that's all Ryzen needs to do it's best... and with the higher clock speeds the 8700k competes quite well in most areas... if you are having trouble deciding, flip a coin  (I say heads Ryzen wins and tails Intel loses :laugher: )


----------



## rdr09

kazablanka said:


> It depends on what monitor do you have. If you have a high refresh monitor /qsync ,may 8700k is a better choice imo


You are right. At 1080 High Hz. 1440 and above, its a faster gpu thats needed. Neither CPU or no current cpu will make a difference seeing they are quite close. Esp, 4K.

Now, 1080 60Hz is still common and the i5 8400 or R5 2600 would do, which you'd normally pair with a mid-tier gpu. I just checked, the latter is a bit cheaper.


----------



## LesPaulLover

Minotaurtoo said:


> honestly the gains from higher clocked ram are over hyped a bit... yes it does make a difference... in some games as much as 10% I've seen myself going from 3000 cas 16 to 3266 cas 14. In cinebench I only gained a few points though... and some games didn't gain any fps from the new ram... Gskill FlareX is what I have and from what I've heard pretty much a guarantee of higher clocks on ram.


(This is based on many, many reviews/benchmarks I've seen on Ryzen in general and/or Ryzen specifically pertaining to DRAM speed):

For Ryzen performance, 3000MHz looks like the diminishing returns point and anything over 3400MHz granting EXTREMELY limited performance gains.

The BIG gains seem to be in going from say 2400-3000MHz. I definitely wouldn't buy anything below 3000MHz for a Ryzen system.


----------



## noobee

minal said:


> Not sure what horror stories you're referring to. There are many linux users. I'm currently running Fedora 28 with my 2700X.
> 
> The problems I've heard of relate to Raven Ridge APUs, specifically with the Vega graphics side.


With no problems or changing the BIOS settings at all?

Check Reddit and the AMD website (forum/support section). There's horror stories about freezing and soft lockups.


----------



## icesergio

Hi, I bought a 2700x, testing on an X370 Gaming K7 Bios F22
The CPU won't go past 4.1ghz all cores at 1.35v High LLC.
With XFR it won't go past 3.8ghz in prime95...

Cooling with NH-D15 in Meshify C case, did I lose the silicon lottery?


----------



## Minotaurtoo

icesergio said:


> Hi, I bought a 2700x, testing on an X370 Gaming K7 Bios F22
> The CPU won't go past 4.1ghz all cores at 1.35v High LLC.
> With XFR it won't go past 3.8ghz in prime95...
> 
> Cooling with NH-D15 in Meshify C case, did I lose the silicon lottery?


xfr works on power limits and temp limits... turning on precision boost overdrive can help with that... as far as the voltage goes, mine hits 4.1ghz with 1.3v high llc setting... but 4.2 requires 1.4 volts with extreme llc settings (on my board llc is a bit "broken" as in barely counteracts vdroop so extreme llc = steady voltage) some chips I've seen can hit 4.2 with much lower than mine, but some takes even more than mine, but the general rule of thumb is there is a voltage wall somewhere around 4.1-4.2ghz where it takes enormous voltage increases to get only a few mhz more... did you lose the silicone lottery... well, lets say you weren't a winner, but more middle of the road.


----------



## detrophy

Hey Guys,

I´m trying to OC my 2700x and wanted to know if I´m already at the limit of the CPU (temp wise).
Please let me know (tested with prime95).


----------



## Minotaurtoo

yeah, I'd say your temps are a bit high... as long as you only see temps that high under stress tests you're good... but keep a watch on them when gaming and such... don't want to go that high all the time or your cpu could suffer an early death... not instant or anything, just slow degradation over time.


----------



## ewitte

This design does well with boosting on its own to about 4.3-4.35 if you want to push that across all cores power and temps go up dramatically. I see up to 4.35 on both the 2700x and 2950x. Both are on water. The TR can do good at lowish voltage but an AIO can't handle the temps you need a custom loop for full 4.3+. I'll be pushing it more when winter temperatures hit.


----------



## detrophy

Minotaurtoo said:


> yeah, I'd say your temps are a bit high... as long as you only see temps that high under stress tests you're good... but keep a watch on them when gaming and such... don't want to go that high all the time or your cpu could suffer an early death... not instant or anything, just slow degradation over time.


Well, thank you!
I will try to fix this.



ewitte said:


> This design does well with boosting on its own to about 4.3-4.35 if you want to push that across all cores power and temps go up dramatically. I see up to 4.35 on both the 2700x and 2950x. Both are on water. The TR can do good at lowish voltage but an AIO can't handle the temps you need a custom loop for full 4.3+. I'll be pushing it more when winter temperatures hit.


PBO goes to 3.95 to 4.0 on all cores with way to high voltages (1.45+) and high temperatures. (80+)

This will give me static 4.2GHz on all cores. (Have to tweak the voltages a bit more)


----------



## rdr09

detrophy said:


> Well, thank you!
> I will try to fix this.
> 
> 
> 
> PBO goes to 3.95 to 4.0 on all cores with way to high voltages (1.45+) and high temperatures. (80+)
> 
> This will give me static 4.2GHz on all cores. (Have to tweak the voltages a bit more)


Can't you set a static voltage using PBO? Say, 1.4v, to keep the temp down. Also, set Balance Power in Window or Ryzen Master.


----------



## detrophy

Could do that, but I lose about 200-300MHz on all cores when using PBO, even with VCore offset -0.1V and still going higher than 1.4V on 4.2GHz (up to 4 cores).

4.2GHz runs at 1.315-1.337 full stable.

I will have to use a better cooler to get temps a bit lower, even this will be a hard thing to do as I’m using a Noctua D15 with 2 140mm fans.

Another problem I’ve got is with PState VIDs, as the processor wont use lower VIDs than p0.

p0 is 4.2GHz @ 1.35V (a8 . 8 . 20)
p1 is 3.2GHz @ 0.99375V (80 . 8 . 59)
p2 is 2.2GHz @ 0.8125V (84 . c . 76) (have to tweak this)

Motherboard is Taichi x470 Ultimate at latest BIOS (non Beta).

The funny thing: it has worked one time


----------



## pez

detrophy said:


> Could do that, but I lose about 200-300MHz on all cores when using PBO, even with VCore offset -0.1V and still going higher than 1.4V on 4.2GHz (up to 4 cores).
> 
> 4.2GHz runs at 1.315-1.337 full stable.
> 
> I will have to use a better cooler to get temps a bit lower, even this will be a hard thing to do as I’m using a Noctua D15 with 2 140mm fans.
> 
> Another problem I’ve got is with PState VIDs, as the processor wont use lower VIDs than p0.
> 
> p0 is 4.2GHz @ 1.35V (a8 . 8 . 20)
> p1 is 3.2GHz @ 0.99375V (80 . 8 . 59)
> p2 is 2.2GHz @ 0.8125V (84 . c . 76) (have to tweak this)
> 
> Motherboard is Taichi x470 Ultimate at latest BIOS (non Beta).
> 
> The funny thing: it has worked one time


I wouldn't worry too much about trying to get 4.2GHz across all cores until you go towards custom loop. I've got a AIO in the same case and it performs well, but I'm not going to push it to the vcore needed to get higher than 4.2GHz on all cores. I think mine holds 4.2GHz at 1.4v currently, but I wouldn't recommend going from a D15 to an AIO by any means....unless you know you're making a lateral cooling move and want it for pure aesthetics.


----------



## icesergio

Minotaurtoo said:


> icesergio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hi, I bought a 2700x, testing on an X370 Gaming K7 Bios F22
> The CPU won't go past 4.1ghz all cores at 1.35v High LLC.
> With XFR it won't go past 3.8ghz in prime95...
> 
> Cooling with NH-D15 in Meshify C case, did I lose the silicon lottery?
> 
> 
> 
> xfr works on power limits and temp limits... turning on precision boost overdrive can help with that... as far as the voltage goes, mine hits 4.1ghz with 1.3v high llc setting... but 4.2 requires 1.4 volts with extreme llc settings (on my board llc is a bit "broken" as in barely counteracts vdroop so extreme llc = steady voltage) some chips I've seen can hit 4.2 with much lower than mine, but some takes even more than mine, but the general rule of thumb is there is a voltage wall somewhere around 4.1-4.2ghz where it takes enormous voltage increases to get only a few mhz more... did you lose the silicone lottery... well, lets say you weren't a winner, but more middle of the road.
Click to expand...

The poor CPU isn't at fault.
After testing I have come to two conclusions:
I was a bit of an idiot 
The Gigabyte X370 Gaming K7 voltage sensors are complete crap, at least on bios F23.

Measuring socket voltage with dmm is the only way.
So far I am stable in IBT at 4.2ghz 1.375 vcore (measured at socket with dmm) and 0.85 vsoc (running RAM at non xmp 2133 for now) 
Seems like an above average chip after all...


----------



## Minotaurtoo

icesergio said:


> The poor CPU isn't at fault.
> After testing I have come to two conclusions:
> I was a bit of an idiot
> The Gigabyte X370 Gaming K7 voltage sensors are complete crap, at least on bios F23.
> 
> Measuring socket voltage with dmm is the only way.
> So far I am stable in IBT at 4.2ghz 1.375 vcore (measured at socket with dmm) and 0.85 vsoc (running RAM at non xmp 2133 for now)
> Seems like an above average chip after all...


not bad... yeah my problem is my board too... I'm on a B350.... ugh.. I keep wanting to upgrade x470, but can't really justify it.


----------



## rdr09

PAID


https://www.techpowerup.com/248355/intels-9th-gen-core-gaming-benchmarks-flawed-and-misleading


----------



## pez

Paid....?


----------



## rdr09

pez said:


> Paid....?


Paid reviewer.

EDIT: And there is more to the story . . . 

https://www.patreon.com/posts/21950120

Whether or not intel knew about it . . . it sure is like a way to justify the premium price.


----------



## pez

rdr09 said:


> Paid reviewer.
> 
> EDIT: And there is more to the story . . .
> 
> https://www.patreon.com/posts/21950120
> 
> Whether or not intel knew about it . . . it sure is like a way to justify the premium price.


Ooooh wow...

I didn't catch that the first time and wasn't trying to assume anything there....but....yikes .


----------



## noobee

What is the point of 'Game Mode' if - A) it slows down the processor and B) it disables 4 of the 8 cores?

EDIT: Game Mode looks like a 'fail' to me....

https://www.anandtech.com/show/1172...me-mode-halving-cores-for-more-performance/17

The benefits are limited, the cons/negatives are crippling.


----------



## rdr09

noobee said:


> What is the point of 'Game Mode' if - A) it slows down the processor and B) it disables 4 of the 8 cores?
> 
> EDIT: Game Mode looks like a 'fail' to me....
> 
> https://www.anandtech.com/show/1172...me-mode-halving-cores-for-more-performance/17
> 
> The benefits are limited, the cons/negatives are crippling.


If im not mistaken, that feature is for Threadripper. Only.

EDIT: Anyway, i would not be surprised if this "reviewer" inflated the number for the i9 9900K, too. three or five add'l fps could proportionally increase the % difference. Instead 20 it ends up 30%. Makes the case for 200$ difference in price.

See, most of ocn understand this. Ordinary gamers everywhere they see the comparison and will say - WoW.


----------



## MNMadman

noobee said:


> What is the point of 'Game Mode' if - A) it slows down the processor and B) it disables 4 of the 8 cores?
> 
> EDIT: Game Mode looks like a 'fail' to me....
> 
> https://www.anandtech.com/show/1172...me-mode-halving-cores-for-more-performance/17
> 
> The benefits are limited, the cons/negatives are crippling.


1. Game Mode was designed only for Threadripper CPUs. I'm surprised it works on regular Ryzen CPUs.

2. A lot of games are latency-sensitive. On a Threadripper CPU, two of the memory channels come from one die and the other two channels come from the second die. And there is a huge latency penalty with die-to-die communication. Disabling one die gets rid of that extra latency.

When I had my Threadripper system, Game Mode wasn't worth it. I was using 1440p resolution with maxed out in-game graphics settings, so the CPU wasn't the bottleneck anyway. Maybe if I was a competitive gamer that needed absolute maximum frame rates at a lower resolution it might have mattered. But then again, if I was a competitive gamer I wouldn't have bought a Threadripper system anyway.

On a regular Ryzen system, Game Mode isn't worth it at all. But on Threadripper it can be an advantage.


----------



## polkfan

4.81 bios stock CPU and XMP profile set ZERO tweaking Amd balance power setting is enabled 

https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/10289606

Not bad my 4790K stock however got the same single core score with 1600mhz memory. 

Ah Amd can't wait to see Zen 2 and 3!


----------



## diggiddi

madbrayniak said:


> Welp,
> 
> Bought a 2700X. Went for the Crosshair Hero VII(non-wifi) and G.Skill 3200 cl14 RAM.
> 
> Looking forward to it!
> 
> I'm still using a 955 Phenom...should be a YUGE upgrade!


Those things sing at 4.2ghz + if you can get them there, I loved mine. It would open my browser tabs quicker than an FX 8350


----------



## King Lycan

My babbyyy


https://valid.x86.fr/fldbyc


----------



## magicase

I'm going to be ordering a 2700 with a B450 board soon. I'm just wondering can I hit 4.2 all cores while OCed with a Noctua U14S cooler?


----------



## Johan45

@CJMitsuki I noticed you made a bit of progress but I couldn't let that stand muhahaha http://hwbot.org/submission/3955968_


----------



## Minotaurtoo

magicase said:


> I'm going to be ordering a 2700 with a B450 board soon. I'm just wondering can I hit 4.2 all cores while OCed with a Noctua U14S cooler?


it's a bit iffy at that point... if you have a good vrm on your board and a reasonable chip yes... if either is slightly under par, then likely either temps or voltage will hold you back.


----------



## madbrayniak

diggiddi said:


> madbrayniak said:
> 
> 
> 
> Welp,
> 
> Bought a 2700X. Went for the Crosshair Hero VII(non-wifi) and G.Skill 3200 cl14 RAM.
> 
> Looking forward to it!
> 
> I'm still using a 955 Phenom...should be a YUGE upgrade!
> 
> 
> 
> Those things sing at 4.2ghz + if you can get them there, I loved mine. It would open my browser tabs quicker than an FX 8350
Click to expand...

I have mine clocked at 4.15ghz any higher it is unstable.

I've been very happy with it over the years for desktop use. Only shows it's age with gaming and tasks like handbrake for a.movie rip.


----------



## rdr09

Twelve Percent Faster (12%)

https://www.techpowerup.com/248518/...ile-being-just-12-faster-than-2700x-at-gaming

Now, I tried to run their timings at 2933 and compared my 3200 CL 14 using Cine 15 both at 4000MHz OC - my score went from 1830 to 1807. That is like a good 75MHz OC gone.


----------



## sblantipodi

rdr09 said:


> Twelve Percent Faster (12%)
> 
> https://www.techpowerup.com/248518/...ile-being-just-12-faster-than-2700x-at-gaming
> 
> Now, I tried to run their timings at 2933 and compared my 3200 CL 14 using Cine 15 both at 4000MHz OC - my score went from 1830 to 1807. That is like a good 75MHz OC gone.


intel is becaming ridiculous


----------



## noobee

Do you think it's worth buying a used 2700X (seller is probably reputable / good reviews/on site) and the seller claims it wasn't overclocked....

I found a couple of other processors (same model) but shipping is only option unless I travel there - also, this is like classifieds - not 'craigslist' risk but still risky, nonetheless. I wanted to save a bit.... I guess it's about $100 SAVED if you include taxes. 

I am reading the mobo recommendation thread, too...as that I will probably buy new - and want something with decent VRM - not for overclocking but because it seems voltage/settings/options is pretty important for ryzen systems?


----------



## polkfan

noobee said:


> Do you think it's worth buying a used 2700X (seller is probably reputable / good reviews/on site) and the seller claims it wasn't overclocked....
> 
> I found a couple of other processors (same model) but shipping is only option unless I travel there - also, this is like classifieds - not 'craigslist' risk but still risky, nonetheless. I wanted to save a bit.... I guess it's about $100 SAVED if you include taxes.
> 
> I am reading the mobo recommendation thread, too...as that I will probably buy new - and want something with decent VRM - not for overclocking but because it seems voltage/settings/options is pretty important for ryzen systems?


I would say yes man put that money towards a M.2 drive or a sweet AIO or faster memory!


----------



## CJMitsuki

Johan45 said:


> @CJMitsuki I noticed you made a bit of progress but I couldn't let that stand muhahaha http://hwbot.org/submission/3955968_


Ah, had to break out the LN2 pot to beat the AIO and chilled air? 😉 Only reason I got higher scores than previously were bc I optimized my timings on my ram. It’s a good thing though bc I brought scores up in nearly every benchmark especially the 3D ones. Gimme that chiller and I’d beat that score though 😊


----------



## Johan45

CJMitsuki said:


> Ah, had to break out the LN2 pot to beat the AIO and chilled air? 😉 Only reason I got higher scores than previously were bc I optimized my timings on my ram. It’s a good thing though bc I brought scores up in nearly every benchmark especially the 3D ones. Gimme that chiller and I’d beat that score though 😊


A chiller wouldn't cut it CJ, LN2 is the only way to get that speed. I'm sure I could optimize things further but....


----------



## DivineLight

What kind of OC, voltages and temps do you guys use? I have the 2700X with a Corsair H150i and 6x ML120 RGB fans in Push/Pull. My CPU still runs at stock voltages, I set it to 4.2 GHz because it gives a faster multicore and more steady (accurate) singlecore performance without those extreme 1.5 V spikes. AIDA64 says it gets close to 80°, is this the offset or normal temperature?

I'm aiming at a good combo of RAM (3533+) and CPU (4.2+) overclock, since the 2700X can't be overclocked much anyway. It is a placeholder until the Zen 2 generation releases, so I should be able to get more out of my RAM then.


----------



## MNMadman

DivineLight said:


> What kind of OC, voltages and temps do you guys use? I have the 2700X with a Corsair H150i and 6x ML120 RGB fans in Push/Pull. My CPU still runs at stock voltages, I set it to 4.2 GHz because it gives a faster multicore and more steady (accurate) singlecore performance without those extreme 1.5 V spikes. AIDA64 says it gets close to 80°, is this the offset or normal temperature?
> 
> I'm aiming at a good combo of RAM (3533+) and CPU (4.2+) overclock, since the 2700X can't be overclocked much anyway. It is a placeholder until the Zen 2 generation releases, so I should be able to get more out of my RAM then.


Easy way to find out what that AIDA64 temp is -- use a program that has Tctl (offset) and Tdie (non-offset) temps, like HWiNFO.

Good luck with that RAM speed. It's doable but you have to get lucky. You have to have RAM that will do it, a memory controller that will do it, and a board that will allow it. I used four different boards (X370, B450, and 2x X470) with the same CPU and RAM, and got four different stable RAM overclocks.

*Frankenstein's Monster* (my sig rig) is currently running:

4.2GHz fixed all-core OC @ 1.425v, Level 4 CPU LLC
3466MHz RAM clock (using The Stilt's 3466 preset but with 2T CR) @ 1.4v, 0.975v SOC, Level 4 SOC LLC


----------



## rdr09

sblantipodi said:


> intel is becaming ridiculous


Off topic: Sorry op.

I think intel is trying to offset the cost and without bad intention - passing the burden to consumers. That and retailers' greed. This is how i see what's happening (fictional figures to keep simple). Production levels down, the cost goes up.


----------



## DivineLight

I don't dare to use Hwinfo anymore, since it will randomly reboot my PC, so annoying during stability tests.

Did you test the bandwith with AIDA? 2T doesn't seem to be worth to me. I could run 3600 CL14 out of the box if I applied 2T, but its still much slower than 3466 CR1. You may need a higher SOC instead.


----------



## MNMadman

DivineLight said:


> I don't dare to use Hwinfo anymore, since it will randomly reboot my PC, so annoying during stability tests.
> 
> Did you test the bandwith with AIDA? 2T doesn't seem to be worth to me. I could run 3600 CL14 out of the box if I applied 2T, but its still much slower than 3466 CR1. You may need a higher SOC instead.


Never heard of HWiNFO problems, unless you are running other monitoring software as well. Runs perfectly for me, even when MSI Afterburner is running as well.

I think my AIDA64 bench scores are pretty good.


----------



## gupsterg

Been going at 4x8GB, 3400MHz C15 1T I've managed with SOC: 1.068V (LLC: AMD Stock), VDIMM: 1.36V, VTTDDR: 0.699V on the C6H. This seems like my final config unless I gain some more lowered timings.



Spoiler














I had passes in P95 v28.10b1 and v29.4b8 with setups of 8K 4096K 26GB (upto 13hrs runs) and repeat passes in HCI Memtest v6.0 of upto 400%, but something was not quite right as GSAT within Linux Mint was showing POST to POST/rerun variance on stability. So far nailed 9hrs warm post PASS in GSAT, 2hrs warm and final run of 1hr left of 2hrs run on cold post.


----------



## R1amddude

MNMadman said:


> Easy way to find out what that AIDA64 temp is -- use a program that has Tctl (offset) and Tdie (non-offset) temps, like HWiNFO.
> 
> Good luck with that RAM speed. It's doable but you have to get lucky. You have to have RAM that will do it, a memory controller that will do it, and a board that will allow it. I used four different boards (X370, B450, and 2x X470) with the same CPU and RAM, and got four different stable RAM overclocks.
> 
> *Frankenstein's Monster* (my sig rig) is currently running:
> 
> 4.2GHz fixed all-core OC @ 1.425v, Level 4 CPU LLC
> 3466MHz RAM clock (using The Stilt's 3466 preset but with 2T CR) @ 1.4v, 0.975v SOC, Level 4 SOC LLC



Thats a nice setup. I too have an all core OC 4225 mhz 1.43 volts on a Ryzen 2700 LLC set to auto, 3466 mhz ram 14-14-14-14 1T @1.41 voltage paired with a 2080ti. I am loving this ryzen setup so far as I am sure you are too. So much value for $$$ if you game at 4K like I do :specool:


----------



## rdr09

R1amddude said:


> Thats a nice setup. I too have an all core OC 4225 mhz 1.43 volts on a Ryzen 2700 LLC set to auto, 3466 mhz ram 14-14-14-14 1T @1.41 voltage paired with a 2080ti. I am loving this ryzen setup so far as I am sure you are too. So much value for $$$ if you game at 4K like I do :specool:


Interesting choice of card for a budget cpu. You mind showing off some Firestrike or any bench you prefer?

I've seen the 2700X handle 1080 Tis in SLI, so no doubt at 4.2 that setup is sweet, esp at 4K.


----------



## Velheibgnar

Seriously, I'm here back again. Just updated bios to 1101 (some strange stuff with audio driver and devices like keyboard, not much besides).

Sadly idel fan/temp swings are still present. I found some info that this was also noticed in 1000 Ryzen series. Anyone considered it a reason to RMA? 
Temps/fan jumps in idle from 28 to 45 for no reason. Setting stable 3.7GHz is not a happy solution. That's with NH-D15 SE-AM4 (2 fans) + 3 other noctua fans. 
No change from stock fan at all with this ****.


----------



## MNMadman

HTML:







Velheibgnar said:


> Seriously, I'm here back again. Just updated bios to 1101 (some strange stuff with audio driver and devices like keyboard, not much besides).
> 
> Sadly idel fan/temp swings are still present. I found some info that this was also noticed in 1000 Ryzen series. Anyone considered it a reason to RMA?
> Temps/fan jumps in idle from 28 to 45 for no reason. Setting stable 3.7GHz is not a happy solution. That's with NH-D15 SE-AM4 (2 fans) + 3 other noctua fans.
> No change from stock fan at all with this ****.


That's actually normal behavior as the CPU clocks up to its boost frequency (and higher voltage) on some of the cores while the others remain at idle clocks. You may not be actively doing something on the computer, but that doesn't mean the Windows isn't doing something in the background.


----------



## DivineLight

A 2700X isn't that bad as some people say, its on par with Haswell / Broadwell-HEDT-CPUs. It just doesn't reach 5 GHz like current Intel models, but you don't need 5 GHz if you are GPU bottlenecked. And even then you only benefit from Intel if you use a highend GPU, in most midrange builds its still GPU limited in 1080p.

What kind of voltage do you need for 4.25 GHz? Those 4.2 GHz work with the stock voltage. I only set the multiplier and tested it.


----------



## R1amddude

rdr09 said:


> Interesting choice of card for a budget cpu. You mind showing off some Firestrike or any bench you prefer?
> 
> I've seen the 2700X handle 1080 Tis in SLI, so no doubt at 4.2 that setup is sweet, esp at 4K.



Ask and you shall receive!


----------



## MNMadman

DivineLight said:


> What kind of voltage do you need for 4.25 GHz? Those 4.2 GHz work with the stock voltage. I only set the multiplier and tested it.


There is a "stock" voltage but the Auto setting isn't it. Auto just means the CPU says "give me what I want for voltage", but it might need less or more than that.

I found out 1.425v fixed voltage isn't enough for my 4.2GHz fixed overclock -- it works for gaming but higher-load situations resulted in hard-locks. Going to try all the way up to 1.45v to see if I can stabilize it.


----------



## rdr09

R1amddude said:


> Ask and you shall receive!


Nice. Thank you. The Physics score got covered. Im guessing around 22000?


----------



## ubbernewb

im in the club how do you overclock this? i mean what settings do you set? i know you only change the multi BUT there are cpu settings to change but im not sure what they are


----------



## Minotaurtoo

ubbernewb said:


> im in the club how do you overclock this? i mean what settings do you set? i know you only change the multi BUT there are cpu settings to change but im not sure what they are


depends highly on the board you have, whether you have the 2700x or 2700 and the other components involved... tell us your hardware and we can help better.... although if you have the 2700x you'd probably be best to set DOCP for your ram then turn on precision boost overdrive and be done with it since the 2700x really overclocks itself well.


----------



## ubbernewb

2700x Crosshair vii hero not the wifi


----------



## CJMitsuki

ubbernewb said:


> 2700x Crosshair vii hero not the wifi


Check the Crosshair 7 thread for some good advice. search back through the posts. Me and many others have posted overclocks and even bios dumps showing our setups. For memory, 24/7 ryzen memory thread and DRAM calculator thread are good places for a wealth of info.


----------



## Jericho941

Minotaurtoo said:


> ubbernewb said:
> 
> 
> 
> im in the club how do you overclock this? i mean what settings do you set? i know you only change the multi BUT there are cpu settings to change but im not sure what they are
> 
> 
> 
> depends highly on the board you have, whether you have the 2700x or 2700 and the other components involved... tell us your hardware and we can help better.... although if you have the 2700x you'd probably be best to set DOCP for your ram then turn on precision boost overdrive and be done with it since the 2700x really overclocks itself well.
Click to expand...

Could you explain the precision boost settings more? I just swapped my 1700 for a 2700x. I did a rough OC of 4.1 on all cores, but i have some testing to do.

What's the go to for testing these days. I bought my 1700 right at launch and prime95 at the time wasn't working as well.

System specs:
Ryzen 7 2700x
Asrock x370 Fatal1ty Pro Gaming (latest bios)
2x8 gskill 3200 running @ 2999 (Samsung "d" die)
2x rx480 8gb
Intel 600 nvme boot drive
Swiftech x2 360mm aio with nd gentle typhoons


----------



## DivineLight

4.1 should be what it does on stock with proper cooling. I would rather undervolt it then.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

Jericho941 said:


> Could you explain the precision boost settings more? I just swapped my 1700 for a 2700x. I did a rough OC of 4.1 on all cores, but i have some testing to do.
> 
> What's the go to for testing these days. I bought my 1700 right at launch and prime95 at the time wasn't working as well.
> 
> System specs:
> Ryzen 7 2700x
> Asrock x370 Fatal1ty Pro Gaming (latest bios)
> 2x8 gskill 3200 running @ 2999 (Samsung "d" die)
> 2x rx480 8gb
> Intel 600 nvme boot drive
> Swiftech x2 360mm aio with nd gentle typhoons



each mobo is different in where it's located but as far as I know they all have a precision boost overdrive setting somewhere in there... mine was hidden well under the advanced menu... so deep I can't remember the exact location even... but if you poke around I'm sure you will find it. If you enable precision boost overdrive and lower your voltage using a - offset of something around .075 there is a good chance you'll beat your all core oc of 4.1ghz benchmarks... some boards have different levels for the boost too... mine does not. 



You should be able to get 3200 ram on the 2700x, but then again it does depend on the board a bit as well... look for different docp settings... mine had a docp standard setting pop up in the last bios edition and it allowed me to get over 3200 on my "b" die, however I've heard that the x370 boards usually do better than b350's like mine.


as for testing, I tend to use IBT (avx edition) that can be found in the 8350 owners thread.... I use it because it also stresses the ram pretty good and allows for some quick dirty tests... then after that prime 95 is still a good test to follow up with.


----------



## rdr09

They seem to be avoiding the R7 2700X 

https://www.gamersnexus.net/hwrevie...der-vs-paste-delid-gaming-benchmarks-vs-2700x

https://play3r.net/reviews/cpus/intel-core-i9-9900k-review-the-8-core-16-thread-gaming-cpu/


----------



## Minotaurtoo

well the 9900k reviews are out and performance per dollar the 2700x stomps it... even on outright performance the 2700x doesn't lag behind too far... AMD is still doing quite well compared to intel.


----------



## rdr09

Minotaurtoo said:


> well the 9900k is out and performance per dollar the 2700x stomps it... even on outright performance the 2700x doesn't lag behind too far... AMD is still doing quite well compared to intel.


The thing they used to sodder looks worst than paste. For 500$, one may still need to delid.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

rdr09 said:


> The thing they used to sodder looks worst than paste. For 500$, one may still need to delid.


I've heard that... leave it to intel to dork it up... funny thing is.. .just undervolting the compute performance lead intel has now starts to dwindle... my cinebench score this morning was 1906 just using PBO and a small undervolt (was pretty cold this am) the 9900k score is just over 2000


----------



## gupsterg

Minotaurtoo said:


> well the 9900k reviews are out and performance per dollar the 2700x stomps it... even on outright performance the 2700x doesn't lag behind too far... AMD is still doing quite well compared to intel.


Really got no qualms on jumping ship on Intel back in Q1 17.

Recently I recall someone on r/AMD commenting that for the price of 9900K (UK IIRC), they could go quite a few combos of R7 2700X with differing mobos and nice RAM. Based on that I felt :stun: at 9900K pricing (I hadn't looked into it at the time).


----------



## Minotaurtoo

gupsterg said:


> Really got no qualms on jumping ship on Intel back in Q1 17.
> 
> Recently I recall someone on r/AMD commenting that for the price of 9900K (UK IIRC), they could go quite a few combos of R7 2700X with differing mobos and nice RAM. Based on that I felt :stun: at 9900K pricing (I hadn't looked into it at the time).


honestly I think Intel is in trouble right now... With a new architecture coming soon from AMD and the semi-official leaks showing 10-13% IPC gains as well as clock speed gains; I expect that Intel is literally pulling all the stops trying to remain relevant... and failing... they can't drop the price any because their production methods can't keep up right now... at first that news didn't bother me, but then I though about it, that means they had really sunk their own ship trying to convert to a failed 10nm process and by doing such lost production capacity... I am happy that AMD is getting it together, but it concerns me that we may end up with a new chipzilla soon if Intel can't do better than this... in the mean time though, I'm just enjoying this new level of compute power at such low prices from AMD.


----------



## rdr09




----------



## MNMadman

Minotaurtoo said:


> ...but it concerns me that we may end up with a new chipzilla soon if Intel can't do better than this...


Even if Intel could only produce half the CPUs AMD can, we would never see a new "chipzilla". Intel would remain king (a declining king, but still...) just on name alone.

Edit:


rdr09 said:


> https://youtu.be/n8QRaYGq4dk


And in this video, the GPU speed bin favors Intel in the beginning, but favors AMD at the end. The temps don't seem to be causing it.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

MNMadman said:


> Even if Intel could only produce half the CPUs AMD can, we would never see a new "chipzilla". Intel would remain king (a declining king, but still...) just on name alone.


I'm old enough to remember when IBM fell from glory... it looked similar to what's happening now... I really hope it doesn't happen since the competition is what makes for all this rapid progress we are seeing.


----------



## rdr09

MNMadman said:


> Even if Intel could only produce half the CPUs AMD can, we would never see a new "chipzilla". Intel would remain king (a declining king, but still...) just on name alone.
> 
> Edit:
> 
> And in this video, the GPU speed bin favors Intel in the beginning, but favors AMD at the end. The temps don't seem to be causing it.


Not sure about temp. Prolly test done during the time of day when ambient was higher. They are both below 80 though.


----------



## polkfan

Minotaurtoo said:


> I'm old enough to remember when IBM fell from glory... it looked similar to what's happening now... I really hope it doesn't happen since the competition is what makes for all this rapid progress we are seeing.



Why hope they stay king(they probably will anyways) 


I would love to see 50/50 split hell i'll take 70/30. 

Amd needs the money and we need some darn progress remember Intel kept us at 4 cores for years upon years with 3%-5% IPC improvements. 

Note that Intel is trying hard to compete 

Intel still hasn't improved their iGPU since what the 500 series? At a time that's all they where basically doing. Then Ryzen came and we got a 8700K and now a 9900K.

Lets hope Amd doesn't miss the date on Zen 2 or Zen 3 and i hope Amd focuses a lot on IPC and frequency improvements over pure core count. Fix their weakness instead of improving what their great at!


----------



## Minotaurtoo

polkfan said:


> Why hope they stay king(they probably will anyways)
> 
> 
> I would love to see 50/50 split hell i'll take 70/30.
> 
> Amd needs the money and we need some darn progress remember Intel kept us at 4 cores for years upon years with 3%-5% IPC improvements.
> 
> Note that Intel is trying hard to compete
> 
> Intel still hasn't improved their iGPU since what the 500 series? At a time that's all they where basically doing. Then Ryzen came and we got a 8700K and now a 9900K.
> 
> Lets hope Amd doesn't miss the date on Zen 2 or Zen 3 and i hope Amd focuses a lot on IPC and frequency improvements over pure core count. Fix their weakness instead of improving what their great at!


not hoping they stay king, just relevant... when IBM fell from glory it was a fall straight out of relevance... that's what I hope doesn't happen 50/50 split would be a dream situation for me too. AMD has really pushed Intel into a corner so they are desperate now and it shows with their latest release.


----------



## rdr09

MNMadman said:


> Even if Intel could only produce half the CPUs AMD can, we would never see a new "chipzilla". Intel would remain king (a declining king, but still...) just on name alone.
> 
> Edit:
> 
> And in this video, the GPU speed bin favors Intel in the beginning, but favors AMD at the end. The temps don't seem to be causing it.





Minotaurtoo said:


> I've heard that... leave it to intel to dork it up... funny thing is.. .just undervolting the compute performance lead intel has now starts to dwindle... my cinebench score this morning was 1906 just using PBO and a small undervolt (was pretty cold this am) the 9900k score is just over 2000



PBO is really interesting but B350/370 boards i believe do not have this feature and only for X type Ryzens. You see in the video i posted the R7 was pegged at 4GHz. With PBO (and a good cooler) the cores will boost to 4.2/4.3 depending on the game. I saw a reviewer use a 2700 @4.2 and equated it to a 2700X stock. lol


PBO off and PBO on


----------



## Minotaurtoo

rdr09 said:


> PBO is really interesting but B350/370 boards i believe do not have this feature and only for X type Ryzens. You see in the video i posted the R7 was pegged at 4GHz. With PBO (and a good cooler) the cores will boost to 4.2/4.3 depending on the game. I saw a reviewer use a 2700 @4.2 and equated it to a 2700X stock. lol
> 
> 
> PBO off and PBO on



some B350's have PBO, mine is a Asus TUF B350m + gaming and it received it on a bios update when the 2nd gen cpu's released... it also seems to have adopted the xfr too since it clocks single cores to 4.35 Ghz... now, I don't have the normal PBO options like some do with the different levels, but it does offer manual adjustments... I just set it to the default "enable" settings


----------



## Clukos

4.2GHz all core @ 1.3vcore, 64C peak temps + 3466CL14 with tuned sub-timings:










^ 1 hour realbench.


----------



## rdr09

Clukos said:


> 4.2GHz all core @ 1.3vcore, 64C peak temps + 3466CL14 with tuned sub-timings:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ^ 1 hour realbench.


Seen and shared your YT Overwatch gameplay. Impressive at over 200 fps.

@Minotaurtoo, my B350F does not have PBO. Prolly cos i only have a 2700. Using latest BIOS.


----------



## polkfan

Minotaurtoo said:


> not hoping they stay king, just relevant... when IBM fell from glory it was a fall straight out of relevance... that's what I hope doesn't happen 50/50 split would be a dream situation for me too. AMD has really pushed Intel into a corner so they are desperate now and it shows with their latest release.


True i mean for me the days of even thinking about switching to Intel is over the last CPU i will own from them is a 4790K. Unless Amd starts pulling the crap that Intel is pulling with benchmarks i will only buy them. 

I'll be upgrading to Zen 2 and then Zen 3


----------



## cowboy44mag

I'm hoping that I'm posting this question in the right place. I have just upgraded My system to a Ryzen 7 2700X and am running 3200mhz Trident Z RAM on a Asus ROG Strix 470-f gaming motherboard. I am using all stock settings as I haven't gotten the right mounts for my NH-D15S yet. I just built this rig only reusing the hard drives and my aging but still capable Sapphire R9 290 Vapor X. I have plenty of case cooling utilizing 5 140mm case fans in a Phantex Pro M Tempered Glass tower. The only "overclocking" I've done really isn't even overclocking as all I have done thus far is set the RAM speed to 3200Mhz and the timing to 16-18-18-38. Everything else is on auto.


I think that's all the details of my system, but my question is when I started to do the early benchmarks of this system it is scoring higher than other stock systems I've been able to find in Cinebench R15. Most users with stock settings are reporting scores of around 1750, give or take. My rig is consistently scoring 1870 with a high of 1881. I've also noticed in HW monitor that I'm not just hitting a turbo speed of 4.35Ghz on two cores I'm hitting up to 7.176Ghz on one to two cores for brief periods of time. I've also noticed that I'm spiking to 1.5v at auto voltage for brief periods of time as well. My peak temperature registered at 75C. I'm not complaining about better performance, but I was wondering how unusual is this? Is this just the product of AMD's improved multi-core boost rates? Does anyone else have a all stock system getting scores up to 1881 in Cinebench R15? Online most scores I've found that high were the product of overclocking.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

cowboy44mag said:


> I'm hoping that I'm posting this question in the right place. I have just upgraded My system to a Ryzen 7 2700X and am running 3200mhz Trident Z RAM on a Asus ROG Strix 470-f gaming motherboard. I am using all stock settings as I haven't gotten the right mounts for my NH-D15S yet. I just built this rig only reusing the hard drives and my aging but still capable Sapphire R9 290 Vapor X. I have plenty of case cooling utilizing 5 140mm case fans in a Phantex Pro M Tempered Glass tower. The only "overclocking" I've done really isn't even overclocking as all I have done thus far is set the RAM speed to 3200Mhz and the timing to 16-18-18-38. Everything else is on auto.
> 
> 
> I think that's all the details of my system, but my question is when I started to do the early benchmarks of this system it is scoring higher than other stock systems I've been able to find in Cinebench R15. Most users with stock settings are reporting scores of around 1750, give or take. My rig is consistently scoring 1870 with a high of 1881. I've also noticed in HW monitor that I'm not just hitting a turbo speed of 4.35Ghz on two cores I'm hitting up to 7.176Ghz on one to two cores for brief periods of time. I've also noticed that I'm spiking to 1.5v at auto voltage for brief periods of time as well. My peak temperature registered at 75C. I'm not complaining about better performance, but I was wondering how unusual is this? Is this just the product of AMD's improved multi-core boost rates? Does anyone else have a all stock system getting scores up to 1881 in Cinebench R15? Online most scores I've found that high were the product of overclocking.


 first off that 7.176 is an error... wish it was true lol... anyway, volatages around 1.5v are pretty common on the 2700x for single core boosts to 4.35ghz. Mine routinely scores near and sometime over 1900 in Cinebench with stock clock settings... the only things I've changed from stock are the ram timings/speeds and I set a - voltage offset to the cpu of .075v. Other than that nothing... with proper cooling and a decent motherboard these chips will self overclock pretty good.


edit: crap I forgot to include enabling PBO in the bios too...


----------



## Minotaurtoo

@cowboy44mag here is a run I did a couple days ago


----------



## cowboy44mag

Minotaurtoo said:


> @*cowboy44mag* here is a run I did a couple days ago



Thanks for the reply. I kind of thought the 7.1ghz reading was an error, either that or it turboed there for a fraction of a second, just enough to register. I'm glad to know that my rig is within specs. I'm going to be installing my NH-D15S as soon as I get the proper mount for it so it will have even better performance soon. I have to say, coming from a FX 8370 this processor is amazing!! I only wish I was able to keep the RGB fan from the stock cooler somewhere in the system, once I upgrade to my NH-D15S, it looks really cool. 



I have been thinking about setting a - offset as I don't think the processor needs up to 1.5V... at least not on stock. That should help with thermals too... What frequency are you running your RAM at? I have Trident Z RGB 3200mhz ram set at 3200mhz. I overclocked it to 3400mhz, tested it for stability but didn't notice any performance gain in benchmarks so I set it back to 3200mhz as I was unsure if it could handle 3600mhz.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

cowboy44mag said:


> Thanks for the reply. I kind of thought the 7.1ghz reading was an error, either that or it turboed there for a fraction of a second, just enough to register. I'm glad to know that my rig is within specs. I'm going to be installing my NH-D15S as soon as I get the proper mount for it so it will have even better performance soon. I have to say, coming from a FX 8370 this processor is amazing!! I only wish I was able to keep the RGB fan from the stock cooler somewhere in the system, once I upgrade to my NH-D15S, it looks really cool.
> 
> 
> 
> I have been thinking about setting a - offset as I don't think the processor needs up to 1.5V... at least not on stock. That should help with thermals too... What frequency are you running your RAM at? I have Trident Z RGB 3200mhz ram set at 3200mhz. I overclocked it to 3400mhz, tested it for stability but didn't notice any performance gain in benchmarks so I set it back to 3200mhz as I was unsure if it could handle 3600mhz.


I have mine clocked at 3266 but with tightened sub timings.... 14 14 14 26 40 all my sub timings are manually set with many of them pretty tight like trfc set to 275, I used the ryzen ram calculator I found somewhere on this site.


----------



## cowboy44mag

Minotaurtoo said:


> first off that 7.176 is an error... wish it was true lol... anyway, volatages around 1.5v are pretty common on the 2700x for single core boosts to 4.35ghz. Mine routinely scores near and sometime over 1900 in Cinebench with stock clock settings... the only things I've changed from stock are the ram timings/speeds and I set a - voltage offset to the cpu of .075v. Other than that nothing... with proper cooling and a decent motherboard these chips will self overclock pretty good.
> 
> 
> edit: crap I forgot to include enabling PBO in the bios too...



Is it safe to enable PBO with the Wraith Prism stock cooler or should I wait until I get my NH-D15S installed?


----------



## cowboy44mag

Minotaurtoo said:


> I have mine clocked at 3266 but with tightened sub timings.... 14 14 14 26 40 all my sub timings are manually set with many of them pretty tight like trfc set to 275, I used the ryzen ram calculator I found somewhere on this site.



Still learning with the newer Ryzen platform. I know that back in the old 990FX days tighter timings were better than higher speed, but I thought with Ryzen higher speed was better than tighter timings when it came to RAM... Like I said, still learning on this new arch.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

cowboy44mag said:


> Is it safe to enable PBO with the Wraith Prism stock cooler or should I wait until I get my NH-D15S installed?


I would suppose it best to wait, but probably "safe" as there are many safe guards built in to the system.


----------



## cowboy44mag

Minotaurtoo said:


> I would suppose it best to wait, but probably "safe" as there are many safe guards built in to the system.



Yea, I think I'm going to wait... I'm looking forward to getting better thermals, but I got to say I'm going to miss the RGB fan on the Prism cooler...


----------



## rdr09

Minotaurtoo said:


> I've heard that... leave it to intel to dork it up... funny thing is.. .just undervolting the compute performance lead intel has now starts to dwindle... my cinebench score this morning was 1906 just using PBO and a small undervolt (was pretty cold this am) the 9900k score is just over 2000


Here is what one reviewer gets in C15 MT. About equal to my 2700 @ 4000Mhz with Bias set to C15 in BIOS. 

When i run C15 on this 2700 at stock all cores jumps to only 3300MHz, thus a stock score of around 1500 as shown in the chart. Not sure about the 2700X.


----------



## frong

Minotaurtoo said:


> I've heard that... leave it to intel to dork it up... funny thing is.. .just undervolting the compute performance lead intel has now starts to dwindle... my cinebench score this morning was 1906 just using PBO and a small undervolt (was pretty cold this am) the 9900k score is just over 2000



What motherboard, memory and undervolt do you use to get 1906? I get 1870-1880 using PBO and -0.1 off set undervolt with 3200mhz memories @ 14. I want to pump it up abit if possible. My single core score seems about the same, I've gotten 178 iirc.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

frong said:


> What motherboard, memory and undervolt do you use to get 1906? I get 1870-1880 using PBO and -0.1 off set undervolt with 3200mhz memories @ 14. I want to pump it up abit if possible. My single core score seems about the same, I've gotten 178 iirc.


I'm using the Asus TUF B350m + gaming, with PBO enabled using -.075 offset RAM is GSkill Flare X 3200 kit using timings generated from the fast preset from the ryzen ram calculator with speed set to 3266. The real trick to getting that score turns out to be keeping this little chip cool and happy... I got that score on a cold morning before I cut on the heat in the house and it's pretty repeatable now that fall has kicked in down here... I really didn't expect it to make a difference though since I have a 120x360 rad running in a custom loop, but yet I still saw a difference from hot days. During Summer heat I was getting around 1885 consistently.


----------



## frong

Minotaurtoo said:


> I'm using the Asus TUF B350m + gaming, with PBO enabled using -.075 offset RAM is GSkill Flare X 3200 kit using timings generated from the fast preset from the ryzen ram calculator with speed set to 3266. The real trick to getting that score turns out to be keeping this little chip cool and happy... I got that score on a cold morning before I cut on the heat in the house and it's pretty repeatable now that fall has kicked in down here... I really didn't expect it to make a difference though since I have a 120x360 rad running in a custom loop, but yet I still saw a difference from hot days. During Summer heat I was getting around 1885 consistently.



Ah okay. That custom loop probably makes the difference then. I'm using a NH-D15 and the temps are probably around 23-26c in my PC-room. I could probably gain a few more points from further memory tweaking I suppose.


----------



## Johan45

Minotaurtoo said:


> I'm old enough to remember when IBM fell from glory... it looked similar to what's happening now... I really hope it doesn't happen since the competition is what makes for all this rapid progress we are seeing.


I wouldn't say that IBM ever fell from glory they just shifted focus away from PC's to where the real money is. https://www.nextplatform.com/2018/05/09/ibm-rounds-out-power9-systems-for-hpc-analytics/
Just to give you an idea of what they're up to and the money they're raking in.


> The base air-cooled Power AC922 costs $5,100. The 16 core Power9 processor costs $2,999 and the 20 core Power9 costs $3,999. IBM is charging $11,499 for a Tesla V100 with 16 GB of frame buffer memory and $15,499 for the V100 with 32 GB. For workloads sensitive to memory bandwidth, you want to fill all 16 memory slots on the box, so that means using 16 GB sticks, which cost $619 or $39 per GB, to reach 256 GB or 32 GB sticks, which cost $1,179 or $37 per GB, to reach 512 GB. The 64 GB sticks cost $2,699 or $42 per GB, and the 128 GB sticks cost $9,880 or $77 per GB. With two 3.2 TB NVM-Express flash drives, 256 GB of main memory, and a dual-port 100 Gb/sec EDR InfiniBand adapter, a power AC922 with two 20 core Power9s and four of the 32 GB Voltas costs $133,215 at list price. That extra GPU memory really adds up in the overall cost, but the other components are not cheap, either.


----------



## kd5151

When undervolting the 2700x. Mine does -.075 easily. Does any one feel they lose a little mhz all core boost when undervolting? But gain mhz under lighter loads?


----------



## rdr09

Minotaurtoo said:


> I'm using the Asus TUF B350m + gaming, with PBO enabled using -.075 offset RAM is GSkill Flare X 3200 kit using timings generated from the fast preset from the ryzen ram calculator with speed set to 3266. The real trick to getting that score turns out to be keeping this little chip cool and happy... I got that score on a cold morning before I cut on the heat in the house and it's pretty repeatable now that fall has kicked in down here... I really didn't expect it to make a difference though since I have a 120x360 rad running in a custom loop, but yet I still saw a difference from hot days. During Summer heat I was getting around 1885 consistently.


It's not that the reviewers are gimping Ryzen, is just they are like the regular Joe setting these systems up for testing without really tweaking them. Doubt they have the time for such, so their scores are lower even for intel cpus. Winter is coming and benching can be fun at times. Boring and fun at same time. lol Game in between.


----------



## cowboy44mag

Minotaurtoo said:


> I would suppose it best to wait, but probably "safe" as there are many safe guards built in to the system.





I Just wanted to thank you for all your help. I've got my system to where I think I may just leave it now. I ended up leaving PBO off (actually set to AUTO, which if I'm not mistaken is the same thing), overclocking my RAM to 3600 MHZ which it achieved with the standard 1.35V, and setting a -.0625 offset on the Vcore. I'm still on stock cooler and my temps are well within check, so far I haven't exceeded 70C. My peak score in Cinebench R15 is now 1900, which I think is really good considering the processor is overclocking itself with all AMD's safeguards in place.


----------



## nick name

At multiplier 41.5 I get 1912 points and at 42.5 I get 1972. I'm always over 1900 in Cinebench now. I use the Performance Enhancer Level 3 on the Crosshair VII and then bump up the EDC using Ryzen Master which increases the multi-core multiplier the CPU PBO runs at. That setup can be combined with an increased BCLK if you want a higher single-core. Also 3600MHz RAM with tight subs. 

I don't really save scores anymore so a lot of those are from when I was testing out overclock using a set multiplier in BIOS. Now I can adjust on the fly within Windows. So any high scores with a 3.70~3.72 are using my current formula with and without BCLK adjustments.


----------



## nick name

kd5151 said:


> When undervolting the 2700x. Mine does -.075 easily. Does any one feel they lose a little mhz all core boost when undervolting? But gain mhz under lighter loads?


If I'm using the standard BCLK or 100.2 I also use -.075, but with a LLC 4 too. It keeps all voltages below 1.5V under all types of loads.


----------



## cowboy44mag

nick name said:


> At multiplier 41.5 I get 1912 points and at 42.5 I get 1972. I'm always over 1900 in Cinebench now. I use the Performance Enhancer Level 3 on the Crosshair VII and then bump up the EDC using Ryzen Master which increases the multi-core multiplier the CPU PBO runs at. That setup can be combined with an increased BCLK if you want a higher single-core. Also 3600MHz RAM with tight subs.
> 
> I don't really save scores anymore so a lot of those are from when I was testing out overclock using a set multiplier in BIOS. Now I can adjust on the fly within Windows. So any high scores with a 3.70~3.72 are using my current formula with and without BCLK adjustments.





That is awesome


These processors are really amazing. I think once I get better cooling installed I'll delve more into overclocking, however on the stock cooler I think I've pushed it as far as I should.


----------



## nick name

cowboy44mag said:


> That is awesome
> 
> 
> These processors are really amazing. I think once I get better cooling installed I'll delve more into overclocking, however on the stock cooler I think I've pushed it as far as I should.


Corsair had their old school H100i on sale for $99 (other sites are $129-$169). You may need to find the AM4 bracket for it. Not sure that it comes with them since they are older. However, they seem to perform very well.

Edit:

Still on sale

https://www.corsair.com/us/en/Categ...xtreme-Performance-CPU-Cooler/p/CW-9060009-WW


----------



## Minotaurtoo

cowboy44mag said:


> I Just wanted to thank you for all your help. I've got my system to where I think I may just leave it now. I ended up leaving PBO off (actually set to AUTO, which if I'm not mistaken is the same thing), overclocking my RAM to 3600 MHZ which it achieved with the standard 1.35V, and setting a -.0625 offset on the Vcore. I'm still on stock cooler and my temps are well within check, so far I haven't exceeded 70C. My peak score in Cinebench R15 is now 1900, which I think is really good considering the processor is overclocking itself with all AMD's safeguards in place.


congrats, looks like you doing well... it's cool how amd did that self overclocking algorithm... I had mine overclocked to 4.25 once and was hitting nearly 2000 in cinebench, but I didn't like how much juice it was pulling from the vrm's on this board... so I just went with PBO and and a voltage drop... little lower scores, but over all it works better with less power....


----------



## noobee

AMD sucks. Rips off Canadians. I'm going with Intel even if I have to pay more.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

noobee said:


> AMD sucks. Rips off Canadians. I'm going with Intel even if I have to pay more.


when you make a post like this, it's always nice if you tell people why... especially if it might help someone avoid problems.


----------



## jclafi

next



noobee said:


> AMD sucks. Rips off Canadians. I'm going with Intel even if I have to pay more.


----------



## Johan45

noobee said:


> AMD sucks. Rips off Canadians. I'm going with Intel even if I have to pay more.


Not sure the intent here but we get ripped off by everyone! LoL
He might be alluding to the fact that Samsung is the better RAM to get but most any will work these days.


----------



## noobee

Minotaurtoo said:


> when you make a post like this, it's always nice if you tell people why... especially if it might help someone avoid problems.


Just blowing off steam. The 'used' cpu is probably sold/gone and then looked online for a potential sale only to find 2700x prices went up considerably in Canada.

Now looking at the 2700 which is on sale.

I'd like to go Intel but I can't justify buying at retail, those chips..... unfortunately or maybe fortunately (that I am sticking to the principle.).  

Are you 2700 owners happy with your chip? I'm mostly mad at having to deal with the Canadian system (of higher prices and a crappy currency). 

I was told, also, that the vendors set the price.... but, AMD has no say in it? Really?


----------



## noobee

Johan45 said:


> Not sure the intent here but we get ripped off by everyone! LoL
> He might be alluding to the fact that Samsung is the better RAM to get but most any will work these days.


I hope so. I currently have Corsair Vengeance LPX 3200 MHz CL16, Hynix RAM (waiting for a system build to go in and try).


----------



## Johan45

noobee said:


> I hope so. I currently have Corsair Vengeance LPX 3200 MHz CL16, Hynix RAM (waiting for a system build to go in and try).


Corsair can be finicky, only one way to find out. The 2700 is on sale today only on amazon for $289 CDN https://www.amazon.ca/AMD-Ryzen-Pro...5c7-b44812341f65&pf_rd_r=A2RAHZV1K4KMTV52H16K


----------



## MishelLngelo

noobee said:


> Just blowing off steam. The 'used' cpu is probably sold/gone and then looked online for a potential sale only to find 2700x prices went up considerably in Canada.
> 
> Now looking at the 2700 which is on sale.
> 
> I'd like to go Intel but I can't justify buying at retail, those chips..... unfortunately or maybe fortunately (that I am sticking to the principle.).
> 
> Are you 2700 owners happy with your chip? I'm mostly mad at having to deal with the Canadian system (of higher prices and a crappy currency).
> 
> I was told, also, that the vendors set the price.... but, AMD has no say in it? Really?


If you want to blame somebody, blame Intel, it's their mistakes with next gen that they didn't manage to produce in time while they curtailed production of older gen that caused CPU shortage driving their CPU prices up and with that Ryzen CPUs became more desirable and retailers and their middleman took the opportunity to raise prices across the board. That should pass early next year at latest when both start with new models. Intel went so far as to resume production of last gen CPUs. 
Many times same scenario played, RAM (a factory making plastic for chips burned), flooding of a factory in Asisa producing parts for HDDs causing shortage and higher prices........ Than $CDN value drop in late '70s, we used to blame Pierre Trudeau for that one.


----------



## kazablanka

i bought to my self a new 2700x 

pbo x10 , offset -0.075v memory @3600mhz on prime x470 pro


----------



## MishelLngelo

kazablanka said:


> i bought to my self a new 2700x
> 
> pbo x10 , offset -0.075v memory @3600mhz on prime x470 pro


Which BIOS ? Best I could do is:


----------



## kazablanka

MishelLngelo said:


> Which BIOS ? Best I could do is:


4024

For me it stoped @4325ghz for cinebench @4250mhz my score is about 1970-1980


----------



## MishelLngelo

kazablanka said:


> 4024
> 
> For me it stoped @4325ghz for cinebench @4250mhz my score is about 1970-1980


Must be a good CPU, I couldn't pass benches with 4.3GHz for love or money, even at over 1.5v. This CB was at 4.25GHz/1.416v and RAM 3600. All tested stable but one step up and puff, no go.


----------



## kazablanka

MishelLngelo said:


> Must be a good CPU, I couldn't pass benches with 4.3GHz for love or money, even at over 1.5v. This CB was at 4.25GHz/1.416v and RAM 3600. All tested stable but one step up and puff, no go.


Mine is stable @4250mhz with 1.3875v llc5 but without voltage drop @Idle i prefer to run cpu stock with pbo ,there is not much difference in real word


----------



## MishelLngelo

kazablanka said:


> Mine is stable @4250mhz with 1.3875v llc5 but without voltage drop @Idle i prefer to run cpu stock with pbo ,there is not much difference in real word


My PBO is not working too good despite being cooled good so I have 2 distinctive settings, one with all stock CPU and 3600 RAM and another full tilt 4.25 OC. No real need for anything else.


----------



## kazablanka

MishelLngelo said:


> My PBO is not working too good despite being cooled good so I have 2 distinctive settings, one with all stock CPU and 3600 RAM and another full tilt 4.25 OC. No real need for anything else.


what is your all core boost at cinebench with pbox10 ?


----------



## MishelLngelo

kazablanka said:


> what is your all core boost at cinebench with pbox10 ?


Never over 4.2 and even than not all the time. Mostly hovers around 4.17 or less.


----------



## nick name

MishelLngelo said:


> Never over 4.2 and even than not all the time. Mostly hovers around 4.17 or less.


Have you tried manually increasing any PBO values? PPT TDC or EDC?


----------



## MishelLngelo

Yes, for a while but didn't see any difference and gave up.


----------



## nick name

MishelLngelo said:


> Yes, for a while but didn't see any difference and gave up.


Well your results are still better than what I would get using regular PBO. I was only seeing 40 to 41 on the all core multiplier. So high-five for that.


----------



## MishelLngelo

There's another thing, preferred cores are 5, 3 and 1 respectively but but in case of turbo boost or under single core load they rarely get used, always weakest cores.


----------



## noobee

Johan45 said:


> Corsair can be finicky, only one way to find out. The 2700 is on sale today only on amazon for $289 CDN https://www.amazon.ca/AMD-Ryzen-Pro...5c7-b44812341f65&pf_rd_r=A2RAHZV1K4KMTV52H16K


That's what I was looking at.


----------



## MNMadman

MishelLngelo said:


> There's another thing, preferred cores are 5, 3 and 1 respectively but but in case of turbo boost or under single core load they rarely get used, always weakest cores.


Core quality identified by the system doesn't mean that Windows will prioritize those cores.

Maybe someday the Windows scheduler will pay attention to information like that, but it doesn't now.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

Johan45 said:


> Not sure the intent here but we get ripped off by everyone! LoL
> He might be alluding to the fact that Samsung is the better RAM to get but most any will work these days.


My mother board does almost as good on corsair vengeance (not b-die) as it does on the samsung b-die.... the only differences is I can get much tighter timings and just a tad more frequency... 3266 vs 3000 and cas 14 vs 16 it's really at the subtimings though that it gets interesting... trfc 275 vs 575 lol The only issue I still have with the b-die that's driving me nuts is randomly it will go unstable on a restart/cold boot... unless I clock it down to 3133 and this is independent of timings as I've manually set all timings and it's happened... even tried the "safe" timings and once in a blue moon it'll go unstable on a restart/cold boot.... and it's not a "oh it must have been unstable before" kind of difference... it's a "it will pass mem test, IBT/AVX set to very high 20 runs and OCCT on one boot and then crap out a couple days later and isn't even stable enough to run firefox" kind of change. All I have to do is go into bios and exit right back out and it'll go back to being stable... but if I set it to 3133 and leave it, it will never do it... no idea what the deal is, but it's bound to be something in this board that I'm missing that's still on auto and ever so often it just gets it wrong.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Minotaurtoo said:


> each mobo is different in where it's located but as far as I know they all have a precision boost overdrive setting somewhere in there... mine was hidden well under the advanced menu... so deep I can't remember the exact location even... but if you poke around I'm sure you will find it. If you enable precision boost overdrive and lower your voltage using a - offset of something around .075 there is a good chance you'll beat your all core oc of 4.1ghz benchmarks... some boards have different levels for the boost too... mine does not.
> 
> 
> 
> You should be able to get 3200 ram on the 2700x, but then again it does depend on the board a bit as well... look for different docp settings... mine had a docp standard setting pop up in the last bios edition and it allowed me to get over 3200 on my "b" die, however I've heard that the x370 boards usually do better than b350's like mine.
> 
> 
> as for testing, I tend to use IBT (avx edition) that can be found in the 8350 owners thread.... I use it because it also stresses the ram pretty good and allows for some quick dirty tests... then after that prime 95 is still a good test to follow up with.



You shouldnt use either of those to assess memory stability. Will they crash if there are errors? Sure. But how do you determine if it was a CPU cache error or a memory error? The CPU is being stressed more than the ram is so its a high possiblilty that there could be cache error instead of the memory error. To minimize this you take the OC to stock multiplier and dont let it use XFR to boost then run a memory testing software designed specifically to test for memory errors. TM5, HCI Memtest, RamTest(without cache enabled), these are all quick stability testing methods but to determine full stability after confirming initial stability through the 10-20 passes of TM5, or 500% on HCI, or 5000% RamTest etc, I use MemTest 6.1 bootable which is included with the HCI memtest Pro Version. Load the .iso to a USB with Rufus and boot to the USB device and run it while you are asleep or at work. 1000% is around 10 hours using 16gb of ram and it tests everything but what is reserved by the bios which for me is 15.93gb. It also has a benchmark score you can use to compare how the memory setup increased the CPU performance or vice versa. Pretty handy when wondering if changing some timings made a difference in CPU performance by comparing the new score to the old score.


----------



## noobee

I guess I am building a 2700 system. Looking at motherboards now.


----------



## rdr09

noobee said:


> I guess I am building a 2700 system. Looking at motherboards now.


Im one of the few who own a 2700 here. Prolly cos not long ago the difference between this and the X was like less than 50$. The all core boost of the nonX is pretty low - 3300MHz. This is on a B350 Motherboard. I can only get 4000MHz all core on mine. Only reason i picked this cos it was only for 208$ in Micro Center. Main advantage of nonX is its low power consumption.

Normally i would suggest the X but seeing the price difference now . . .


----------



## glnn_23

Got a 2700x and an Asus x470 itx board. Fun so far.


----------



## MishelLngelo

glnn_23 said:


> Got a 2700x and an Asus x470 itx board. Fun so far.


4.45GHz, great score !!! 8700K can do it just over 5GHz, 5.1 more likely.


----------



## noobee

rdr09 said:


> Im one of the few who own a 2700 here. Prolly cos not long ago the difference between this and the X was like less than 50$. The all core boost of the nonX is pretty low - 3300MHz. This is on a B350 Motherboard. I can only get 4000MHz all core on mine. Only reason i picked this cos it was only for 208$ in Micro Center. Main advantage of nonX is its low power consumption.
> 
> Normally i would suggest the X but seeing the price difference now . . .


The price difference was huge, that's the only reason I bought it. Also, in Canada, the prices are much higher than what Americans can find for the same cpu. In fact, the 2700X went up in price slightly here. I was trying to buy it used but I hesitated for way too long and the one used 2700X appears to have been sold. I did buy the 2700 new for cheaper than the asking price - which was, albeit, very fair. They wanted $370 CAD, shipped. I bought the 2700 on Amazon Canada for $327 taxes included. To compare, the cheapest 2700X was on Ebay (newegg.ca) at $399 + tax (450$) but CURRENTLY, the cheapest 2700X is $480 CAD (total with taxes in).

EDIT: Ebay Canada/newegg site now has the 2700X at $395 so with taxes, it comes to $446. So, I still bought the 2700 for over $100 less so that is my justification.... I know the performance won't be as good and for the longest time, I was aiming to get the 2700X. Oh well.


----------



## rdr09

noobee said:


> The price difference was huge, that's the only reason I bought it. Also, in Canada, the prices are much higher than what Americans can find for the same cpu. In fact, the 2700X went up in price slightly here. I was trying to buy it used but I hesitated for way too long and the one used 2700X appears to have been sold. I did buy the 2700 new for cheaper than the asking price - which was, albeit, very fair. They wanted $370 CAD, shipped. I bought the 2700 on Amazon Canada for $327 taxes included. To compare, the cheapest 2700X was on Ebay (newegg.ca) at $399 + tax (450$) but CURRENTLY, the cheapest 2700X is $480 CAD (total with taxes in).
> 
> EDIT: Ebay Canada/newegg site now has the 2700X at $395 so with taxes, it comes to $446. So, I still bought the 2700 for over $100 less so that is my justification.... I know the performance won't be as good and for the longest time, I was aiming to get the 2700X. Oh well.



Just don't cheap out on the motherboard too much. If you follow the last few pages, the Asus X470 Strix is getting good results. And it is not too expensive. When 7nm comes, we can sell our cpu and switch.


----------



## noobee

rdr09 said:


> Just don't cheap out on the motherboard too much. If you follow the last few pages, the Asus X470 Strix is getting good results. And it is not too expensive. When 7nm comes, we can sell our cpu and switch.


I agree with you, 100% and that's why that board is under consideration.  

https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-amd-motherboards/1711804-out-these-budget-x470.html#post27687880

https://ca.pcpartpicker.com/products/compare/6hF48d,jXJtt6,YJgzK8,NGbwrH/


----------



## Yvese

What are everyone's voltages at stock? I just upgraded from a 2600x out of impulse and I'm pretty amazed at how much lower the voltage is. On the 2600x I was hitting 4ghz @ ~1.3v just watching XFR do its thing in games. On the 2700x I'm hitting 4.1-4.15 @ 1.25v-1.3v. Did I just get a good chip or is this average for the 2700x?

EDIT: My rig in my signature isn't updating and OCN is slow as hell. Jeez what happened to this site.


----------



## MishelLngelo

My hits 1.416v at most when everything's on auto. but that's only on this last BIOS, It used to hit 1.5v on earlier ones. Same voltage when OCed to 4.25. Than I set to 1.4v and LLc5 brings it up to same voltage.


----------



## MNMadman

Yvese said:


> What are everyone's voltages at stock? I just upgraded from a 2600x out of impulse and I'm pretty amazed at how much lower the voltage is. On the 2600x I was hitting 4ghz @ ~1.3v just watching XFR do its thing in games. On the 2700x I'm hitting 4.1-4.15 @ 1.25v-1.3v. Did I just get a good chip or is this average for the 2700x?
> 
> EDIT: My rig in my signature isn't updating and OCN is slow as hell. Jeez what happened to this site.


Try editing your profile to uncheck the sig rig, save it, then check the box to show it and save again.


----------



## the1corrupted

Yvese said:


> What are everyone's voltages at stock? I just upgraded from a 2600x out of impulse and I'm pretty amazed at how much lower the voltage is. On the 2600x I was hitting 4ghz @ ~1.3v just watching XFR do its thing in games. On the 2700x I'm hitting 4.1-4.15 @ 1.25v-1.3v. Did I just get a good chip or is this average for the 2700x?
> 
> EDIT: My rig in my signature isn't updating and OCN is slow as hell. Jeez what happened to this site.


Silicon Lottery also published a "voltage table" that is meant to give a 'ballpark' of what might be expected.

Model	|	SSE Freq.	|	AVX2 Freq.	|	Voltage	|	% Capable
2600X |	Not Tested |	4.10GHz |	1.375V	|	100%
2600X |	Not Tested |	4.15GHz |	1.400V	|	Top 81%
2600X |	Not Tested |	4.20GHz |	1.425V	|	Top 56%
2600X |	Not Tested |	4.25GHz |	1.450V	|	Top 25%
2700X |	Not Tested |	4.05GHz |	1.350V	|	100%
2700X |	Not Tested |	4.10GHz |	1.375V	|	Top 91%
2700X |	Not Tested |	4.15GHz |	1.400V	|	Top 67%
2700X |	Not Tested |	4.20GHz |	1.425V	|	Top 32%

https://siliconlottery.com/pages/statistics


----------



## Yvese

MishelLngelo said:


> My hits 1.416v at most when everything's on auto. but that's only on this last BIOS, It used to hit 1.5v on earlier ones. Same voltage when OCed to 4.25. Than I set to 1.4v and LLc5 brings it up to same voltage.


What voltage/clock speed is it sticking to in games?



MNMadman said:


> Try editing your profile to uncheck the sig rig, save it, then check the box to show it and save again.


That worked, thanks!



the1corrupted said:


> Silicon Lottery also published a "voltage table" that is meant to give a 'ballpark' of what might be expected.
> 
> Model	|	SSE Freq.	|	AVX2 Freq.	|	Voltage	|	% Capable
> 2600X |	Not Tested |	4.10GHz |	1.375V	|	100%
> 2600X |	Not Tested |	4.15GHz |	1.400V	|	Top 81%
> 2600X |	Not Tested |	4.20GHz |	1.425V	|	Top 56%
> 2600X |	Not Tested |	4.25GHz |	1.450V	|	Top 25%
> 2700X |	Not Tested |	4.05GHz |	1.350V	|	100%
> 2700X |	Not Tested |	4.10GHz |	1.375V	|	Top 91%
> 2700X |	Not Tested |	4.15GHz |	1.400V	|	Top 67%
> 2700X |	Not Tested |	4.20GHz |	1.425V	|	Top 32%
> 
> https://siliconlottery.com/pages/statistics


Interesting stats. Unfortunately I have no interest in manually OCing since the headroom is so small and the extra heat/voltage just isn't worth it to me after watching how XFR works in games, especially the 2700x and seeing it do much better than the 2600x. I have no idea how going higher in core count results in higher core speeds and lower voltages but AMD has done it. So used to Intel chips where it's the complete opposite.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Yvese said:


> Interesting stats. Unfortunately I have no interest in manually OCing since the headroom is so small and the extra heat/voltage just isn't worth it to me after watching how XFR works in games, especially the 2700x and seeing it do much better than the 2600x. I have no idea how going higher in core count results in higher core speeds and lower voltages but AMD has done it. So used to Intel chips where it's the complete opposite.



Cant go by silicon lottery statistics at all for Ryzen. They used the multiplier to OC the chips which is the absolute worst way to OC Ryzen. Pstate is a lil better and XFR/PBO with bclk OC is the best imo. Not to mention they only tested a small amount of the chips as they only did one batch bc they couldnt make a profit from it. Id say if they wouldve went with XFR OC then they wouldve gotten better results and made a profit.


----------



## Yvese

CJMitsuki said:


> Cant go by silicon lottery statistics at all for Ryzen. They used the multiplier to OC the chips which is the absolute worst way to OC Ryzen. Pstate is a lil better and XFR/PBO with bclk OC is the best imo. Not to mention they only tested a small amount of the chips as they only did one batch bc they couldnt make a profit from it. Id say if they wouldve went with XFR OC then they wouldve gotten better results and made a profit.


Makes sense why they couldn't make a profit. Their customers are casual-average OCers which likely would already know Ryzen's limited OC potential and about XFR. 

Personally I've tried 4.2ghz all core on the 2600x. IMO it just wasn't worth the extra heat and voltage. I needed about 1.42v to get it stable and for such a small overclock I just went back stock and let XFR do its thing. With the 2700x there's even less incentive since at stock I'm getting all core boosted close to those speeds already, and with manual OC I'd lose the 4.35 single core boosts. I mean AMD just makes everything so simple out the box. Just slap on a good cooler and you're already OC'd without even touching anything in the bios. You're one of the few exceptions though lol. That's an impressive OC.

I think with Zen 2 and ( most likely ) XFR3, it will be even smarter and further make manual OC a thing of the past for 99% of people on AMD platforms. With Intel it will still be better to manually OC until they come out with their own XFR.


----------



## brenopapito

CJMitsuki said:


> Cant go by silicon lottery statistics at all for Ryzen. They used the multiplier to OC the chips which is the absolute worst way to OC Ryzen. Pstate is a lil better and XFR/PBO with bclk OC is the best imo. Not to mention they only tested a small amount of the chips as they only did one batch bc they couldnt make a profit from it. Id say if they wouldve went with XFR OC then they wouldve gotten better results and made a profit.


Noob question here: Any video or tutorial to learn how to OC by "XFR/PBO with bclk"?


----------



## rdr09

noobee said:


> I hope so. I currently have Corsair Vengeance LPX 3200 MHz CL16, Hynix RAM (waiting for a system build to go in and try).



I read the LPX has trouble running on Ryzen systems but if you can run it on spec that would be great. Even at 2933 with tighter timings like Cl16 or Cl14 would be more than enuf.


----------



## CJMitsuki

brenopapito said:


> Noob question here: Any video or tutorial to learn how to OC by "XFR/PBO with bclk"?



Nothing worthwhile, most of it is just leave multiplier at 37, enable Core Performance Boost and C States, set Performance Enhancer to whatever your desired setting (majority will be PE level 3 and for mpre aggressive voltages PE level 4), then you tune the base clock but you have to work with the CPU voltage which is set to an Offset. I use a slight positive offset at PE level 4 with 100 base clock then bumo the clock up and the offset up a small amount depending on your cooling. The voltages and clocks at PE4 are pretty aggressive so dont start with that. Make sure to monitor everything with hwinfo until you get the hang of it. There are other settings that help out, like LLC is a big one as you will need it for PE4 for sure. Ill post a txt file of my bios settings at 100 bclk so you can look at them. Just dont copy the memory settings unless you have a really good IMC and ram. Again, PE level 4 is really aggressive so dont start with it, even PE3 has semi aggressive voltages as you take the base clock up and it doesnt take much base clock OC to make the clocks go really high so take it slow and a slight bump in offset voltage is more than you think so just watch temps and be careful. Dont let the cpu get above 75c its just not a good idea on XFR since the voltages arent controlled by you but rather the system sets them as needed according to the system load. Also, with XFR the colder you can run the cpu the better OC you are going to get from XFR multiplier as it is determined by temp headroom at boot up for a max multiplier of 43.5x before your baseclock is factored in. At 101 max OC is 4393, 102 is 4437mhz, 103 is around 4.5ghz, and 104.8 is 4558mhz. I dont go above that since it will affect the GPU negatively and its highly unlikely youll need to go that high anyway unless you have some really good cooling and its more likely that the majority wont need to even go past 101 baseclock. Ill brb with my bios settings dump and ill edit this post with that txt file. Use this info at your own risk.


Edit: heres my settings


----------



## gupsterg

Minotaurtoo said:


> some B350's have PBO, mine is a Asus TUF B350m + gaming and it received it on a bios update when the 2nd gen cpu's released... it also seems to have adopted the xfr too since it clocks single cores to 4.35 Ghz... now, I don't have the normal PBO options like some do with the different levels, but it does offer manual adjustments... I just set it to the default "enable" settings
> 
> 
> 
> rdr09 said:
> 
> 
> 
> @Minotaurtoo, my B350F does not have PBO. Prolly cos i only have a 2700. Using latest BIOS.
Click to expand...

Yep non X regardless of x3xx or x4xx does not get PBO option.

Only difference I see between say PBO settings on X370 vs X470 is no scalar override setting. So FIT voltage control can not be relaxed manually between 2x-10x. Minor point is Ryzen Master does not allow PBO tweaking. All of above I believe is due to X370 not having "official" support for PBO.

I can not feel as if this is some gimping by AMD on past gen chipset, as X470 only really improved on power consumption of chipset from what I understand.



Yvese said:


> What are everyone's voltages at stock? I just upgraded from a 2600x out of impulse and I'm pretty amazed at how much lower the voltage is. On the 2600x I was hitting 4ghz @ ~1.3v just watching XFR do its thing in games. On the 2700x I'm hitting 4.1-4.15 @ 1.25v-1.3v. Did I just get a good chip or is this average for the 2700x?
> 
> EDIT: My rig in my signature isn't updating and OCN is slow as hell. Jeez what happened to this site.


Only two tests that would be best to use as compare IMO. Either switching off Core Performance Boost (ie Precision Boost/XFR) and getting readings for the all cores boost voltage for comparison IMO. Or testing CPUs with manual ACB setup, see what VID is needed for a fixed load like P95 128K in place FFT.

I forgot to do first test between my 2x 2700X, but have some data on second test method, below was P95 v28.10b1 128K in place FFT.

2700X Batch: 1805 SUS, 4.1GHz ACB I needed 1.318V VID in PState 0, as use LLC: Auto (ie AMD stock on my board), effective VCORE ~1.25V.

2700X Batch: 1825 SUS, 4.1GHz ACB I needed 1.268V VID in PState 0, as use LLC: Auto (ie AMD stock on my board), effective VCORE ~1.2V. 



Yvese said:


> What voltage/clock speed is it sticking to in games?
> 
> That worked, thanks!
> 
> Interesting stats. Unfortunately I have no interest in manually OCing since the headroom is so small and the extra heat/voltage just isn't worth it to me after watching how XFR works in games, especially the 2700x and seeing it do much better than the 2600x. I have no idea how going higher in core count results in higher core speeds and lower voltages but AMD has done it. So used to Intel chips where it's the complete opposite.


Personally I prefer PState 0 OC (ie ACB). I've done several tests where even a lower all cores boost (~200MHz) than PState 0 OC has higher peak temps and voltages, averages are close, but the PState OC has ~+200MHz.



CJMitsuki said:


> Cant go by silicon lottery statistics at all for Ryzen. They used the multiplier to OC the chips which is the absolute worst way to OC Ryzen. Pstate is a lil better and XFR/PBO with bclk OC is the best imo. Not to mention they only tested a small amount of the chips as they only did one batch bc they couldnt make a profit from it. Id say if they wouldve went with XFR OC then they wouldve gotten better results and made a profit.


I reckon Silicon Lottery's data is relevant, there are plus and negatives to it, but easy to understand what they would be and why the fixed core/voltage method was employed.


----------



## CJMitsuki

gupsterg said:


> I reckon Silicon Lottery's data is relevant, there are plus and negatives to it, but easy to understand what they would be and why the fixed core/voltage method was employed.



The fixed core/voltage method was employed because they didnt have the time to learn and test XFR. So, with very minimal quantity of chips and no thorough testing for best OC method that data can only be taken with a grain of salt as it was also on the first bios release. Their data is relevant but only in a very specific context and cant be used for any general comparisons. Had they had the time to do a more thorough run then im sure the data would be quite different.


----------



## gupsterg

CJMitsuki said:


> The fixed core/voltage method was employed because they didnt have the time to learn and test XFR. So, with very minimal quantity of chips and no thorough testing for best OC method that data can only be taken with a grain of salt as it was also on the first bios release. Their data is relevant but only in a very specific context and cant be used for any general comparisons. Had they had the time to do a more thorough run then im sure the data would be quite different.


Comparing PB/XFR/PBO between CPUs needs lab like conditions. Temperatures is one big factor for how the boosting would work.

When I asked The Stilt way back when gen 1 was released how do we go about comparing CPU stock VID/VCORE he said it is not possible due to the factors involved. Now gen 2 has even more differing PB/XFR algorithm you can think what the answer would be.

Yes I believe they should release sample size. I also believe they would use LLC not AMD stock, so again this needs to be stated and taken into consideration.


----------



## xcr89

I just got a 2700X on my C6H motherboard from having a 1700 i must say i'm really impressed already, i have a few questions thought.

How do i put a limit on how high voltage it can boost to in load and how do i set the minimum idle voltage when not boosted?

Also i have had some issues on the OC 3/4 and windows after a while the system just hangs randomly / freezes all the time usually this is happening when it's boosting up and down a few times, we are talking like non workloads like have chrome open it randomly hangs etc.

i'm familiar with ryzen dram calculator though.

And how do i get the lowest temp's with all this boosting algorithm i saw somewhere that if i use bclk it can lower temps with current algorithm, becouse it uses less power or something like that.

Reggards


----------



## gupsterg

You can not limit set voltage as you ask. Only option to scale it back is use a negative VCORE offset.

IMO your CPU can not take PE 3/4 from what you state. Perhaps a positive VCORE offset may help.

I can not believe using BCLK tweaks can affect temperature if final frequency is same.


----------



## brenopapito

CJMitsuki said:


> Nothing worthwhile, most of it is just leave multiplier at 37, enable Core Performance Boost and C States, set Performance Enhancer to whatever your desired setting (majority will be PE level 3 and for mpre aggressive voltages PE level 4), then you tune the base clock but you have to work with the CPU voltage which is set to an Offset. I use a slight positive offset at PE level 4 with 100 base clock then bumo the clock up and the offset up a small amount depending on your cooling. The voltages and clocks at PE4 are pretty aggressive so dont start with that. Make sure to monitor everything with hwinfo until you get the hang of it. There are other settings that help out, like LLC is a big one as you will need it for PE4 for sure. Ill post a txt file of my bios settings at 100 bclk so you can look at them. Just dont copy the memory settings unless you have a really good IMC and ram. Again, PE level 4 is really aggressive so dont start with it, even PE3 has semi aggressive voltages as you take the base clock up and it doesnt take much base clock OC to make the clocks go really high so take it slow and a slight bump in offset voltage is more than you think so just watch temps and be careful. Dont let the cpu get above 75c its just not a good idea on XFR since the voltages arent controlled by you but rather the system sets them as needed according to the system load. Also, with XFR the colder you can run the cpu the better OC you are going to get from XFR multiplier as it is determined by temp headroom at boot up for a max multiplier of 43.5x before your baseclock is factored in. At 101 max OC is 4393, 102 is 4437mhz, 103 is around 4.5ghz, and 104.8 is 4558mhz. I dont go above that since it will affect the GPU negatively and its highly unlikely youll need to go that high anyway unless you have some really good cooling and its more likely that the majority wont need to even go past 101 baseclock. Ill brb with my bios settings dump and ill edit this post with that txt file. Use this info at your own risk.
> 
> 
> Edit: heres my settings


Thanks!! I'll give it a try.


----------



## glnn_23

A couple of benches for the 2700x and Asus x470 itx board


----------



## nick name

glnn_23 said:


> A couple of benches for the 2700x and Asus x470 itx board


What are you using for cooling? And what is the ambient temp there?


----------



## nick name

glnn_23 said:


> A couple of benches for the 2700x and Asus x470 itx board


Also, how stable is your RAM at those higher speeds? What is your daily stable setting?


----------



## glnn_23

nick name said:


> What are you using for cooling? And what is the ambient temp there?


Will have to take a guess on the temp yesterday morning but similar to here today. Maybe between 13-20C during testing period.
Temps showing in Aida64 obviously not when bench was running.

Initially had the board in a Caselabs S3 on stock cooler then moved to a an S8 with 3 x HWLabs nemesis gtx 360 in p/p. EK supremacy and dual d5. Noctua 80mm over vrm block.


----------



## glnn_23

RAM at this speed is only for this bench. 

I have run stressapptest as below and will probably try for 3866 next

https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=227564&d=1540711355


----------



## rdr09

gupsterg said:


> Yep non X regardless of x3xx or x4xx does not get PBO option.
> 
> Only difference I see between say PBO settings on X370 vs X470 is no scalar override setting. So FIT voltage control can not be relaxed manually between 2x-10x. Minor point is Ryzen Master does not allow PBO tweaking. All of above I believe is due to X370 not having "official" support for PBO.
> 
> I can not feel as if this is some gimping by AMD on past gen chipset, as X470 only really improved on power consumption of chipset from what I understand.


Yah, non X miss out on that feature.



glnn_23 said:


> A couple of benches for the 2700x and Asus x470 itx board


Nice. Like giving us a glimps of Zen2 plus the IPC bump. Good job.


----------



## cowboy44mag

Ok, I have I'm sure a really stupid question, but I'm sure you guys are the ones to ask. So I had some crash to desktop and system reboots after overclocking my RAM. I brought the clock down from 3600Mhz to 3533Mhz and have been 100% stable ever since (I kept the Ram voltage at the spec 1.35V). I was considering raising the ram voltage from 1.35 (spec on the box) to 1.4V and on different forums they said that was safe just make sure SOC voltage is 1.1 or 1.2 max. My problem is VDDCR SOC is set to AUTO and is showing 1.150V. The AUTO SOC voltage doesn't change no matter how low I put the RAM clock. Is running it on AUTO with 1.150V ok? Most of the guides are from first gen Ryzen and I have both a X470 motherboard and Ryzen 7 2700X. Has SOC voltage max changed between generations? Will be be safe for me to leave VDDCR SOC on auto and raise the ram voltage from 1.35v to 1.4v to see if I can get 3600Mhz or maybe a little more stable?


----------



## MishelLngelo

That thing with SOC voltage is subject to "Silicone lottery" of both, CPU/IMC and RAM . I'm doing fine with 1.087v but core voltage asks for 1.4v or 4.25GHz. This RAM on the other hand asks for 1.4v to be stable at 3600MHz.


----------



## cowboy44mag

MishelLngelo said:


> That thing with SOC voltage is subject to "Silicone lottery" of both, CPU/IMC and RAM . I'm doing fine with 1.087v but core voltage asks for 1.4v or 4.25GHz. This RAM on the other hand asks for 1.4v to be stable at 3600MHz.



Is it recommended taking SOC off auto and setting it lower say 1.1V? I really think my RAM would be stable at 3600Mhz with 1.4V but don't want the SOC to be overvolted on AUTO. At this point the only thing I want overclocked is the RAM.


----------



## nick name

cowboy44mag said:


> Is it recommended taking SOC off auto and setting it lower say 1.1V? I really think my RAM would be stable at 3600Mhz with 1.4V but don't want the SOC to be overvolted on AUTO. At this point the only thing I want overclocked is the RAM.


The best way to stabilize RAM is with a manual SOC voltage setting. Many use 1.1V at higher speeds ie 3600 and others find between 1V - 1.08V stable for lower speeds.


----------



## nick name

cowboy44mag said:


> Ok, I have I'm sure a really stupid question, but I'm sure you guys are the ones to ask. So I had some crash to desktop and system reboots after overclocking my RAM. I brought the clock down from 3600Mhz to 3533Mhz and have been 100% stable ever since (I kept the Ram voltage at the spec 1.35V). I was considering raising the ram voltage from 1.35 (spec on the box) to 1.4V and on different forums they said that was safe just make sure SOC voltage is 1.1 or 1.2 max. My problem is VDDCR SOC is set to AUTO and is showing 1.150V. The AUTO SOC voltage doesn't change no matter how low I put the RAM clock. Is running it on AUTO with 1.150V ok? Most of the guides are from first gen Ryzen and I have both a X470 motherboard and Ryzen 7 2700X. Has SOC voltage max changed between generations? Will be be safe for me to leave VDDCR SOC on auto and raise the ram voltage from 1.35v to 1.4v to see if I can get 3600Mhz or maybe a little more stable?


At DOCP the 1.35V profile setting isn't 100% stable with my 3600CL15 kit. You'll find increasing the voltage just a little will help a lot and then mandatory when you tighten up timings.. For the b-die settings in the 1usmus calcultor at 3600MHz I can use 1.46V, but when I tighten the timings further I need to go up to 1.5V


----------



## cowboy44mag

I've been benchmark and stress testing after setting my SOC at 1.1V. I left the RAM clocked at 3533Mhz with 1.35V and spec timings. So far it seems stable so my next step is going to be increasing the RAM voltage to 1.4 and seeing how much further I can push it. I've noticed that my benchmark scores have gone up with just setting the SOC at 1.1V, I would assume that's because the processor is running slightly cooler and allowing it to scale a little higher.


----------



## glnn_23

For me this seems the way to go for 24/7 setup with 2700x in Asus x470 Strix itx. Have it in a Caselabs S8 with 3 x 360 rads.

Bclk 101
PE Level 2
CPU Ratio Auto
DDR4. 3434Mhz
Vcore offset -0.1125
Vdimm 1.39v
SOC 1.1v
LLC 2


----------



## cowboy44mag

I still have some stability testing to do, but I have settled on 3666Hmz on the RAM CL16-18-18-38 @ 1.37V. I am running G.Skill TridentZ RGB RAM. Is that voltage safe for 24/ 7 use on this RAM? I tried to boot it at I think 3766 but it was a total no go, and I'm not sure with this RAM if I should try any higher voltages. Saying this RAM is specked for 3200Mhz its not a bad overclock. If this turns out to be totally stable is it safe to run this RAM at 1.37V long term?


----------



## cowboy44mag

glnn_23 said:


> For me this seems the way to go for 24/7 setup with 2700x in Asus x470 Strix itx. Have it in a Caselabs S8 with 3 x 360 rads.
> 
> Bclk 101
> PE Level 2
> CPU Ratio Auto
> DDR4. 3434Mhz
> Vcore offset -0.1125
> Vdimm 1.39v
> SOC 1.1v
> LLC 2





Once I get my RAM set I'm going to work on figuring out where my Vcore offset should be. I set a small offset, but I know on CPU Auto Ratio it shouldn't need 1.48V which is what it tops off at using Ryzen Master to monitor voltage and clock speed.


----------



## Novus88

Hello i have 2700X GIGABYTE X470 GAMING 7 wifi (bios F5) and corsair vengeance led 3200 cl 16 2x16gb @ 2933 cl14
can you help me set the bios to get 4.2 on all the cores? I am currently using pb0 with a negative offset of 0.0250 and arriving at 4050 on all cores on full load.
What parameters do you recommend from the bios ?
I possible to have a complete setting of all paramatres of my bios for the best performance of this processor ?

i have full custom liquid with 480mm radiator and core P5 case.

thanks for help.


----------



## MishelLngelo

I don't know if that MB can do it but I just set manual multiplier and Voltage. For 4.2GHz you need multiplier 42.0 and most probably voltage of 1.4v to start with. After testing you can adjust it until you find lowest voltage it can run stable. If there's LLc settiing in BIOS you can try voltage correction using it.


----------



## Novus88

MishelLngelo said:


> I don't know if that MB can do it but I just set manual multiplier and Voltage. For 4.2GHz you need multiplier 42.0 and most probably voltage of 1.4v to start with.


i have try 1.45 for 4.2 but fail occt stgress test with freeze. if is possible i prefere the pb0 oc experience but i doint know all voice to set.


----------



## nick name

glnn_23 said:


> For me this seems the way to go for 24/7 setup with 2700x in Asus x470 Strix itx. Have it in a Caselabs S8 with 3 x 360 rads.
> 
> Bclk 101
> PE Level 2
> CPU Ratio Auto
> DDR4. 3434Mhz
> Vcore offset -0.1125
> Vdimm 1.39v
> SOC 1.1v
> LLC 2


Damn those are some low temps. How cold is the room the PC is in? Or do you have an AC vent that blows straight into your case like CJ does?


----------



## nick name

Is anyone using an EVGA CLC 280?


----------



## glnn_23

nick name said:


> Damn those are some low temps. How cold is the room the PC is in? Or do you have an AC vent that blows straight into your case like CJ does?


Not sure on ambient temps. Just ran this yesterday morning while still cool before temps got up in 30s in Melb. No aircon.

Heres my set up. Use this pretty much for all platforms.

Fans blowing down on vrms, mem and back of mb. 3 x 360 rads in p/p.
Ran way hotter on the included air cooler in the S3.


----------



## the1corrupted

Hello, everyone!

I finally got my 2700X and I am very excited. It took me all day to get my computer build "just right" so I only just now started the process to overclocking my system. Right now, I have Corsair Vengeance RGB Pro working at the XMP settings. 3000 Mhz @ 15, 17, 17, 35

I overclocked my processor to 4.1 Ghz with 1.425 volts set in bios (1.44 reported by CPU-Z).

Right now, I only had enough time to get Cinebench scores: 1858 Multithreaded / 172 Single Threaded

I am curious where I should try to tighten my memory timings? I have tried changing some values, but then the system stopped posting. Which is very annoying.

So far, everything seems stable. Fingers crossed. I haven't attempted 4.2 Ghz yet, as I want to focus on what benefits tuning my RAM can bring.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

the1corrupted said:


> Hello, everyone!
> 
> I finally got my 2700X and I am very excited. It took me all day to get my computer build "just right" so I only just now started the process to overclocking my system. Right now, I have Corsair Vengeance RGB Pro working at the XMP settings. 3000 Mhz @ 15, 17, 17, 35
> 
> I overclocked my processor to 4.1 Ghz with 1.425 volts set in bios (1.44 reported by CPU-Z).
> 
> Right now, I only had enough time to get Cinebench scores: 1858 Multithreaded / 172 Single Threaded
> 
> I am curious where I should try to tighten my memory timings? I have tried changing some values, but then the system stopped posting. Which is very annoying.
> 
> So far, everything seems stable. Fingers crossed. I haven't attempted 4.2 Ghz yet, as I want to focus on what benefits tuning my RAM can bring.


with that voltage you should be able to get at least 4.2 ghz stable (depending on your boards vrms and the "silicon lottery" of coarse) As for the RAM, that all depends on if it's Samsung b die or not... not sure about that particular kit, but I'm guessing it's not because of the default timings on it... but if it turns out to be, you could likely get timings way tighter and a bit more speed out of it as well... my old non b-die kit though wouldn't even give me 133mhz past its stock and wouldn't budge on timings at all... look up ryzen ram calculator in the search bar and you should find a thread dedicated to the cause of tuning your ram on ryzen... oh I almost forgot.. Congrats on your purchase!


----------



## the1corrupted

Minotaurtoo said:


> with that voltage you should be able to get at least 4.2 ghz stable (depending on your boards vrms and the "silicon lottery" of coarse) As for the RAM, that all depends on if it's Samsung b die or not... not sure about that particular kit, but I'm guessing it's not because of the default timings on it... but if it turns out to be, you could likely get timings way tighter and a bit more speed out of it as well... my old non b-die kit though wouldn't even give me 133mhz past its stock and wouldn't budge on timings at all... look up ryzen ram calculator in the search bar and you should find a thread dedicated to the cause of tuning your ram on ryzen... oh I almost forgot.. Congrats on your purchase!


4.2 Ghz ran Cinebench!

*UPDATE:* I entered the RAM timings from the calculator, and once it was all in, I ran a couple tests. Now I don't know what my CPU Mark score was before applying the new memory profile, but it is stable. I got a slight bump in Cinebench R15.

What I have are Hynix modules, which seem to be decent enough.

New scores:

Cinebench: 1906 / 176 (MT / ST)
CPU Mark: 19001 / 2241 Single Core
3D Mark TimeSpy: 7604 (Previous score with 6700K @ 4.6Ghz: 6885) I gained 800 points!

This CPU mark score beats the pants off my old Skylake i7 6700k. Everything I had researched up to this point indicated I should get similar or better performance from Zen+ in terms of gaming.


----------



## rdr09

the1corrupted said:


> 4.2 Ghz ran Cinebench!
> 
> *UPDATE:* I entered the RAM timings from the calculator, and once it was all in, I ran a couple tests. Now I don't know what my CPU Mark score was before applying the new memory profile, but it is stable. I got a slight bump in Cinebench R15.
> 
> What I have are Hynix modules, which seem to be decent enough.
> 
> New scores:
> 
> Cinebench: 1906 / 176 (MT / ST)
> CPU Mark: 19001 / 2241 Single Core
> 3D Mark TimeSpy: 7604 (Previous score with 6700K @ 4.6Ghz: 6885) I gained 800 points!
> 
> This CPU mark score beats the pants off my old Skylake i7 6700k. Everything I had researched up to this point indicated I should get similar or better performance from Zen+ in terms of gaming.


Lovely. RAM at 3466 Cl14 will add another 30-40 pts in Cine MT.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

the1corrupted said:


> 4.2 Ghz ran Cinebench!
> 
> *UPDATE:* I entered the RAM timings from the calculator, and once it was all in, I ran a couple tests. Now I don't know what my CPU Mark score was before applying the new memory profile, but it is stable. I got a slight bump in Cinebench R15.
> 
> What I have are Hynix modules, which seem to be decent enough.
> 
> New scores:
> 
> Cinebench: 1906 / 176 (MT / ST)
> CPU Mark: 19001 / 2241 Single Core
> 3D Mark TimeSpy: 7604 (Previous score with 6700K @ 4.6Ghz: 6885) I gained 800 points!
> 
> This CPU mark score beats the pants off my old Skylake i7 6700k. Everything I had researched up to this point indicated I should get similar or better performance from Zen+ in terms of gaming.


good to hear, nice scores... make sure to run some tests to ensure stability... everyone has their favorite tests to run... prime 95, IBT/AVX, OCCT... and I forget what is best for testing the ram, memtest I think it is... someone here will know and chime in.


----------



## MishelLngelo

Thaiphoon Burner http://www.softnology.biz/files.html great for finding details about your RAM.

https://hcidesign.com/memtest/ for in windows testing.


----------



## the1corrupted

Minotaurtoo said:


> good to hear, nice scores... make sure to run some tests to ensure stability... everyone has their favorite tests to run... prime 95, IBT/AVX, OCCT... and I forget what is best for testing the ram, memtest I think it is... someone here will know and chime in.


I went to run MemTest last night and... something happened. Dunno what, but the system DIED. It will no longer boot. Cleared CMOS. Motherboard is giving me a CPU light, indicating a problem with the processor.

Thankfully the board I got has a flashback feature. I am using this right now to re-flash the bios just in case something got corrupt.

Could I have KILLED the CPU? I've never actually killed a processor before. Or is it more likely the motherboard?

*UPDATE:* Panic mode is over. Flashback worked. Somehow the motherboard also stored the profile I saved for the memory (thank God!).

Downclocked the CPU to 4.15 Ghz (just in case it was the clock as well).

Configured a much more aggressive fan profile (it might have been temperature-related), and am running MemTest to make sure my timings are stable.

FYI, it's nothing super fancy. 3000 Mhz CL 15-17-17-32. However, running this tuned value for my memory has yielded positive performance results.


----------



## MishelLngelo

That would be quite unusual but I did manage to burn few CPUs although it was quite long time ago. All those volt mods at that time. One of them was a sempron before they had metal cover.


----------



## the1corrupted

the1corrupted said:


> *UPDATE:* Panic mode is over. Flashback worked. Somehow the motherboard also stored the profile I saved for the memory (thank God!).
> 
> Downclocked the CPU to 4.15 Ghz (just in case it was the clock as well).
> 
> Configured a much more aggressive fan profile (it might have been temperature-related), and am running MemTest to make sure my timings are stable.
> 
> FYI, it's nothing super fancy. 3000 Mhz CL 15-17-17-32. However, running this tuned value for my memory has yielded positive performance results.


*Update 2:* CPU temperature is a little hotter than I would have liked. Capping out at 89 degrees under Prime95 Small FFTs.

Reconfigured the case for more fans over the CPU cooler. Using a Dark Rock Pro TF due to the form factor of my case, but ironically, the cooler is *just* short enough to allow me to mount TWO fans right over it.
I had two Thermaltake Riing orange LED fans lying around, and figured "why not" as they are optimized for static pressure.

While I was at it, re-applied thermal compound just in case my first application had an air pocket or something.

So this is where I will leave it, I think. 4.15 Ghz isn't a terrible speed, and I don't notice the 50 Mhz in games. Still cruising 120 frames on a 144hz monitor, so life is good.

I have also noticed better frame consistency across the board. My Skylake would bounce around a little when I was playing games, but Ryzen seems to just peg itself steady which yields a very consistent gaming experience.

Much love! Photo is attached. (Note, that's just lacking the top of the case)


----------



## rdr09

the1corrupted said:


> I went to run MemTest last night and... something happened. Dunno what, but the system DIED. It will no longer boot. Cleared CMOS. Motherboard is giving me a CPU light, indicating a problem with the processor.
> 
> Thankfully the board I got has a flashback feature. I am using this right now to re-flash the bios just in case something got corrupt.
> 
> Could I have KILLED the CPU? I've never actually killed a processor before. Or is it more likely the motherboard?
> 
> *UPDATE:* Panic mode is over. Flashback worked. Somehow the motherboard also stored the profile I saved for the memory (thank God!).
> 
> Downclocked the CPU to 4.15 Ghz (just in case it was the clock as well).
> 
> Configured a much more aggressive fan profile (it might have been temperature-related), and am running MemTest to make sure my timings are stable.
> 
> FYI, it's nothing super fancy. 3000 Mhz CL 15-17-17-32. However, running this tuned value for my memory has yielded positive performance results.


Great troubleshooting. Those fans will really help cool the vrms and ram. When i had the stock Wraith cooler, the rams never had heat issues. Ever since i switched to the Cooler Master T4, my rams all of sudden are heating up at just 3200 MHz.May have to setup something like yours.

Oh, you just took the top of the case off. I thought its a bench setup.


----------



## nick name

Something strange started happening last night while I was trying to beat some benchmark scores. When changing the BCLK to 102 the system boots at a 36.5 multiplier for min and max. This has not happened before and it continues today also. 

After a little testing it appears that any BCLK value above 101 produces the behavior. 

It seems like a limp-mode of some sort.

Edit:

Sigh . . . I think this may be a result of updating the firmware on my 970 EVO.

Edit 2:

It was not the drive, but Core Performance boost changing from Enabled to Auto. It was my oversight.


----------



## Yvese

the1corrupted said:


> *Update 2:* CPU temperature is a little hotter than I would have liked. Capping out at 89 degrees under Prime95 Small FFTs.
> 
> Reconfigured the case for more fans over the CPU cooler. Using a Dark Rock Pro TF due to the form factor of my case, but ironically, the cooler is *just* short enough to allow me to mount TWO fans right over it.
> I had two Thermaltake Riing orange LED fans lying around, and figured "why not" as they are optimized for static pressure.
> 
> While I was at it, re-applied thermal compound just in case my first application had an air pocket or something.
> 
> So this is where I will leave it, I think. 4.15 Ghz isn't a terrible speed, and I don't notice the 50 Mhz in games. Still cruising 120 frames on a 144hz monitor, so life is good.
> 
> I have also noticed better frame consistency across the board. My Skylake would bounce around a little when I was playing games, but Ryzen seems to just peg itself steady which yields a very consistent gaming experience.
> 
> Much love! Photo is attached. (Note, that's just lacking the top of the case)


My CPU is completely stock and I get all core boosted to 4.1-4.15 in games. Really see no need for manual OCs unless you're trying to aim for 4.3+. These chips are near maxed out already. Don't see why go through the added heat and voltage for something you will never notice in games. As long as you have good cooling XFR boosts you high enough at safe levels. The biggest gains will be from your memory.

EDIT: Sig isn't working. I'm on a 2700x with a Deepcool Assassin.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

Yvese said:


> My CPU is completely stock and I get all core boosted to 4.1-4.15 in games. Really see no need for manual OCs unless you're trying to aim for 4.3+. These chips are near maxed out already. Don't see why go through the added heat and voltage for something you will never notice in games. As long as you have good cooling XFR boosts you high enough at safe levels. The biggest gains will be from your memory.
> 
> EDIT: Sig isn't working. I'm on a 2700x with a Deepcool Assassin.


I get better scores in most benchmarks at stock than I do with all core OC of 4.1... but strangely the 4.1ghz all core uses less power and runs cooler.... going over that though is a completely different story. Like you said, stock is best... especially if you have the cooling to turn on PBO and get that extra little bit. My biggest gains came from adjusting the timings on my ram... but my poor B350 board doesn't like anything over 2933 (not supported and they're serious about it) but I was able to get 3133 with very tight timings and for whatever reason when it's in a good mood I can get up to 3266, but the next boot it may or may not be stable on memtest.


----------



## the1corrupted

Yvese said:


> My CPU is completely stock and I get all core boosted to 4.1-4.15 in games. Really see no need for manual OCs unless you're trying to aim for 4.3+. These chips are near maxed out already. Don't see why go through the added heat and voltage for something you will never notice in games. As long as you have good cooling XFR boosts you high enough at safe levels. The biggest gains will be from your memory.
> 
> EDIT: Sig isn't working. I'm on a 2700x with a Deepcool Assassin.


My sig isn't working either! I thought that was just me...

Anyway, I do an every-core OC because Precision Boost doesn't necessarily boost itself for the work load. As far as extra temperatures? It's not that much when gaming. CPU doesn't break 70 degrees with my new more optimized cooling setup under lighter loads like games. GPU reaches 75 degrees instead of 70 which I didn't expect. Overall, component temperatures aren't anywhere near 'risky' territory unless I'm running Prime95 for a few hours.

I finally got my Aida64 setup with the Sensor Panel to measure temperatures and clock speeds.



Minotaurtoo said:


> I get better scores in most benchmarks at stock than I do with all core OC of 4.1... but strangely the 4.1ghz all core uses less power and runs cooler.... going over that though is a completely different story. Like you said, stock is best... especially if you have the cooling to turn on PBO and get that extra little bit. My biggest gains came from adjusting the timings on my ram... but my poor B350 board doesn't like anything over 2933 (not supported and they're serious about it) but I was able to get 3133 with very tight timings and for whatever reason when it's in a good mood I can get up to 3266, but the next boot it may or may not be stable on memtest.


I gained around 10% more raw performance, but also made the performance in gaming much more consistent when using the RAM calculator. It got my primary timings down to 14, 14, 14, 26. Still at 3000 Mhz, but my system is completely stable running at the settings I've got. (MemTest found ZERO errors in 4 passes). 2933 @ CL14 I think wouldn't yield any different results for my processor.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

the1corrupted said:


> My sig isn't working either! I thought that was just me...
> 
> Anyway, I do an every-core OC because Precision Boost doesn't necessarily boost itself for the work load. As far as extra temperatures? It's not that much when gaming. CPU doesn't break 70 degrees with my new more optimized cooling setup under lighter loads like games. GPU reaches 75 degrees instead of 70 which I didn't expect. Overall, component temperatures aren't anywhere near 'risky' territory unless I'm running Prime95 for a few hours.
> 
> I finally got my Aida64 setup with the Sensor Panel to measure temperatures and clock speeds.
> 
> 
> 
> I gained around 10% more raw performance, but also made the performance in gaming much more consistent when using the RAM calculator. It got my primary timings down to 14, 14, 14, 26. Still at 3000 Mhz, but my system is completely stable running at the settings I've got. (MemTest found ZERO errors in 4 passes). 2933 @ CL14 I think wouldn't yield any different results for my processor.


It really depends on cooling and board settings how much the xfr helps... with PBO on, xfr will hold over 4.2ghz usually in games for me... but my weak board won't hold 4.2ghz + all core OC due to the 4 phase vrms... as for the ram I settled in at 3133 cas 14 because it's the fastest I can get it and it stays stable from boot to boot.... there is something in this board that doesn't like fast ram, but timings it's pretty flexible on... check your trfc timing, mine is 275 and my trc is 40.... those two seem to have a dramatic impact on ram performance, of coarse when you change them all the others have to be changed too or it won't work properly...


----------



## polkfan

I still see no reason to OC this thing. 

I feel like Amd already pushed these things to the max i mean we already have 8 cores and 16 threads i see no reason to OC all cores to 4.1-4.2ghz when the CPU jumps to 4.35Ghz at stock. 

Ryzen main issue is its single threaded performance and getting the most out of that is what we should be achieving i much prefer people who OC using XFR instead. 

With my H150I all cores turbo to 4050mhz anyways on full load why add 15C to the temps for 100mhz while i'm losing 200mhz on single threaded tasks which again is Ryzen's main weakness. 

Makes 0 sense.

Instead buy the best ram you can and tune your timings and speed to the max and try from their.


----------



## os2wiz

jprovido said:


> I'm using a B350 motherboard on my 2700x (upgraded from a 1700x) is it better to run it on stock with XFR or all cores at 4.1GHz 1.34v. I can get it stable at 4150mhz but I decided to just leave it at 4.1GHz and the voltage is not that high


 I consider it a waste to run a 2700X on a B350 motherboards. All B350 motherboards lack adequate VRM support and that is why you are only stable to 4.1 GHZ on all cores. I am stable to 4.25 GHZ on all cores on my MSI X470 Gaming M7 AC motherboard. It is about 4th best on vrm support of X470 boards. Bested by Asus ROG CH7, Gigabyte X470 Gaming 7, and Asrock X470 Taichi.


----------



## MishelLngelo

That's only if it does go much over 4.2GHz or even to 4.3GHz on all cores but it's not the case at all times and processors. My for some reason rarely goes that far, 4.1+ a bit is all and even then on unacceptable voltages . On the other hand, with set OC at 4.25GHz and 1.4v I can run indefinitely.


----------



## the1corrupted

MishelLngelo said:


> That's only if it does go much over 4.2GHz or even to 4.3GHz on all cores but it's not the case at all times and processors. My for some reason rarely goes that far, 4.1+ a bit is all and even then on unacceptable voltages . On the other hand, with set OC at 4.25GHz and 1.4v I can run indefinitely.


This has been similar to my experience. I can lock in at 4.15 pretty darn well, but under stock settings, or even with Precision Boost Overdrive, I don't see the CPU trying to hit 4.35.

Plus, this adds a level of consistency when considering performance tests. It is much easier to test a things when you can eliminate variables.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

os2wiz said:


> I consider it a waste to run a 2700X on a B350 motherboards. All B350 motherboards lack adequate VRM support and that is why you are only stable to 4.1 GHZ on all cores. I am stable to 4.25 GHZ on all cores on my MSI X470 Gaming M7 AC motherboard. It is about 4th best on vrm support of X470 boards. Bested by Asus ROG CH7, Gigabyte X470 Gaming 7, and Asrock X470 Taichi.


Generally I agree, but some B350's/B450's are OK, not great, not even "good", but OK.... I can hit 4.2 pretty easy and within safe voltages... but I don't like the power pull it creates, nearly 200 watts... highest stable I've hit was 4.25, but it was just over 1.45 volts with extreme LLC set... I recently discovered that my B350 has the same exact vrm setup as the x470 version of this board... I only know this because I built a rig for a friend with the x470 version of this board and was surprised it was the same vrm... the biggest difference I saw was ram speed stability and support... this poor board can't hit over 3200 consistently for nothing... the other board was easy with the same ram... I even put my chip in it just to see...


----------



## MishelLngelo

With some BIOS versions like 4011 on this MB, voltages were shooting over 1.5v occasionally if all left on auto, that I wouldn't tolerate and had to limit it to 1.4 so PBO wouldn't go over 4GHz. Only solution was to do a small OC 4GHz for everyday use and a top OC 4.25GHz for when needed. Now I have 2 OC profiles set, one almost auto but RAM at 3600, Cl16 and one that I call "Damn the torpedoes" with 4.25GHz.


----------



## MNMadman

MishelLngelo said:


> With some BIOS versions like 4011 on this MB, voltages were shooting over 1.5v occasionally if all left on auto, that I wouldn't tolerate and had to limit it to 1.4 so PBO wouldn't go over 4GHz. Only solution was to do a small OC 4GHz for everyday use and a top OC 4.25GHz for when needed. Now I have 2 OC profiles set, one almost auto but RAM at 3600, Cl16 and one that I call "Damn the torpedoes" with 4.25GHz.


Those are actually acceptable and expected voltages for these CPUs with PB2 and XFR2. They won't stay at that voltage if you're loading the CPU anyway, so it won't do damage.


----------



## MishelLngelo

MNMadman said:


> Those are actually acceptable and expected voltages for these CPUs with PB2 and XFR2. They won't stay at that voltage if you're loading the CPU anyway, so it won't do damage.


It's true that those voltages above 1.5v don't hang around long but if at same time it boosted to 4.3GHz+ I wouldn't mind but at same time frequency drops to bellow 4GHz than it's just wrong. It also sends my fans into overdrive. A nice steady OC with all acceptable temps and voltages still works best.


----------



## nick name

I am currently running load line calibration with my negative offset and it prevents my CPU from ever getting up to 1.5V. My setup is LLC4 and - offset .075. Of course you'll have to fiddle with it to find the stable solution for yourself, but I've found using the LLC combined with offset is what keeps the CPU fed enough to prevent those high voltage requirements.


----------



## MishelLngelo

I'm quite satisfied with this OC, manual 1.4v + Llc5 never hit over 1.416v with temps in low 70s. Over 4.25Ghz it will not go (stable) for love or money anyway. That's quite a hard border right there.


----------



## respoda

Hi there,

I've just built this rig right here:

- Ryzen 2700x
- Asus ROG Strix X470-F Gaming
- 2x8Gb Corsair LPX CMK16GX4M2Z3200C16
- BeQuiet! Dark Rock Pro 4
- Samsung 970 EVO 250Gb M2
- WD Blue 1Tb (WD10EZEX)

I've been using an old i7-860, oc'd @4.0Ghz, up until now and for the past 9 years straight,
so this turned out to be quite the upgrade 

I haven't done any manual overclocking yet, but I have fiddled with the PBO and XFR settings,
and I was wondering if these settings are alright for 24/7 use...
Seeing that a lot of you know just about everything there is to know about Ryzen overclocking,
there is no better place to ask than here...

Here are my settings :


Everything on auto, except :

- Performance Enhancer : Level 3 (OC) (settings from the Stilt)
- TPU: keep current settings
- VDDCR CPU Voltage : Offset Mode, -0.0125v
- VDDCR SOC Voltage: Manual, 0.99375v
- DRAM Voltage : 1.355v

- VDDCR LLC : Level 4
- VDDCR CPU Current : 140%
- VDDCR CPU Switching Freq.: Manual, 400
- Spread Spectrum : OFF
- VDDCR CPU Power Duty Control: T.Probe
- VDDCR CPU Power Phase: Manual, Ultra Fast
- VDDCR SOC LLC : Level 2
- VDDCR SOc Current : 120%
- VDDCR SOC Switching Freq.: Manual, 400
- VDDCR SOC Power Phase: Optimized

- Memory Interleaving: Channel
- Power Supply Idle Control: Typical Current Idle
- OpCache Control: Enabled

- PBO: Auto (=enabled)
- Scalar: Manual, X10

RAM is @3200, 14,14,14,30,44, as per the Ryzen RAM calculator
I've set all timings manually according to the calculator...
- Geardown Mode Enabled
- Power Down Mode Enabled
- BSG OFF, BSGalt ON


In Cinebench, with these settings, I'm getting scores between 1850 and 1860 -ish
Temps go up to 70-75°C in Cinebench, while around 50-60 in normal to heavy real workloads.

Single core shoots up to 3.340Ghz for any given core, and all-cores go up to 4.090Ghz.

My Vcore under Cinebench load goes to about 1.325v.
VIN is set at 1.319 so LLC level4 seems just about right, perhaps a tad too much ? 
Level 3 still drops about .02v and I'm getting a bit better results with Level4...


I'm just wondering, are these results acceptable for a Ryzen 2700x ?
Is this alright for 24/7 use, because on single cores I'm getting vcore spikes of 1.50v to even 1.53 and 1.55,
and I know it's supposed to be alright but it still feels counter-intuitive to everything I (thought) I knew...

If I increase the Vcore offset, I can get those spikes down to 1.5 and even 1.45v, but then all core boost goes down to 4.0-4.05
and single core boost also drops to 4.2-4.25...temps go down about 10 degrees.

So I'm undecided whether to keep these settings with a bit higher temps and voltage but much better boosts,
or to increase the voltage offset to 0.05 or 0.075 with lower temps and lower boosts...
AMD keeps saying those 1.55v boosts are normal and per design, so I'm inclined to keep these settings, though I'm still not sure.

Also, the RAM calculator says my RAM is 93% healthy and capable of doing 3600 @18,18,18
-> haven't tried yet but just wondering if that could be correct ? It is rated at only [email protected]
It is already doing [email protected] so I guess that's not bad ? Better than the rated specs....

Lastly, would it matter much to do a manual overclock on this cpu ?
Since it seems to do extremely well on auto settings and PBO/XFR set a bit more aggressively.
Temps seem fairly acceptable ? I understand 75°C is considered a good upper limit to keep it at ?

Any info, thoughts and considerations are highly appreciated, since I must admit it is all a bit confusing,
especially when coming straight from a 2nd gen Intel CPU from 2009...


----------



## MishelLngelo

That looks quite good, even 100 points up in CB score makes no difference in real work. I' can'd hit even 1800 if all left on auto even with PBo working in full.


----------



## rdr09

respoda said:


> Hi there,
> 
> I've just built this rig right here:
> 
> - Ryzen 2700x
> - Asus ROG Strix X470-F Gaming
> - 2x8Gb Corsair LPX CMK16GX4M2Z3200C16
> - BeQuiet! Dark Rock Pro 4
> - Samsung 970 EVO 250Gb M2
> - WD Blue 1Tb (WD10EZEX)
> 
> I've been using an old i7-860, oc'd @4.0Ghz, up until now and for the past 9 years straight,
> so this turned out to be quite the upgrade
> 
> I haven't done any manual overclocking yet, but I have fiddled with the PBO and XFR settings,
> and I was wondering if these settings are alright for 24/7 use...
> Seeing that a lot of you know just about everything there is to know about Ryzen overclocking,
> there is no better place to ask than here...
> 
> Here are my settings :
> 
> 
> Everything on auto, except :
> 
> - Performance Enhancer : Level 3 (OC) (settings from the Stilt)
> - TPU: keep current settings
> - VDDCR CPU Voltage : Offset Mode, -0.0125v
> - VDDCR SOC Voltage: Manual, 0.99375v
> - DRAM Voltage : 1.355v
> 
> - VDDCR LLC : Level 4
> - VDDCR CPU Current : 140%
> - VDDCR CPU Switching Freq.: Manual, 400
> - Spread Spectrum : OFF
> - VDDCR CPU Power Duty Control: T.Probe
> - VDDCR CPU Power Phase: Manual, Ultra Fast
> - VDDCR SOC LLC : Level 2
> - VDDCR SOc Current : 120%
> - VDDCR SOC Switching Freq.: Manual, 400
> - VDDCR SOC Power Phase: Optimized
> 
> - Memory Interleaving: Channel
> - Power Supply Idle Control: Typical Current Idle
> - OpCache Control: Enabled
> 
> - PBO: Auto (=enabled)
> - Scalar: Manual, X10
> 
> RAM is @3200, 14,14,14,30,44, as per the Ryzen RAM calculator
> I've set all timings manually according to the calculator...
> - Geardown Mode Enabled
> - Power Down Mode Enabled
> - BSG OFF, BSGalt ON
> 
> 
> In Cinebench, with these settings, I'm getting scores between 1850 and 1860 -ish
> Temps go up to 70-75°C in Cinebench, while around 50-60 in normal to heavy real workloads.
> 
> Single core shoots up to 3.340Ghz for any given core, and all-cores go up to 4.090Ghz.
> 
> My Vcore under Cinebench load goes to about 1.325v.
> VIN is set at 1.319 so LLC level4 seems just about right, perhaps a tad too much ?
> Level 3 still drops about .02v and I'm getting a bit better results with Level4...
> 
> 
> I'm just wondering, are these results acceptable for a Ryzen 2700x ?
> Is this alright for 24/7 use, because on single cores I'm getting vcore spikes of 1.50v to even 1.53 and 1.55,
> and I know it's supposed to be alright but it still feels counter-intuitive to everything I (thought) I knew...


Is your Windows Power Plan set to Balance and the Minimum Processor State to 25% under Advance Power Options? See if it helps in performance a bit. Also, within Asus BIOS, have you set Bias to Cinebench 15?


----------



## nick name

respoda said:


> Hi there,
> 
> I've just built this rig right here:
> 
> - Ryzen 2700x
> - Asus ROG Strix X470-F Gaming
> - 2x8Gb Corsair LPX CMK16GX4M2Z3200C16
> - BeQuiet! Dark Rock Pro 4
> - Samsung 970 EVO 250Gb M2
> - WD Blue 1Tb (WD10EZEX)
> 
> I've been using an old i7-860, oc'd @4.0Ghz, up until now and for the past 9 years straight,
> so this turned out to be quite the upgrade
> 
> I haven't done any manual overclocking yet, but I have fiddled with the PBO and XFR settings,
> and I was wondering if these settings are alright for 24/7 use...
> Seeing that a lot of you know just about everything there is to know about Ryzen overclocking,
> there is no better place to ask than here...
> 
> Here are my settings :
> 
> 
> Everything on auto, except :
> 
> - Performance Enhancer : Level 3 (OC) (settings from the Stilt)
> - TPU: keep current settings
> - VDDCR CPU Voltage : Offset Mode, -0.0125v
> - VDDCR SOC Voltage: Manual, 0.99375v
> - DRAM Voltage : 1.355v
> 
> - VDDCR LLC : Level 4
> - VDDCR CPU Current : 140%
> - VDDCR CPU Switching Freq.: Manual, 400
> - Spread Spectrum : OFF
> - VDDCR CPU Power Duty Control: T.Probe
> - VDDCR CPU Power Phase: Manual, Ultra Fast
> - VDDCR SOC LLC : Level 2
> - VDDCR SOc Current : 120%
> - VDDCR SOC Switching Freq.: Manual, 400
> - VDDCR SOC Power Phase: Optimized
> 
> - Memory Interleaving: Channel
> - Power Supply Idle Control: Typical Current Idle
> - OpCache Control: Enabled
> 
> - PBO: Auto (=enabled)
> - Scalar: Manual, X10
> 
> RAM is @3200, 14,14,14,30,44, as per the Ryzen RAM calculator
> I've set all timings manually according to the calculator...
> - Geardown Mode Enabled
> - Power Down Mode Enabled
> - BSG OFF, BSGalt ON
> 
> 
> In Cinebench, with these settings, I'm getting scores between 1850 and 1860 -ish
> Temps go up to 70-75°C in Cinebench, while around 50-60 in normal to heavy real workloads.
> 
> Single core shoots up to 3.340Ghz for any given core, and all-cores go up to 4.090Ghz.
> 
> My Vcore under Cinebench load goes to about 1.325v.
> VIN is set at 1.319 so LLC level4 seems just about right, perhaps a tad too much ?
> Level 3 still drops about .02v and I'm getting a bit better results with Level4...
> 
> 
> I'm just wondering, are these results acceptable for a Ryzen 2700x ?
> Is this alright for 24/7 use, because on single cores I'm getting vcore spikes of 1.50v to even 1.53 and 1.55,
> and I know it's supposed to be alright but it still feels counter-intuitive to everything I (thought) I knew...
> 
> If I increase the Vcore offset, I can get those spikes down to 1.5 and even 1.45v, but then all core boost goes down to 4.0-4.05
> and single core boost also drops to 4.2-4.25...temps go down about 10 degrees.
> 
> So I'm undecided whether to keep these settings with a bit higher temps and voltage but much better boosts,
> or to increase the voltage offset to 0.05 or 0.075 with lower temps and lower boosts...
> AMD keeps saying those 1.55v boosts are normal and per design, so I'm inclined to keep these settings, though I'm still not sure.
> 
> Also, the RAM calculator says my RAM is 93% healthy and capable of doing 3600 @18,18,18
> -> haven't tried yet but just wondering if that could be correct ? It is rated at only [email protected]
> It is already doing [email protected] so I guess that's not bad ? Better than the rated specs....
> 
> Lastly, would it matter much to do a manual overclock on this cpu ?
> Since it seems to do extremely well on auto settings and PBO/XFR set a bit more aggressively.
> Temps seem fairly acceptable ? I understand 75°C is considered a good upper limit to keep it at ?
> 
> Any info, thoughts and considerations are highly appreciated, since I must admit it is all a bit confusing,
> especially when coming straight from a 2nd gen Intel CPU from 2009...


That's a great build. I think you could find some more power if you felt comfortable going to a 360 AIO, but I can understand why some folks don't.


----------



## nick name

rdr09 said:


> Is your Windows Power Plan set to Balance and the Minimum Processor State to 25% under Advance Power Options? See if it helps in performance a bit. Also, with in Asus BIOS, have you set Bias to Cinebench 15?


You can use any power plan you'd like if you set Minimum Processor State to under 45%. I use 20% and the Ultimate Performance Plan.


----------



## respoda

rdr09 said:


> Is your Windows Power Plan set to Balance and the Minimum Processor State to 25% under Advance Power Options? See if it helps in performance a bit. Also, with in Asus BIOS, have you set Bias to Cinebench 15?


I'm using Win7 with the Balanced Power profile, and I've got Core parking completely disabled.
Disabling core parking is what gave me better scores overal...works well in win7 when you do this.

I believe bias is set to auto. Should I set it to Cinebench ?


----------



## respoda

nick name said:


> That's a great build. I think you could find some more power if you felt comfortable going to a 360 AIO, but I can understand why some folks don't.


Thanks  The difference with the old i7 is stunning, didn't expect that,
so I'm pretty biased towards the results, never had performance like this before...

I really don't want to go water, having read the horror stories of leakages and what have you :/


----------



## mtrai

@respoda One thing to change is with your Ram Power Down Mode Enabled to Disabled It will improve performance across the board for you. It disable ram power saving mode but increases all around performance so not worth keeping it enabled. It will also reduce your Ram latency.


----------



## MishelLngelo

I'm using AiO cooling everywhere for few years now and never got a leak. I just got fed up with enormous cooler staking up half the space.


----------



## respoda

With bias set to CB15 I'm getting almost ten points more,
so negligible in real-life.
Just keeping it at auto then...

So I needn't worry about the 1.5v spikes (and above) ? I take it the cpu will make sure it remains in spec ?
Highest I've seen is 1.55v...


----------



## respoda

mtrai said:


> @respoda One thing to change is with your Ram Power Down Mode Enabled to Disabled It will improve performance across the board for you. It disable ram power saving mode but increases all around performance so not worth keeping it enabled. It will also reduce your Ram latency.


Wow, excellent advice, didn't know that ! I just followed what the ram calculator gave me...
I'll try this right now. Thanks !


----------



## respoda

MishelLngelo said:


> I'm using AiO cooling everywhere for few years now and never got a leak. I just got fed up with enormous cooler staking up half the space.


I have to admit, installing this Dark Rock was a bit of a pain,
and it is quite big, just barely fits in the case.
Good thing it is quiet and performs pretty well.

I might give an AIO a try somewhere down the road, I'm not dismissing it completely yet.
Maybe if I go for Zen2 next year, I'll change the cooling iin one sweep.
Don't know yet, pretty happy right now with what I've got,
only took me ten years


----------



## rdr09

respoda said:


> With bias set to CB15 I'm getting almost ten points more,
> so negligible in real-life.
> Just keeping it at auto then...
> 
> So I needn't worry about the 1.5v spikes (and above) ? I take it the cpu will make sure it remains in spec ?
> Highest I've seen is 1.55v...


Not gonna hurt to leave it Bias to C15. A member did an experiment and found out it also helps in games. Here is the processor state screenie.


----------



## rdr09

nick name said:


> You can use any power plan you'd like if you set Minimum Processor State to under 45%. I use 20% and the Ultimate Performance Plan.


I read in Ryzen Master/Oc'ing guide where it recommends Balance. I get better scores in CPUZ bench.


----------



## nick name

rdr09 said:


> I read in Ryzen Master/Oc'ing guide where it recommends Balance. I get better scores in CPUZ bench.


You don't need to any particular plan -- you just need to set Minimum Processor State to anything below 45% in any plan you decide to use.


----------



## respoda

respoda said:


> Wow, excellent advice, didn't know that ! I just followed what the ram calculator gave me...
> I'll try this right now. Thanks !


With PDM disabled I'm getting 1872 in CB


----------



## nick name

respoda said:


> With bias set to CB15 I'm getting almost ten points more,
> so negligible in real-life.
> Just keeping it at auto then...
> 
> So I needn't worry about the 1.5v spikes (and above) ? I take it the cpu will make sure it remains in spec ?
> Highest I've seen is 1.55v...


If you're seeing a higher score then I would say it's worth using and what you will eventually see is it improves performance across the board. 

And most people see the same spikes you do, but you can do something about it. What I've done is set LLC (load line calibration) Level 4 and also a negative VCORE offset of .075. This keeps my CPU below 1.5V at all times.


----------



## respoda

nick name said:


> If you're seeing a higher score then I would say it's worth using and what you will eventually see is it improves performance across the board.
> 
> And most people see the same spikes you do, but you can do something about it. What I've done is set LLC (load line calibration) Level 4 and also a negative VCORE offset of .075. This keeps my CPU below 1.5V at all times.


I have LLC at level 4 too, but my offset is only -.0125
If I set it at -.075 temps only reach 55° and allcore only goes to 4.0.
With offset at .0125 temps go up to 70-75 but cores then boost to 4.09 with single boost going from 4.2 to 4.34..

I could try finding the sweet spot in between, perhaps setting it -.04 or -.05
I'd have voltage going up to 1.47-1.48 ish and boost to about 4.25 single and 4.05 all-cores...

I guess temps are limiting factor here, not voltage, since with all cores at 4.09 vcore only reaches 1.325.
With better cooling I could go to 1.35 and better all-core boosts...

These Ryzens are a lot of fun.


----------



## mtrai

@respoda I normally would have other tweaks to offer but I am just exhausted today. There are a number of things...here are a few more they all each add a few more points and one is just a QOL. 

Set Performance enhancement to Lvl 3 though for a decent boost without more voltage.

Under the CBS menu set these:

Memory Interleveling to Channel.
Interleveling size 512
Memory Clear to disable.

Somewhere under the ram settings in the CBS set BankGrouSwap to disable. 

All will help with a few points, a bit of boost on ram performance and latency.

Memory Clear is a QOL as once your memory is trained it does not forget and clear some of your bios setting regarding ram and CBS setting on a training fail.


----------



## respoda

mtrai said:


> @respoda I normally would have other tweaks to offer but I am just exhausted today. There are a number of things...here are a few more they all each add a few more points and one is just a QOL.
> 
> Set Performance enhancement to Lvl 3 though for a decent boost without more voltage.
> 
> Under the CBS menu set these:
> 
> Memory Interleveling to Channel.
> Interleveling size 512
> Memory Clear to disable.
> 
> Somewhere under the ram settings in the CBS set BankGrouSwap to disable.
> 
> All will help with a few points, a bit of boost on ram performance and latency.
> 
> Memory Clear is a QOL as once your memory is trained it does not forget and clear some of your bios setting regarding ram and CBS setting on a training fail.



Much appreciated !
Though I do not have those last two memory settings, and I have interleaving at channel.
Also BSG is an option I cannot change, but according to RAM calculator it is already disabled.

I also have PE at level3, I found this to be the best setting between the 4.
The first two are AMD's recommended settings, though 3 and 4 are optimized by the Stilt if I understand correctly.
4 is a bit too aggressive for my cooling solution, but 3 is indeed a lot less voltage and heat with better performance than AMD's level2...

I increased the negative vcore offset from .0125 to .0250, I am now still getting single core boosts to 3.34ghz, but all-core went down to 4.066ghz.
Single core voltage spikes are now only 1.48-1.50v, which brings me a bit more at ease until I get used to those numbers...VID=1.325, full load=1.31
Gonna keep it at this for a while. Think I'm gonna focus on RAM in stead to improve things a bit more.

Thanks for the suggestions, disabling power down mode definitely helped.


----------



## nick name

mtrai said:


> @respoda I normally would have other tweaks to offer but I am just exhausted today. There are a number of things...here are a few more they all each add a few more points and one is just a QOL.
> 
> Set Performance enhancement to Lvl 3 though for a decent boost without more voltage.
> 
> Under the CBS menu set these:
> 
> Memory Interleveling to Channel.
> Interleveling size 512
> Memory Clear to disable.
> 
> Somewhere under the ram settings in the CBS set BankGrouSwap to disable.
> 
> All will help with a few points, a bit of boost on ram performance and latency.
> 
> Memory Clear is a QOL as once your memory is trained it does not forget and clear some of your bios setting regarding ram and CBS setting on a training fail.


I guess I forgot that the Performance Enhancer Levels 3 and 4 on the Crosshair VII ignore some(all?) of the fit parameters so my CPU behaves a little differently.


----------



## mtrai

nick name said:


> I guess I forgot that the Performance Enhancer Levels 3 and 4 on the Crosshair VII ignore some(all?) of the fit parameters so my CPU behaves a little differently.


The PE 3 and 4 if available on your board should all have the same parameters...but keep in mind lvl 3 and 4 also changes some of the CPU MSR registers we cannot access by any means. So not all CPU can run 3 or 4.


----------



## nick name

mtrai said:


> The PE 3 and 4 if available on your board should all have the same parameters...but keep in mind lvl 3 and 4 also changes some of the CPU MSR registers we cannot access by any means. So not all CPU can run 3 or 4.


I'm not sure if they do, but I assumed they didn't based off what I read in these posts. Does the Strix Level 3 and 4 lock the multiplier while under load? Or will it eventually downclock the longer the CPU workload continues? ie start at 41 and then eventually reduce itself as it continues running under load.


----------



## respoda

nick name said:


> I'm not sure if they do, but I assumed they didn't based off what I read in these posts. Does the Strix Level 3 and 4 lock the multiplier while under load? Or will it eventually downclock the longer the CPU workload continues? ie start at 41 and then eventually reduce itself as it continues running under load.


Only if temperature or voltage/current are limiting factors causing the cpu to reduce boost.
afaik level 3 and 4 both lock the multiplier under load, and makes all cores boost at the highest possible frequency whenever possible and needed.

l3 and l4 are same as l1 and l2, no ? But each further optimized.


----------



## mtrai

nick name said:


> I'm not sure if they do, but I assumed they didn't based off what I read in these posts. Does the Strix Level 3 and 4 lock the multiplier while under load? Or will it eventually downclock the longer the CPU workload continues? ie start at 41 and then eventually reduce itself as it continues running under load.


I have never had them downclock in the way you are asking on level 3 and 4. You can change some thing to make it boost longer...but I have just never pondered this or tested. Though in theory it should downclock due to heat or duration of the boost, but I have always used AIO as well as waterblocks. ALso single core boost is handled differently then partial multi-core then to all core boost. So I do know it will do this in the partial multi-core boost for what your are asking. Single core boost has different rules. Also keep in mind this is all handled by the 1000+ sensors built into Ryzen CPUs.



respoda said:


> Only if temperature or voltage/current are limiting factors causing the cpu to reduce boost.
> afaik level 3 and 4 both lock the multiplier under load, and makes all cores boost at the highest possible frequency whenever possible and needed.
> 
> l3 and l4 are same as l1 and l2, no ? But each further optimized.


In some post, a long time ago Elmor mentioned very briefly that the l3 and l4 also have some CPU register changes to enhance performance as well. That was all that was ever mentioned and he nor the stilit will discuss it. Apparently it is ASUS proprietary info. So yes further optimizations lol. 3 and 4 push the EDC etc limits...but there are hidden changes as well.


----------



## nick name

mtrai said:


> I have never had them downclock in the way you are asking on level 3 and 4. You can change some thing to make it boost longer...but I have just never pondered this or tested. Though in theory it should downclock due to heat or duration of the boost, but I have always used AIO as well as waterblocks. ALso single core boost is handled differently then partial multi-core then to all core boost. So I do know it will do this in the partial multi-core boost for what your are asking. Single core boost has different rules. Also keep in mind this is all handled by the 1000+ sensors built into Ryzen CPUs.
> 
> 
> 
> In some post, a long time ago Elmor mentioned very briefly that the l3 and l4 also have some CPU register changes to enhance performance as well. That was all that was ever mentioned and he nor the stilit will discuss it. Apparently it is ASUS proprietary info. So yes further optimizations lol. 3 and 4 push the EDC etc limits...but there are hidden changes as well.


Well if Level 3 and Level 4 don't downclock like Level 2 and Level 1 do then it sounds like it's the same as on the Crosshair VII. And to accomplish it there are some fit parameters ignored/disabled. So learning they behave the same on both boards then this might be useful to some of you Strix guys:

https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...tiplier-adjustments-through-ryzen-master.html


As an aside -- I had the X470 Prime Pro before this Crosshair VII, but upgraded it for the extra Performance Enhancer Levels and because I thought the Crosshair VII would overclock better. I recently learned, from ASUS, that the Prime Pro overclocks the CPU better than the Crosshair VII does. I am assuming the Strix would also -- being that they share many components and layout.


----------



## respoda

nick name said:


> Well if Level 3 and Level 4 don't downclock like Level 2 and Level 1 do then it sounds like it's the same as on the Crosshair VII. And to accomplish it there are some fit parameters ignored/disabled. So learning they behave the same on both boards then this might be useful to some of you Strix guys:
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...tiplier-adjustments-through-ryzen-master.html
> 
> 
> As an aside -- I had the X470 Prime Pro before this Crosshair VII, but upgraded it for the extra Performance Enhancer Levels and because I thought the Crosshair VII would overclock better. I recently learned, from ASUS, that the Prime Pro overclocks the CPU better than the Crosshair VII does. I am assuming the Strix would also -- being that they share many components and layout.


Thanks for this, I'll be looking over it tomorrow.
That sucks, Crosshair is supposed to be on the higher end while Strix is still mid range,
with the pro even below it. Only reason I didn't go for the Asus pro is because the strix has better vrm to go with the 2700x.
Still I'm lacking some bios options that I would have thought were included,
such as manual P-states options, Boot Ram Voltage, BSG and BSGalt, bclk in decimals, some ram interleaving settings and a few more.

Seeing that the board doesn't break much sweat on PBO and XFR with boosts of 4.1 and 4.35,
I guess it'll overclock pretty well, although as said I haven't tried the manual approach yet.

Bios is a bit disappointing so I'm hoping you're right and it'll do well these next few years,
maybe even carry a Zen2 for a while when/if I get to that...


----------



## nick name

respoda said:


> Thanks for this, I'll be looking over it tomorrow.
> That sucks, Crosshair is supposed to be on the higher end while Strix is still mid range,
> with the pro even below it. Only reason I didn't go for the Asus pro is because the strix has better vrm to go with the 2700x.
> Still I'm lacking some bios options that I would have thought were included,
> such as manual P-states options, Boot Ram Voltage, BSG and BSGalt, bclk in decimals, some ram interleaving settings and a few more.
> 
> Seeing that the board doesn't break much sweat on PBO and XFR with boosts of 4.1 and 4.35,
> I guess it'll overclock pretty well, although as said I haven't tried the manual approach yet.
> 
> Bios is a bit disappointing so I'm hoping you're right and it'll do well these next few years,
> maybe even carry a Zen2 for a while when/if I get to that...


Well since I've learned that I can use EDC to manipulate the multiplier on the fly I've been using it with BCLK to do my overclocking as opposed to simply setting the multiplier in BIOS. The last time I had some cold weather I opened a window and did some overclocking up to 4.33GHz using PE3, BCLK 102.2, and EDC. The funny thing is that ran through benchmarks with ease, but I couldn't get 4.3GHz stable enough after setting it through the BIOS by setting the multiplier there. It's a strange behavior.


----------



## the1corrupted

the1corrupted said:


> *Update 2:* CPU temperature is a little hotter than I would have liked. Capping out at 89 degrees under Prime95 Small FFTs.
> 
> Reconfigured the case for more fans over the CPU cooler. Using a Dark Rock Pro TF due to the form factor of my case, but ironically, the cooler is *just* short enough to allow me to mount TWO fans right over it.
> I had two Thermaltake Riing orange LED fans lying around, and figured "why not" as they are optimized for static pressure.
> 
> While I was at it, re-applied thermal compound just in case my first application had an air pocket or something.
> 
> So this is where I will leave it, I think. 4.15 Ghz isn't a terrible speed, and I don't notice the 50 Mhz in games. Still cruising 120 frames on a 144hz monitor, so life is good.
> 
> I have also noticed better frame consistency across the board. My Skylake would bounce around a little when I was playing games, but Ryzen seems to just peg itself steady which yields a very consistent gaming experience.
> 
> Much love! Photo is attached. (Note, that's just lacking the top of the case)


So after more extensive testing, turns out the system is not as stable as I originally believed. I tried to run Aida64 stress for an hour, but only got to about 17 minutes before a really hard freezing crash took over the system. Nothing is being tracked in the event log of Windows during these stress failures.

I started changing my voltages, thinking I had too much voltage going through the CPU. I have a range of 1.35 to 1.38 VCore for the CPU that seems semi-stable but the crashes continue past the 6 minute mark of stress testing. I can boot to windows and play games/run Fire Strike at 1.35V. I can't run Prime95 or Aida64 stress tests past 10 minutes.

In some configurations, Aida64 will actually detect the hardware failure and safely exit the stress test. I cannot figure out how to get more details on what the particular hardware failure is.

Multiplier is staying the same at 41.5

Then I thought it might be RAM/SOC related. I changed my SOC voltage from Auto to 1.350, and DRAM voltage to 1.360. This yielded a 10 minute gain in stress stability (crash after 17 minutes instead of 8). This also DROPPED my max average temperature to 84 degrees. (This is after a 4-minute warm up)

This still feels like an instability of the CPU. As the computer crashes with a hard freeze and no error log. My initial suspect is the 4-phase power delivery of my motherboard, that the VRM might be dipping voltage in a hard downspike. How likely is this to be the case?

What else should I look for?

*Update:*


Aida64 said:


> The hardware failure message specifically means the stress testing module detected a CPU processing error. It may be caused by a CPU execution glitch, a cache issue or if something happened while the data "travelled" from the memory into the CPU. It's not easy to diagnose such issues, and I'm afraid it's not possible to be more specific.


----------



## rdr09

the1corrupted said:


> So after more extensive testing, turns out the system is not as stable as I originally believed. I tried to run Aida64 stress for an hour, but only got to about 17 minutes before a really hard freezing crash took over the system. Nothing is being tracked in the event log of Windows during these stress failures.
> 
> Then I thought it might be RAM/SOC related. I changed my SOC voltage from Auto to 1.350, and DRAM voltage to 1.360. This yielded a 10 minute gain in stress stability (crash after 17 minutes instead of 8). This also DROPPED my max average temperature to 84 degrees. (This is after a 4-minute warm up)
> 
> What else should I look for?
> 
> *Update:*


Its recommended not to go over 1.2v on SOC. Might do permanent damage. CPU Vcore might be a tad low. Its safe to go up to 1.42v so long as your cooling allows. Make use of llc if you haven't. Keep Tdie below 80c. Did you use the DRAM Calculator?


----------



## MishelLngelo

I often take different tack, set voltage as high as I would normally dare, get maximum OC considering power draw and temps and than work down with voltage and see how low it would go.


----------



## nick name

rdr09 said:


> Its recommended not to go over 1.2v on SOC. Might do permanent damage. CPU Vcore might be a tad low. Its safe to go up to 1.42v so long as your cooling allows. Make use of llc if you haven't. Keep Tdie below 80c. Did you use the DRAM Calculator?


Yeah everything I have read says 1.2V SOC is the firm limit for safety of the CPU. And honestly most people report instability with their RAM when going up to 1.2V for SOC.


----------



## the1corrupted

rdr09 said:


> Its recommended not to go over 1.2v on SOC. Might do permanent damage. CPU Vcore might be a tad low. Its safe to go up to 1.42v so long as your cooling allows. Make use of llc if you haven't. Keep Tdie below 80c. Did you use the DRAM Calculator?


I did use the calculator... but maybe I forgot to enter the voltage values.


----------



## lightsout

Cross posting this from the r5 thread seems to be more active here, system is a 2600, B450-I Strix, Tridentz 3200c16. Anyone got any thoughts, seems like most people boosts to 4+ghz.

With core enhancement features turned on, and set to level 4 (OC). My chip only clocks to 3.75. Is this right? 2600 non x. It also seems to want a lot of voltage above 4.0. Like over 1.45v. I always get the good chips


----------



## the1corrupted

lightsout said:


> Cross posting this from the r5 thread seems to be more active here, system is a 2600, B450-I Strix, Tridentz 3200c16. Anyone got any thoughts, seems like most people boosts to 4+ghz.
> 
> With core enhancement features turned on, and set to level 4 (OC). My chip only clocks to 3.75. Is this right? 2600 non x. It also seems to want a lot of voltage above 4.0. Like over 1.45v. I always get the good chips


That doesn't seem right to me. The 2600 should volt similarly to the 2700X? I managed to get 4.1 Ghz bootable (but not yet stable) for 1.35 - 1.38 volts. Try lowering your voltage below 1.4.


----------



## the1corrupted

nick name said:


> Yeah everything I have read says 1.2V SOC is the firm limit for safety of the CPU. And honestly most people report instability with their RAM when going up to 1.2V for SOC.


For reference, what is the stock SOC voltage?


----------



## lightsout

the1corrupted said:


> That doesn't seem right to me. The 2600 should volt similarly to the 2700X? I managed to get 4.1 Ghz bootable (but not yet stable) for 1.35 - 1.38 volts. Try lowering your voltage below 1.4.


4.0 looks fairly stable at 1.38. But beyond that its taking more voltage, a little annoying but I'll probably just leave it at 4 to keep volts and temps down.


----------



## nick name

the1corrupted said:


> For reference, what is the stock SOC voltage?


I haven't had it on Auto for a long time now, but if I remember correctly it fluctuates so there isn't a "stock" setting per se.


----------



## CJMitsuki

nick name said:


> Well if Level 3 and Level 4 don't downclock like Level 2 and Level 1 do then it sounds like it's the same as on the Crosshair VII. And to accomplish it there are some fit parameters ignored/disabled. So learning they behave the same on both boards then this might be useful to some of you Strix guys:
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...tiplier-adjustments-through-ryzen-master.html
> 
> 
> As an aside -- I had the X470 Prime Pro before this Crosshair VII, but upgraded it for the extra Performance Enhancer Levels and because I thought the Crosshair VII would overclock better. I recently learned, from ASUS, that the Prime Pro overclocks the CPU better than the Crosshair VII does. I am assuming the Strix would also -- being that they share many components and layout.



This isnt true from my perspective. I have a C7H and a Prime Pro and while I can get 4.4ghz+ stable on C7H, I cant on Prime Pro. It gets smoking hot on the VRMs while the C7H doesnt even really change in temps. The Prime Pro cant even get anywhere near 4.55ghz as the C7H can easily for me.


----------



## nick name

CJMitsuki said:


> This isnt true from my perspective. I have a C7H and a Prime Pro and while I can get 4.4ghz+ stable on C7H, I cant on Prime Pro. It gets smoking hot on the VRMs while the C7H doesnt even really change in temps. The Prime Pro cant even get anywhere near 4.55ghz as the C7H can easily for me.



That does make sense, but if you were using more simple cooling you might find that the Prime Pro does a better job. The CH7 can certainly go past the limits of the Prime Pro with the right cooling.


----------



## lightsout

CJMitsuki said:


> This isnt true from my perspective. I have a C7H and a Prime Pro and while I can get 4.4ghz+ stable on C7H, I cant on Prime Pro. It gets smoking hot on the VRMs while the C7H doesnt even really change in temps. The Prime Pro cant even get anywhere near 4.55ghz as the C7H can easily for me.


4.55? Easily? Wow. What voltage/temps/cooling?


----------



## CJMitsuki

nick name said:


> That does make sense, but if you were using more simple cooling you might find that the Prime Pro does a better job. The CH7 can certainly go past the limits of the Prime Pro with the right cooling.



IDK, i might check that out and see. With just normal cooling and mostly deafult settings at 23c ambient the C7H will give me a 1940 in Cinebench and 4.3 to 4.35ghz all core. Noth sure how much of this is due to silicon and how much is motherboard though.


----------



## nick name

CJMitsuki said:


> IDK, i might check that out and see. With just normal cooling and mostly deafult settings at 23c ambient the C7H will give me a 1940 in Cinebench and 4.3 to 4.35ghz all core. Noth sure how much of this is due to silicon and how much is motherboard though.


The weird thing is I was able to get my CPU to 4.33GHz using PE3, 102.2 BCLK, and EDC changes. That ran through all the benchmarks I wanted. Then I tried to simply set the multiplier in BIOS to 43 with sufficient voltage and that wouldn't even make it through Cinebench. I couldn't figure it out.


----------



## CJMitsuki

lightsout said:


> 4.55? Easily? Wow. What voltage/temps/cooling?


Well, I run cold air through my case, basically I route one of my A/C vents through my case when I go to that frequency since I have to use up to 1.55v but XFR decides the voltages as I dont set a locked voltage. The highest stable overclocks Ive seen are with XFR/PBO baseclock OC with Performance Enhancer 4 although I can get pretty good OC even with Performance Enhancer set to default. Its just more stable during a heavy benchmark with PE4. The temps are never above 70c, Ive never let my cpu go above 75c even at 1.6v. I dont have to use any of that cooling for 4.45ghz. I suppose it has something to do with having 9 Noctuas in my Silverstone RL06 with 4 in push/pull on a Corsair H115i pro AIO on the front of the case bringing air in and 2 on the side panel directed at the GPU, 1 rear exhaust and 2 top exhaust. I also mod my case often, i have a Memory cooler i made out of the fans from and old gtx 660 OC and Ive soldered wires to my ProbeIt points to have a way to quickly check real voltages outside of software. etc






nick name said:


> The weird thing is I was able to get my CPU to 4.33GHz using PE3, 102.2 BCLK, and EDC changes. That ran through all the benchmarks I wanted. Then I tried to simply set the multiplier in BIOS to 43 with sufficient voltage and that wouldn't even make it through Cinebench. I couldn't figure it out.


I get a similar result, the manual OC isnt good at all for Ryzen. XFR with PE4 is probably the best coupled with BCLK OC


----------



## the1corrupted

Alright, I input the values from the DRAM calculator and found a stable configuration within the recommended specs.

SOC Voltage is now 1.0
DRAM Voltage is 1.34 (kinda close to the max).

Memory was tested with CPU on stock multiplier to eliminate variables.

Then I started overclocking multiplier. 4.2 Ghz was not Aida64 stable at 1.42 volts so I just gave up on that speed all together. If it doesn't hit 4.2 @ 1.425V then I won't push it.

So far, 4.175 Ghz works @ 1.4V Vcore.

Memory has remained consistently stable at each check. Still tuning voltages, but just wanted to update my progress.

Also, I broke 18000 on Fire Strike. Trying to get 8000 points in Time Spy.


----------



## gupsterg

the1corrupted said:


> For reference, what is the stock SOC voltage?


~850-900mV on both Ryzen gen 1 & 2, confirmed via The Stilt, Elmor and about 7x mix of Ryzen gen 1 / 2 CPUs I've had. ASUS boards tend to increase voltage when left on [Auto], when RAM MHz is pushed past AMD officially supported speeds for a CPU. This based on "autorule" of UEFI not some form of automatic determination of silicon profiling. What other boards do no idea.


----------



## Johan45

lightsout said:


> Cross posting this from the r5 thread seems to be more active here, system is a 2600, B450-I Strix, Tridentz 3200c16. Anyone got any thoughts, seems like most people boosts to 4+ghz.
> 
> With core enhancement features turned on, and set to level 4 (OC). My chip only clocks to 3.75. Is this right? 2600 non x. It also seems to want a lot of voltage above 4.0. Like over 1.45v. I always get the good chips


"X" chips have higher boost capabilities. Your chip is maxed at 3.7 boost all cores. The PE and XFR are pretty much useless on non "X" chips since they can't push it past their native boost capabilities unless you use BCLK, manual OC is the way you have to go.


----------



## lightsout

CJMitsuki said:


> Well, I run cold air through my case, basically I route one of my A/C vents through my case when I go to that frequency since I have to use up to 1.55v but XFR decides the voltages as I dont set a locked voltage. The highest stable overclocks Ive seen are with XFR/PBO baseclock OC with Performance Enhancer 4 although I can get pretty good OC even with Performance Enhancer set to default. Its just more stable during a heavy benchmark with PE4. The temps are never above 70c, Ive never let my cpu go above 75c even at 1.6v. I dont have to use any of that cooling for 4.45ghz. I suppose it has something to do with having 9 Noctuas in my Silverstone RL06 with 4 in push/pull on a Corsair H115i pro AIO on the front of the case bringing air in and 2 on the side panel directed at the GPU, 1 rear exhaust and 2 top exhaust. I also mod my case often, i have a Memory cooler i made out of the fans from and old gtx 660 OC and Ive soldered wires to my ProbeIt points to have a way to quickly check real voltages outside of software. etc
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I get a similar result, the manual OC isnt good at all for Ryzen. XFR with PE4 is probably the best coupled with BCLK OC


Wow that's a sweet setup.


----------



## nick name

the1corrupted said:


> Alright, I input the values from the DRAM calculator and found a stable configuration within the recommended specs.
> 
> SOC Voltage is now 1.0
> DRAM Voltage is 1.34 (kinda close to the max).
> 
> Memory was tested with CPU on stock multiplier to eliminate variables.
> 
> Then I started overclocking multiplier. 4.2 Ghz was not Aida64 stable at 1.42 volts so I just gave up on that speed all together. If it doesn't hit 4.2 @ 1.425V then I won't push it.
> 
> So far, 4.175 Ghz works @ 1.4V Vcore.
> 
> Memory has remained consistently stable at each check. Still tuning voltages, but just wanted to update my progress.
> 
> Also, I broke 18000 on Fire Strike. Trying to get 8000 points in Time Spy.



I love chasing benchmark scores. Here is my highest Fire Strike: https://www.3dmark.com/fs/16726943

And here is my highest Time Spy: https://www.3dmark.com/spy/4924280


----------



## azanimefan

Joining the Club with a Ryzen 7 2700; on a little mITX board so I'm not sure what clocks should be good to expect. I can get it rock solid at 4.1ghz and 1.4V, I can get it somewhat stable at 4.2ghz and 1.5V, but I really need to ride it up to 1.525 to stabilize at 4.2, and unfortunately my little Kraken M22 can't really cool it at that vcore, so I backed it back down to 4.1ghz for now. Figure with a more aggressive CPU cooler and maybe a louder/cooler case, I could bump that clock up a bit. but right now looks like a got a mediocre overclocker. 


nearly silent little build I have going right now.


----------



## MishelLngelo

Methinks you are pushing it with that voltage.


----------



## nick name

azanimefan said:


> Joining the Club with a Ryzen 7 2700; on a little mITX board so I'm not sure what clocks should be good to expect. I can get it rock solid at 4.1ghz and 1.4V, I can get it somewhat stable at 4.2ghz and 1.5V, but I really need to ride it up to 1.525 to stabilize at 4.2, and unfortunately my little Kraken M22 can't really cool it at that vcore, so I backed it back down to 4.1ghz for now. Figure with a more aggressive CPU cooler and maybe a louder/cooler case, I could bump that clock up a bit. but right now looks like a got a mediocre overclocker.
> 
> 
> nearly silent little build I have going right now.


I think you will have to settle at 4.1GHz. I don't think you will find anyone comfortable pushing 1.5V for an overclock with even a 360 AIO.


----------



## bigjdubb

I've had my Ryzen system on an Asus x470 mITX board and have decided to change motherboards to see if I can get better clocks (memory and cpu). Will the Crosshair VII offer my best chance at getting 4.2ghz and 3200mhz (or higher)? I already have 3 ram kits (1-3200mhz kit and 2-3600mhz kits) that are on the Asus QVL so I was thinking about sticking with Asus but if another board has shown to be better I will switch it up.

I just want to be able to run 4.2ghz and 3600mhz (I'll settle for 3200mhz), it performs so well at these settings but I can't keep it stable on this mITX board.


----------



## nick name

bigjdubb said:


> I've had my Ryzen system on an Asus x470 mITX board and have decided to change motherboards to see if I can get better clocks (memory and cpu). Will the Crosshair VII offer my best chance at getting 4.2ghz and 3200mhz (or higher)? I already have 3 ram kits (1-3200mhz kit and 2-3600mhz kits) that are on the Asus QVL so I was thinking about sticking with Asus but if another board has shown to be better I will switch it up.
> 
> I just want to be able to run 4.2ghz and 3600mhz (I'll settle for 3200mhz), it performs so well at these settings but I can't keep it stable on this mITX board.


I would bet anything the Crosshair VII will get you 4.2GHz and 3200MHz. I am running at 3600MHz with a 3600CL15 kit.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

well... for whatever reason I decided to run cinebench again... and the multi core score stayed within the normal range (clocks are set to auto with PBO enabled and a - voltage offset).... but the single core was up by 2 pts over my normal score... nothing special, just interesting to me... One thing I've discovered today, my board is limited to 168 watts output to the cpu when on auto... so PBO is pushing it right to that edge... betting with the CHV this chip would be a good clocker.


----------



## TalosTHG

I'm a bit late to the party but I was waiting for the new intel cpus to be released in order to better evaluate all the viable options and upgrade my pc accordingly.
I'm also new on this forum ( so, Hello World ) even though I'm not really new to pc/oc forums : I've been a mod on tomshw.it and a regular user in many more ( later I'll probably post in the new member area )

I didn't really have a budget limit but the new intel cpus didn't really convince me and buying the old ones well, not really smart at the moment imho 
+ am4 "theoretical" support till 2020 which means a possible and viable "cheap" upgrade in the future

so, here's the build:
2700x 
Asus x470 Strix F-Gaming
16GB Tridentz 3600c17 (F4-3600C17D-16GTZR - bdie but I guess v2)
GTX 1080 MSI Armor OC 
Corsair HX850W ( the old 80+silver model ) 

Now, for the oc :
2700x @4.125GHz
Ram @3466MHz c16 ( with manually configured sub-timings following DramFrequency calculator values) 
Vcore 1.38V fixed 
Vsoc 1.1 manual
CLDO_VDDP 1.0V 
BCLK auto ( 100 )
LLC 1

tested 2 different times with IBT, 20 runs each with 14000MB ( ~3hrs per test )
sometimes it freezes for 5 to 10s, especially at the start/end of the full load but ultimately passes the test, so I'll call that stable

max cpu temp under IBT is around ~60°C (coretemp/ryzen master)



But I think actually hit a wall since I can't reach 4.2GHz

Enabling PBO > average voltage too high, with peaks around 1.55V
Enablig XFR2 level 2 > 1.5 voltage peaks in ST load @4.2750/4.3GHz (which, ok, is normal ) and an average "permanent" 1.39/1.4V @4.05GHz on all cores while gaming ( which makes it not worth compared to manual imho ) 

both resulted in lower gaming and 3dmark firestrike performances, anyway ( except for games like LoL that benefit from that 4.3GHz boost but where it doesn't really make all that difference since we're talking 170+fps lows and 250+fps highs - tbh sometimes even 4/500fps but well you get it, it's not worth - ) 

@4.2 it will boot and pass some ibt cycles even with the same 1.38V voltage but will freeze no matter what voltage I set ( actually I didn't try more than 1.45V because that's not worth imho, but I expected to it to be stable somewhere around 1.42-1.43V considering 1.38V is enough for 4.125 ) 

Am I missing something or the chip is just near its limit? 


P.S. BLCK oc is not really viable for me ( not even setting it at 101 ) and will result in freezes/crashes , I also read it adds input latency so I'll avoid it; I didn't play that much with DIGI+ VRM settings except for LLC and spread spectrum ( disabled ), i know they're supposed to help with oc but setting CPU Current Capability/CPU Voltage Frequency/CPU Power Duty Control/CPU Power Phase Control to anything different from the auto/default value seems to make it worse.


----------



## rdr09

Minotaurtoo said:


> well... for whatever reason I decided to run cinebench again... and the multi core score stayed within the normal range (clocks are set to auto with PBO enabled and a - voltage offset).... but the single core was up by 2 pts over my normal score... nothing special, just interesting to me... One thing I've discovered today, my board is limited to 168 watts output to the cpu when on auto... so PBO is pushing it right to that edge... betting with the CHV this chip would be a good clocker.



You feel like your cpu needs a new home? lol. The news about the new line of amd cpus makes it harder to justify getting a CHVII, since X500 chipset series should be out too. Black Friday might make it even harder.



TalosTHG said:


> I'm a bit late to the party but I was waiting for the new intel cpus to be released in order to better evaluate all the viable options and upgrade my pc accordingly.
> I'm also new on this forum ( so, Hello World ) even though I'm not really new to pc/oc forums : I've been a mod on tomshw.it and a regular user in many more ( later I'll probably post in the new member area )
> Am I missing something or the chip is just near its limit?
> 
> 
> P.S. BLCK oc is not really viable for me ( not even setting it at 101 ) and will result in freezes/crashes , I also read it adds input latency so I'll avoid it; I didn't play that much with DIGI+ VRM settings except for LLC and spread spectrum ( disabled ), i know they're supposed to help with oc but setting CPU Current Capability/CPU Voltage Frequency/CPU Power Duty Control/CPU Power Phase Control to anything different from the auto/default value seems to make it worse.


What LLC are you using for 4.2GHz?


----------



## TalosTHG

rdr09 said:


> What LLC are you using for 4.2GHz?


I tested lvl 2 overnight with no luck

currently testing lvl 3, let's see...


----------



## rdr09

TalosTHG said:


> I tested lvl 2 overnight with no luck
> 
> currently testing lvl 3, let's see...



Me thinks - so long as it is game stable. Unless you use your system for work, then you better off at stock.







Next gens need those clock speedz.


----------



## gupsterg

TalosTHG said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> I'm a bit late to the party but I was waiting for the new intel cpus to be released in order to better evaluate all the viable options and upgrade my pc accordingly.
> I'm also new on this forum ( so, Hello World ) even though I'm not really new to pc/oc forums : I've been a mod on tomshw.it and a regular user in many more ( later I'll probably post in the new member area )
> 
> I didn't really have a budget limit but the new intel cpus didn't really convince me and buying the old ones well, not really smart at the moment imho
> + am4 "theoretical" support till 2020 which means a possible and viable "cheap" upgrade in the future
> 
> so, here's the build:
> 2700x
> Asus x470 Strix F-Gaming
> 16GB Tridentz 3600c17 (F4-3600C17D-16GTZR - bdie but I guess v2)
> GTX 1080 MSI Armor OC
> Corsair HX850W ( the old 80+silver model )
> 
> Now, for the oc :
> 2700x @4.125GHz
> Ram @3466MHz c16 ( with manually configured sub-timings following DramFrequency calculator values)
> Vcore 1.38V fixed
> Vsoc 1.1 manual
> CLDO_VDDP 1.0V
> BCLK auto ( 100 )
> LLC 1
> 
> tested 2 different times with IBT, 20 runs each with 14000MB ( ~3hrs per test )
> sometimes it freezes for 5 to 10s, especially at the start/end of the full load but ultimately passes the test, so I'll call that stable
> 
> max cpu temp under IBT is around ~60°C (coretemp/ryzen master)
> 
> 
> 
> But I think actually hit a wall since I can't reach 4.2GHz
> 
> Enabling PBO > average voltage too high, with peaks around 1.55V
> Enablig XFR2 level 2 > 1.5 voltage peaks in ST load @4.2750/4.3GHz (which, ok, is normal ) and an average "permanent" 1.39/1.4V @4.05GHz on all cores while gaming ( which makes it not worth compared to manual imho )
> 
> both resulted in lower gaming and 3dmark firestrike performances, anyway ( except for games like LoL that benefit from that 4.3GHz boost but where it doesn't really make all that difference since we're talking 170+fps lows and 250+fps highs - tbh sometimes even 4/500fps but well you get it, it's not worth - )
> 
> @4.2 it will boot and pass some ibt cycles even with the same 1.38V voltage but will freeze no matter what voltage I set ( actually I didn't try more than 1.45V because that's not worth imho, but I expected to it to be stable somewhere around 1.42-1.43V considering 1.38V is enough for 4.125 )
> 
> Am I missing something or the chip is just near its limit?
> 
> 
> P.S. BLCK oc is not really viable for me ( not even setting it at 101 ) and will result in freezes/crashes , I also read it adds input latency so I'll avoid it; I didn't play that much with DIGI+ VRM settings except for LLC and spread spectrum ( disabled ), i know they're supposed to help with oc but setting CPU Current Capability/CPU Voltage Frequency/CPU Power Duty Control/CPU Power Phase Control to anything different from the auto/default value seems to make it worse.


To me your CPU reads as if similar / slightly worse than my first. So I'd say at limits of your sample.

I say that based on 4.125GHz needing 1.38V with also LLC1. My first needed 1.318V VID in PState 0 for 4.1GHz, LLC: [Auto] (ie AMD Stock). 4.15GHz used 1.387V again LLC: [Auto]. If I used PE1 onwards I had very little multicore gain and somewhat crazed voltages IMO.

My second needs 1.268V for 4.1GHz, LLC: [Auto]. I did not try 4.15GHz yet, but using just PE: [Default] and PBO: [Enabled] averages higher MHz than first under P95. CB15 multicore matches 4.1GHz OC but single core kills Pstate OC as get 4.35GHz.

So it seems to me some chips are more suited to PE/PBO tweaks than others. Perhaps yours and my first, were lower leakage samples hence not scaling MHz well under PE/PBO.

Third post of this thread, section To use manual OC or Precision Boost Override?, I placed a 3 way screenie compare/info.


----------



## kazablanka

Minotaurtoo said:


> well... for whatever reason I decided to run cinebench again... and the multi core score stayed within the normal range (clocks are set to auto with PBO enabled and a - voltage offset).... but the single core was up by 2 pts over my normal score... nothing special, just interesting to me... One thing I've discovered today, my board is limited to 168 watts output to the cpu when on auto... so PBO is pushing it right to that edge... betting with the CHV this chip would be a good clocker.


what board do you have? pbo limits are equal for every board.


----------



## kazablanka

nick name said:


> As an aside -- I had the X470 Prime Pro before this Crosshair VII, but upgraded it for the extra Performance Enhancer Levels and because I thought the Crosshair VII would overclock better. I recently learned, from ASUS, that the Prime Pro overclocks the CPU better than the Crosshair VII does. I am assuming the Strix would also -- being that they share many components and layout.


Thank you for the confirmation 
I was thinking that was a problem only with my board but this change things...


----------



## respoda

TalosTHG said:


> I'm a bit late to the party but I was waiting for the new intel cpus to be released in order to better evaluate all the viable options and upgrade my pc accordingly.
> I'm also new on this forum ( so, Hello World ) even though I'm not really new to pc/oc forums : I've been a mod on tomshw.it and a regular user in many more ( later I'll probably post in the new member area )
> 
> I didn't really have a budget limit but the new intel cpus didn't really convince me and buying the old ones well, not really smart at the moment imho
> + am4 "theoretical" support till 2020 which means a possible and viable "cheap" upgrade in the future
> 
> so, here's the build:
> 2700x
> Asus x470 Strix F-Gaming
> 16GB Tridentz 3600c17 (F4-3600C17D-16GTZR - bdie but I guess v2)
> GTX 1080 MSI Armor OC
> Corsair HX850W ( the old 80+silver model )
> 
> Now, for the oc :
> 2700x @4.125GHz
> Ram @3466MHz c16 ( with manually configured sub-timings following DramFrequency calculator values)
> Vcore 1.38V fixed
> Vsoc 1.1 manual
> CLDO_VDDP 1.0V
> BCLK auto ( 100 )
> LLC 1
> 
> tested 2 different times with IBT, 20 runs each with 14000MB ( ~3hrs per test )
> sometimes it freezes for 5 to 10s, especially at the start/end of the full load but ultimately passes the test, so I'll call that stable
> 
> max cpu temp under IBT is around ~60°C (coretemp/ryzen master)
> 
> 
> 
> But I think actually hit a wall since I can't reach 4.2GHz
> 
> Enabling PBO > average voltage too high, with peaks around 1.55V
> Enablig XFR2 level 2 > 1.5 voltage peaks in ST load @4.2750/4.3GHz (which, ok, is normal ) and an average "permanent" 1.39/1.4V @4.05GHz on all cores while gaming ( which makes it not worth compared to manual imho )
> 
> both resulted in lower gaming and 3dmark firestrike performances, anyway ( except for games like LoL that benefit from that 4.3GHz boost but where it doesn't really make all that difference since we're talking 170+fps lows and 250+fps highs - tbh sometimes even 4/500fps but well you get it, it's not worth - )
> 
> @4.2 it will boot and pass some ibt cycles even with the same 1.38V voltage but will freeze no matter what voltage I set ( actually I didn't try more than 1.45V because that's not worth imho, but I expected to it to be stable somewhere around 1.42-1.43V considering 1.38V is enough for 4.125 )
> 
> Am I missing something or the chip is just near its limit?
> 
> 
> P.S. BLCK oc is not really viable for me ( not even setting it at 101 ) and will result in freezes/crashes , I also read it adds input latency so I'll avoid it; I didn't play that much with DIGI+ VRM settings except for LLC and spread spectrum ( disabled ), i know they're supposed to help with oc but setting CPU Current Capability/CPU Voltage Frequency/CPU Power Duty Control/CPU Power Phase Control to anything different from the auto/default value seems to make it worse.


I've got a similar build with the same cpu and board.
Haven't tried a manual oc yet, but have been playing with PBO and XFR
and found that, for this asus board, pbo and xfr work best if you set cpu current to 140% and speed to 'manual' and 'ultra-fast', with Soc at 120% and speed at 'optimized', LLC to level2 for Soc and Level4 for CPU, and switching freq. to 300/400 for both. With tightly set RAM and timings those settings are for me the most stable for both cpu and Soc.

Also have a look at the thread by 'nick name', you can manually set EDC to get different PBO results,
and basically control the boost-frequencies in increments of .25Ghz. You can easily define your own upper limit
regarding temps (which go up accordingly off course) and current/power delivered during PBO boosts...

https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...tiplier-adjustments-through-ryzen-master.html

Those settings above though, combined with Performance Enhancer to level3 and a voltage offset of -0.025v I'm getting boosts of 4.35 single and 4.1 allcore with temps around 65-70°C,
voltage VID is at 1.325, spiking at 1.50 max during single core boosts and only 1.33v under full load (level4 causes a tiny spike of 0.005v under full load).

This is all on air mind you.

I don't know about you but I'm missing a few key BIOS options that I would have expected to be present on this board...
Especially when manually overclocking, but also mainly RAM options that cannot be set with this board.
I have excellent 3200 b-die ram, rated C16, that is supposedly capable of running 3600 @1.37v and 19-19-19-42 or something,
but for that I would need those options...it is now running smoothly at 3200mhz, 1.355v and 14-14-14-30.


----------



## specialedge

kazablanka said:


> Thank you for the confirmation
> I was thinking that was a problem only with my board but this change things...


Is this true? Is this why we spent $300 on a board, so a lower end board can do a better job? 

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## TalosTHG

respoda said:


> I've got a similar build with the same cpu and board.
> Haven't tried a manual oc yet, but have been playing with PBO and XFR
> and found that, for this asus board, pbo and xfr work best if you set cpu current to 140% and speed to 'manual' and 'ultra-fast', with Soc at 120% and speed at 'optimized', LLC to level2 for Soc and Level4 for CPU, and switching freq. to 300/400 for both. With tightly set RAM and timings those settings are for me the most stable for both cpu and Soc.
> 
> Also have a look at the thread by 'nick name', you can manually set EDC to get different PBO results,
> and basically control the boost-frequencies in increments of .25Ghz. You can easily define your own upper limit
> regarding temps (which go up accordingly off course) and current/power delivered during PBO boosts...
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...tiplier-adjustments-through-ryzen-master.html
> 
> Those settings above though, combined with Performance Enhancer to level3 and a voltage offset of -0.025v I'm getting boosts of 4.35 single and 4.1 allcore with temps around 65-70°C,
> voltage VID is at 1.325, spiking at 1.50 max during single core boosts and only 1.33v under full load (level4 causes a tiny spike of 0.005v under full load).
> 
> This is all on air mind you.
> 
> I don't know about you but I'm missing a few key BIOS options that I would have expected to be present on this board...
> Especially when manually overclocking, but also mainly RAM options that cannot be set with this board.
> I have excellent 3200 b-die ram, rated C16, that is supposedly capable of running 3600 @1.37v and 19-19-19-42 or something,
> but for that I would need those options...it is now running smoothly at 3200mhz, 1.355v and 14-14-14-30.


First of all thank you very much for the info, definitely gonna try these settings and check that thread out

-to be fair I tried playing around with manual ptt/tdc/edc settings and the pbo scalar option but I guess I'll try again since I didn't really "tune" anything else beside that at the time-


as for the LLC testing it actually seems stable at 4.2GHz 1.4V/ LLC lvl4 (still 5 ibt cycles to go tho) which makes it 1.38V under load if i remember correctly - I'm at the gym rn, when I left it was still running so I can't really check it at the moment but more or less it should be around that- and an average temp of 75°C under load ( can't really complain about the heatkiller v4 1.38V is quite high )

I just wonder if it's safe for daily usage, the extra temp bump doesn't get me worried that much but 1.38/1.4V fixed on all cores surely has an impact on longevity, the question is how strong that impact will be, maybe not that much or maybe...


My ram sticks are labeled as 3600c17 [ NOT AMD Optimized ] but i'm actually running them at 3466c16 ( 16-16-16-16-32-48 gonna post exact subtimings when i'm back home ) 
what settings are you referring to? 
I'm currently on the latest bios and the only thing 
I can't find is BGS

Edit: 


gupsterg said:


> To me your CPU reads as if similar / slightly worse than my first. So I'd say at limits of your sample...





rdr09 said:


> Me thinks - so long as it is game stable...


sorry guys as I said I was at the gym so forgive me but I didn't notice your replies
I'm gonna have dinner and then I'll be happy to check both the link and the video out
in the meantime I'd like to thank you guys, I really appreciate your help/tips etc.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

kazablanka said:


> what board do you have? pbo limits are equal for every board.


Actually the limits vary... mostly due to vrm design.. mine is limited to 168 watts, where as many x470 boards its closer to 300 watts. My board is the Asus TUF B350M Plus Gaming... I wouldn't have ever known the limits if ryzen master hadn't told me... I knew that for PBO mine would never exceed 160 watts by much... but manually overclocking I can get it to go up just over 200 watts.


----------



## glnn_23

Tried a few settings now with my 2700x and x470 Strix itx and have ended up with this and stable so far.

Running with cpu ratio on auto and using offset. I think I have PE4 and Bclk 104

During Prime95 clock moves between 4.185Ghz and 4.34Ghz. Volts pretty much stayed around 1.319 but during these tests must have spiked up to 1.45.

Had to drop mem speed back a little as well.

Pretty happy so far.

edit. Just checked bios after running P95 for 3 hrs and PE level2 , Vcore offset -0.075v, LLC 2


----------



## nick name

glnn_23 said:


> Tried a few settings now with my 2700x and x470 Strix itx and have ended up with this and stable so far.
> 
> Running with cpu ratio on auto and using offset. I think I have PE4 and Bclk 104
> 
> During Prime95 clock moves between 4.185Ghz and 4.34Ghz. Volts pretty much stayed around 1.319 but during these tests must have spiked up to 1.45.
> 
> Had to drop mem speed back a little as well.
> 
> Pretty happy so far.


What are you using for cooling? And do you have SenseMi Skew enabled?


----------



## glnn_23

Using 3 x 360 rads. Know nothing about SenseMi skew. 2700x on the stock cooler ran a lot warmer.


----------



## AlphaC

gupsterg said:


> Comparing PB/XFR/PBO between CPUs needs lab like conditions. Temperatures is one big factor for how the boosting would work.
> 
> When I asked The Stilt way back when gen 1 was released how do we go about comparing CPU stock VID/VCORE he said it is not possible due to the factors involved. Now gen 2 has even more differing PB/XFR algorithm you can think what the answer would be.
> 
> Yes I believe they should release sample size. I also believe they would use LLC not AMD stock, so again this needs to be stated and taken into consideration.



Bit late here but the problem with SiliconLottery's Zen testing was not enough demand and also because it's 8 cores with temperature + power / voltage as a variable they were forced to rely on all core clock. All core clock is limited by the worst core obviously unless you are using Ryzen Master.





Novus88 said:


> Hello i have 2700X GIGABYTE X470 GAMING 7 wifi (bios F5) and corsair vengeance led 3200 cl 16 2x16gb @ 2933 cl14
> can you help me set the bios to get 4.2 on all the cores? I am currently using pb0 with a negative offset of 0.0250 and arriving at 4050 on all cores on full load.
> What parameters do you recommend from the bios ?
> I possible to have a complete setting of all paramatres of my bios for the best performance of this processor ?
> 
> i have full custom liquid with 480mm radiator and core P5 case.
> 
> thanks for help.




X470 Gaming 7 is one of the easiest to overclock on 


Just set PBO on and up the scalar , adjust offset voltage if you need to.


For manual OC use fixed voltage and Turbo LLC.


----------



## respoda

TalosTHG said:


> I just wonder if it's safe for daily usage, the extra temp bump doesn't get me worried that much but 1.38/1.4V fixed on all cores surely has an impact on longevity, the question is how strong that impact will be, maybe not that much or maybe...


I personally wouldn't recommend fixed 1.38v for daily usage on an AMD, the limit for that is more like 1.35v max.
With multiplier and vcore on auto with negative offset, PBO and XFR though fair differently with short bursts up to 1.5v which is fine, and only 1.33 under full load. but yeah, it is at the upper limit regarding heat, that's for sure, also in my case.



TalosTHG said:


> My ram sticks are labeled as 3600c17 [ NOT AMD Optimized ] but i'm actually running them at 3466c16 ( 16-16-16-16-32-48 gonna post exact subtimings when i'm back home )
> what settings are you referring to?
> I'm currently on the latest bios and the only thing
> I can't find is BGS


Thanks, could be useful when trying for 3400 and 3600...

What's missing is BSG and BSGalt, RAM boot voltage, super i/o clockskew, and some other interleaving settings.
Also in the vrm section I'm missing power thermal control, and I'm also missing P-state settings vital for P-state overclocking,
which I was initially planning to do but now basically can't afaik...
I'm also on the latest 4024 bios.


----------



## lightsout

respoda said:


> I personally wouldn't recommend fixed 1.38v for daily usage on an AMD, the limit for that is more like 1.35v max.
> With multiplier and vcore on auto with negative offset, PBO and XFR though fair differently with short bursts up to 1.5v which is fine, and only 1.33 under full load. but yeah, it is at the upper limit regarding heat, that's for sure, also in my case.
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks, could be useful when trying for 3400 and 3600...
> 
> What's missing is BSG and BSGalt, RAM boot voltage, super i/o clockskew, and some other interleaving settings.
> Also in the vrm section I'm missing power thermal control, and I'm also missing P-state settings vital for P-state overclocking,
> which I was initially planning to do but now basically can't afaik...
> I'm also on the latest 4024 bios.


Wait I thought we were safe up to 1.45v. I don't have an X model so PB is much weaker. (3.75ghz). I see offset for voltage in my bios but I am under the impression it won't clock down at idle.


----------



## AlphaC

lightsout said:


> Wait I thought we were safe up to 1.45v. I don't have an X model so PB is much weaker. (3.75ghz). I see offset for voltage in my bios but I am under the impression it won't clock down at idle.



1.425V for manual fixed voltage OC per Robert Hallock at AMD








See also the Stilt's testing:


> To see what the actual maximum voltage FIT allows the CPU to run at in various different scenarios is, I disabled all of the other limiters and safe guards. With every other limiter / safe guard disabled, the reliability (FIT) becomes the only restrain. The voltage command which the CPU sends to the VRM regulator via the SVI2 interface and the actual effective voltage were then recorded in various scenarios. In stock configuration the sustained maximum effective voltage during all-core stress allowed by FIT was =< 1.330V. Meanwhile, in single core workloads the sustained maximum was =< 1.425V. When the “FIT” parameters were adjusted by increasing the scalar value from the default 1x to the maximum allowed value of 10x, the maximum all-core voltage became 1.380V, while the maximum single core voltage increased to 1.480V. The recorded figures appear to fall very well in line with the seen and known behavior, frequency, power and thermal scaling wise.
> 
> The seen behavior suggests that the full silicon reliability can be maintained up to around 1.330V in all-core workloads (i.e. high current) and up to 1.425V in single core workloads (i.e. low current). Use of higher voltages is definitely possible (as FIT will allow up to 1.380V / 1.480V when scalar is increased by 10x), but it more than likely results in reduced silicon lifetime / reliability. By how much? Only the good folks at AMD who have access to the simulation data will know for sure.
> 
> These figures will almost certainly vary between the different CPU specimens (due to SIDD and other silicon specific factors), however the recorded values were almost identical on all of the tested samples (within 20mV, lowest-highest leaking specimen).


https://forums.anandtech.com/threads/ryzen-strictly-technical.2500572/page-72


----------



## TalosTHG

respoda said:


> I personally wouldn't recommend fixed 1.38v for daily usage on an AMD, the limit for that is more like 1.35v max.
> With multiplier and vcore on auto with negative offset, PBO and XFR though fair differently with short bursts up to 1.5v which is fine, and only 1.33 under full load. but yeah, it is at the upper limit regarding heat, that's for sure, also in my case.
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks, could be useful when trying for 3400 and 3600...
> 
> What's missing is BSG and BSGalt, RAM boot voltage, super i/o clockskew, and some other interleaving settings.
> Also in the vrm section I'm missing power thermal control, and I'm also missing P-state settings vital for P-state overclocking,
> which I was initially planning to do but now basically can't afaik...
> I'm also on the latest 4024 bios.


Sorry I didn't reply but I fell asleep after dinner ( eheh to much exercise )

So 
Bad news : Manual OC failed before IBT could complete the last 2 cycles so manual 4.2GHz = nope ( at least for now )

Good news : this morning I tried your settings and tweaked the voltages a bit in order to have stable ram (also set cpu offset at -0.0325 ) + XFR lvl 3 + manual PBO ( EDC set @148 , PTT and TDC @ default values, meaning I set them at 141 and 95) which ultimately resulted in a stable frequency of 4.1GHz on all cores and a ST boost up to 4.35GHz ( when 2 or 3 cores are under load they boost up to 4.2/4.25 or something like that ) 
HWinfo reported an Average SFI2 TFN voltage of 1.35 under load so I guess it's fine since it's 1.35v and considering that since it's IBT I'll probably never reach that load


so I guess I'll just monitor average voltage while using my pc like I would do in a "typical" day 



For the missing options part:

my bad I thought we were talking about the settings suggested by the Dram Calculator tool
well yes all those you mentioned are missing from mine too so I guess they're just not available ( not your bios fault obviously )

as for the dram timings I made some screens but I basically fed the mobo with the timings the calculator gave me (rounding to the next even number those that had decimals) :


----------



## gupsterg

lightsout said:


> Wait I thought we were safe up to 1.45v. I don't have an X model so PB is much weaker. (3.75ghz). I see offset for voltage in my bios but I am under the impression it won't clock down at idle.
> 
> 
> 
> AlphaC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 1.425V for manual fixed voltage OC per Robert Hallock at AMD
Click to expand...




> As a general guideline: a CPU voltage of 1.35V is acceptable for driving everyday overclocks of the AMD Ryzen processor. Core voltages up to 1.45V are also sustainable, but our models suggest that processor longevity may be affected. Regardless of your voltage, make sure you’re using capable cooling to keep temperatures as low as possible.
> 
> While there are never guarantees with overclocking, the majority of users should find that an 8C16T AMD Ryzen processor will achieve 4.2 GHz @ 1.45V of CPU voltage. Advanced and accomplished overclockers trying to push record frequencies may find more headroom by disabling cores and disabling SMT on motherboards that offer the option in the BIOS.


Above is from AMD Ryzen Gen 1 reviewers guide, you can find a copy of one in this post.

I'm curious to know if anyone has info on that as gen 2 is using 12nm vs 14nm would this mean should use lower voltages to sustain longevity when OC?


----------



## Minotaurtoo

AlphaC said:


> 1.425V for manual fixed voltage OC per Robert Hallock at AMD


I don't often do this, but I put a link to this post in the OP... I don't suppose he divulged any further info I could link to?


----------



## Minotaurtoo

gupsterg said:


> Above is from AMD Ryzen Gen 1 reviewers guide, you can find a copy of one in this post.
> 
> I'm curious to know if anyone has info on that as gen 2 is using 12nm vs 14nm would this mean should use lower voltages to sustain longevity when OC?


I'm betting that there is a slightly reduced voltage max... but then again, the default voltages regularly push up over 1.4 for sustained light loads... 1.425 seems legit for a "max" sustained voltage set manually, but I'm guessing it's similar to the old suggested limit of 1.45 in that while sustainable, may reduce cpu life... hoping AlphaC can provide some more info surrounding that 1.425 limit. I've been wanting to add some voltage suggestions to the OP, but haven't seen (or noticed) anyone directly quoting AMD rep yet on such limits until AlphaC did.


----------



## lightsout

AlphaC said:


> 1.425V for manual fixed voltage OC per Robert Hallock at AMD
> 
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vZgpHTaQ10k


Thanks


----------



## MishelLngelo

Got no use for more than 1.425v anyway, Whatever the voltage it will not work stable over 4.25GHz and does it at 1.416v at most when set to 1.4v + Llc5.


----------



## gupsterg

Gotta say liking this new 2700X  .

I've gone for +0.012mV offset on my current 2700X, SOC 1.006, both LLC: [Auto]. Performance Enhancer: [Default], Precision Boost Override: [Enabled] (ie whatever ODM/AMD set values as defaults). Holding 32GB @ 3200MHz C14 1T with 1.35V, gotta tweak some more timings.

Initially passed 30min RB, 1.5hrs in of P95 v28.10b1 8K 4096K 28GB I lost a thread, this where VCORE offset/SOC was bumped a step from initial +6mV/1.0V. Snagged now 8hrs PASS, rerun HCI, doing some more tests. Hopefully next week chip will be under water, will see if same profile gains more MHz with extra cooling on it's own  .



Spoiler






















Seen max single core of ~4.45GHz, depending on load multicore/ACB can be upto 4.15GHz.



Spoiler






























Gotta say still so in awe of how good the C6H is still  .



Minotaurtoo said:


> I'm betting that there is a slightly reduced voltage max... but then again, the default voltages regularly push up over 1.4 for sustained light loads... 1.425 seems legit for a "max" sustained voltage set manually, but I'm guessing it's similar to the old suggested limit of 1.45 in that while sustainable, may reduce cpu life... hoping AlphaC can provide some more info surrounding that 1.425 limit. I've been wanting to add some voltage suggestions to the OP, but haven't seen (or noticed) anyone directly quoting AMD rep yet on such limits until AlphaC did.


The Robert Hallock video sux IMO.

He really glosses over LLC, stating the usual stuff and not really the reality. Then the whole ProcODT of x is for higher end cooling was load of pugwash, glad The Stilt, [email protected] and others where there in the C6H thread at launch to guide properly. The video is also from when gen 1 was out, ie 14nm not 12nm gen 2.

Next the 1.4V+ you see at stock as you say is light loads, you'll see sustained loads gen 1:-

a) clocked lower than gen 2

b) used vastly lower voltage than peak clocks

So if the concern is longevity I don't think 1.425V is perhaps all good, for Pstate 0 OC or all cores setup. Especially as most throw in LLC increase so, technically they could be send more to CPU than what SW monitoring or DMM highlights as being sent.


----------



## respoda

TalosTHG said:


> Sorry I didn't reply but I fell asleep after dinner ( eheh to much exercise )
> 
> So
> Bad news : Manual OC failed before IBT could complete the last 2 cycles so manual 4.2GHz = nope ( at least for now )
> 
> Good news : this morning I tried your settings and tweaked the voltages a bit in order to have stable ram (also set cpu offset at -0.0325 ) + XFR lvl 3 + manual PBO ( EDC set @148 , PTT and TDC @ default values, meaning I set them at 141 and 95) which ultimately resulted in a stable frequency of 4.1GHz on all cores and a ST boost up to 4.35GHz ( when 2 or 3 cores are under load they boost up to 4.2/4.25 or something like that )
> HWinfo reported an Average SFI2 TFN voltage of 1.35 under load so I guess it's fine since it's 1.35v and considering that since it's IBT I'll probably never reach that load
> 
> 
> so I guess I'll just monitor average voltage while using my pc like I would do in a "typical" day
> 
> 
> 
> For the missing options part:
> 
> my bad I thought we were talking about the settings suggested by the Dram Calculator tool
> well yes all those you mentioned are missing from mine too so I guess they're just not available ( not your bios fault obviously )
> 
> as for the dram timings I made some screens but I basically fed the mobo with the timings the calculator gave me (rounding to the next even number those that had decimals) :


Those timings are very similar to mine, but I also used the ram calculator.
I was having issues getting the timings stable until I used it, instant stability.

1.35v is perfectly fine, you have the cooling to deal with it.
Each chip is different so seems alright that you need to tweak a few settings here and there.
That's not a bad chip you got there. I'm noticing in my setup that heat becomes an issue before anything else when oc'ing...
PBO/XFR do the job so good that it seems redundant to set up a manual oc.
Many also state that ram oc'ing is more rewarding with these chips, so for me, I'm focusing on that.
Hope you get it fully stable, and yeh IBT when stable is more than you'll ever do in real loads.
Thanks for those timings bud.


----------



## specialedge

Anyone with c7h/2700x setup with samsung b 3600cl16 that can share their bios settings/success stories?

I am pursuing the 4.45ghz single core boost, and it looks like I may have achieved it, but it is giving poorer cinebench scores than my stock pbo4 runs


----------



## MNMadman

specialedge said:


> Anyone with c7h/2700x setup with samsung b 3600cl16 that can share their bios settings/success stories?
> 
> I am pursuing the 4.45ghz single core boost, and it looks like I may have achieved it, but it is giving poorer cinebench scores than my stock pbo4 runs


I had that combo, but mine wasn't a success story. The G.Skill 3600C16 GTZR kit couldn't even get stable at 3200. Replaced it with a G.Skill 3200C14 GTZRX kit that is currently running at 3466 using The Stilt's 3466 1.4v preset from the BIOS.


----------



## kazablanka

glnn_23 said:


> Tried a few settings now with my 2700x and x470 Strix itx and have ended up with this and stable so far.
> 
> Running with cpu ratio on auto and using offset. I think I have PE4 and Bclk 104
> 
> During Prime95 clock moves between 4.185Ghz and 4.34Ghz. Volts pretty much stayed around 1.319 but during these tests must have spiked up to 1.45.
> 
> Had to drop mem speed back a little as well.
> 
> Pretty happy so far.
> 
> edit. Just checked bios after running P95 for 3 hrs and PE level2 , Vcore offset -0.075v, LLC 2


Nice chip ,watch batch number is it?


----------



## kazablanka

Minotaurtoo said:


> Actually the limits vary... mostly due to vrm design.. mine is limited to 168 watts, where as many x470 boards its closer to 300 watts. My board is the Asus TUF B350M Plus Gaming... I wouldn't have ever known the limits if ryzen master hadn't told me... I knew that for PBO mine would never exceed 160 watts by much... but manually overclocking I can get it to go up just over 200 watts.


The limits are 1000w /114A/168A for scalar x10
What are the limits you see in ryzen master?


----------



## glnn_23

kazablanka said:


> Nice chip ,watch batch number is it?


Sorry didn't take note of it before the water block went on.


----------



## DivineLight

Do you have any resources on PBO overclock? 3600 won't run with good timings, at least not absolutely stable. 3575 seem to work. I tried to BLCK overclock now, including the _performance enhancer_ of my ASUS Crosshair VII. 100.6 works, 101.4 and higher will crash when trying to singlecore boost. It sometimes benches, then runs 6 hours in a multicore test but it will crash when I want to fully utilize its boost. And thats just 4.4 GHz. How do I get that stable? I was running 1.425 - 1.45 V, even more will yield a crash. These voltages are fine for running the multicore part (Up to 4.2 GHz allcore). Temperatures stay below 80° all the time.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

kazablanka said:


> The limits are 1000w /114A/168A for scalar x10
> What are the limits you see in ryzen master?


That is the limits I see, but I can't get them to go higher even when I set them manually in the bios to 1000, 300, 300 it still stays the same and the self overclocking stays the same as well... am I missing something? I know my board is going to be much more limited than chv style boards because I only have a 4+2 vrm design... when choosing the "board limits" option I get peaks of 160ish watts... manual all core OC I've seen it go over this reaching 200 watts before (according to hwinfo, actual power draw I can only test at the wall)


----------



## kazablanka

Minotaurtoo said:


> That is the limits I see, but I can't get them to go higher even when I set them manually in the bios to 1000, 300, 300 it still stays the same and the self overclocking stays the same as well... am I missing something? I know my board is going to be much more limited than chv style boards because I only have a 4+2 vrm design... when choosing the "board limits" option I get peaks of 160ish watts... manual all core OC I've seen it go over this reaching 200 watts before (according to hwinfo, actual power draw I can only test at the wall)


This is not your boards fault ,these limits are specified by cpu and cant be exceeded. Setting anything above this limits just doesn't do anything whatever board you have. Both my prime x470 pro and my ch7 couldn't exceed this limits because they are specified by amd. The only way to go higher is with a better chip that will need less voltage for the same speed. So whatever board you take the limits will be the same


----------



## gupsterg

kazablanka said:


> The limits are 1000w /114A/168A for scalar x10


This reads to me as if Scalar 10x populates / stipulates PPT/TDC/EDC. Which it does not IMO, on C6H as it doesn't officially support Precision Boost Override as an X370 I get no scalar access, only on C7H X470 do I.



Minotaurtoo said:


> That is the limits I see, but I can't get them to go higher even when I set them manually in the bios to 1000, 300, 300 it still stays the same and the self overclocking stays the same as well... am I missing something? I know my board is going to be much more limited than chv style boards because I only have a 4+2 vrm design... when choosing the "board limits" option I get peaks of 160ish watts... manual all core OC I've seen it go over this reaching 200 watts before (according to hwinfo, actual power draw I can only test at the wall)


Perhaps Ryzen Master does not correctly read back PPT/TDC/EDC.

I'll try manual on C6H, currently use Extreme Tweaker > PE: Default, AMD CBS > PBO: Enabled:-



Spoiler


----------



## nick name

DivineLight said:


> Do you have any resources on PBO overclock? 3600 won't run with good timings, at least not absolutely stable. 3575 seem to work. I tried to BLCK overclock now, including the _performance enhancer_ of my ASUS Crosshair VII. 100.6 works, 101.4 and higher will crash when trying to singlecore boost. It sometimes benches, then runs 6 hours in a multicore test but it will crash when I want to fully utilize its boost. And thats just 4.4 GHz. How do I get that stable? I was running 1.425 - 1.45 V, even more will yield a crash. These voltages are fine for running the multicore part (Up to 4.2 GHz allcore). Temperatures stay below 80° all the time.


Yeah, I was having the same problem with the single core speeds causing crashes. I used load line calibration level 4 to fix my problem. The odd bit is that it kept voltages for single core lower than without it.


----------



## DivineLight

Unfortunately that doesn't help. 100.6 is the max I can get. Anything higher will run multicore, but crash singlecore. 4.4 - 4.5 singlethread would be a dream.


----------



## cowboy44mag

You guys have been a lot of help and answered a lot of my questions for getting my Ryzen R7 2700X system up and optimized, and I can't thank you enough. I am having a rather strange issue. First off just a recap of my computer I have a X470-F Strix Gaming motherboard, R7 2700X, 16GB of G.Skill Trident Z RGB 3200Mhz RAM, EVGA Supernova 750 P2 80+ Platinum PSU, Crucial MX500 1TB NAND SSD, All in a Phanteks Pro M Tempered Glass tower. I also have 6 140mm case fans and all the temp readings are cool. The only components I reused from my old FX 8370 build were two addition HDDs for storage and my Sapphire R9 290 Vapor X, everything else is brand new.


My problem is confounding me as I have my system "optimized" to my liking with the only overclock on the processor being Precision Boost Overdrive enabled, I have a negative offset on the Vcore of just over 1.1V, have the SOC set to 1.1V and the RAM overclocked to 3600Mhz @ 1.36V. I pass every test I can think to throw at my rig, I've passed Prime 95 blend test without error, I've passed several hours of memtest without error, every benchmark I can run passes without issue with results well within what is expected. So on the surface my rig is running perfectly, and it does the entire time I'm using it, and I can even do several restarts without issue and even total power downs for an hour or so and startup without issue. My problem is when I turn my rig off for the night the next morning for the past week or so it won't post anything at all on cold start. I get no bios screen, just no output at all to the monitor. All the fans are running, all the lights are on, I get no sound code errors, just no output at all to the monitor. I have to switch the power off on the power supply wait a couple seconds, switch it back on and power back on. The computer then goes through the cycle of turning itself off and back on 3 times tells me it didn't boot properly and press F1 to enter bios. If I change nothing at all and just save and restart from bios it will then start up properly and I have no issues the entire day will I turn it off at night and have the same issue the next morning. I just don't understand what it could be.


----------



## rdr09

gupsterg said:


> This reads to me as if Scalar 10x populates / stipulates PPT/TDC/EDC. Which it does not IMO, on C6H as it doesn't officially support Precision Boost Override as an X370 I get no scalar access, only on C7H X470 do I.
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps Ryzen Master does not correctly read back PPT/TDC/EDC.
> 
> I'll try manual on C6H, currently use Extreme Tweaker > PE: Default, AMD CBS > PBO: Enabled:-
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 230554
> 
> 
> View attachment 230556
> 
> 
> View attachment 230558
> 
> 
> View attachment 230560


Do you recommend Ryzen Master?


----------



## MNMadman

cowboy44mag said:


> You guys have been a lot of help and answered a lot of my questions for getting my Ryzen R7 2700X system up and optimized, and I can't thank you enough. I am having a rather strange issue. First off just a recap of my computer I have a X470-F Strix Gaming motherboard, R7 2700X, 16GB of G.Skill Trident Z RGB 3200Mhz RAM, EVGA Supernova 750 P2 80+ Platinum PSU, Crucial MX500 1TB NAND SSD, All in a Phanteks Pro M Tempered Glass tower. I also have 6 140mm case fans and all the temp readings are cool. The only components I reused from my old FX 8370 build were two addition HDDs for storage and my Sapphire R9 290 Vapor X, everything else is brand new.
> 
> 
> My problem is confounding me as I have my system "optimized" to my liking with the only overclock on the processor being Precision Boost Overdrive enabled, I have a negative offset on the Vcore of just over 1.1V, have the SOC set to 1.1V and the RAM overclocked to 3600Mhz @ 1.36V. I pass every test I can think to throw at my rig, I've passed Prime 95 blend test without error, I've passed several hours of memtest without error, every benchmark I can run passes without issue with results well within what is expected. So on the surface my rig is running perfectly, and it does the entire time I'm using it, and I can even do several restarts without issue and even total power downs for an hour or so and startup without issue. My problem is when I turn my rig off for the night the next morning for the past week or so it won't post anything at all on cold start. I get no bios screen, just no output at all to the monitor. All the fans are running, all the lights are on, I get no sound code errors, just no output at all to the monitor. I have to switch the power off on the power supply wait a couple seconds, switch it back on and power back on. The computer then goes through the cycle of turning itself off and back on 3 times tells me it didn't boot properly and press F1 to enter bios. If I change nothing at all and just save and restart from bios it will then start up properly and I have no issues the entire day will I turn it off at night and have the same issue the next morning. I just don't understand what it could be.


It means that you need to change some settings to get it to be able to cold boot. Your negative offset on the CPU voltage might be the culprit -- you might be cutting too deep. Or it might be some other setting. You will have to do some experimenting.


----------



## cowboy44mag

MNMadman said:


> It means that you need to change some settings to get it to be able to cold boot. Your negative offset on the CPU voltage might be the culprit -- you might be cutting too deep. Or it might be some other setting. You will have to do some experimenting.



Yea, I was wondering if maybe I'm pushing the RAM too far, I've already scaled back to 3466Mhz (I think) and 1.355V on the RAM. I've left the SOC at 1.1V as I think that is more than high enough for stability. I will try tinkering with lowing the negative offset on the Vcore if that doesn't work. Unfortunately it only happens when my rig has been off for a long period of time, like overnight. This may take weeks to find the culprit...


----------



## gupsterg

rdr09 said:


> Do you recommend Ryzen Master?


I don't use it TBH, only occasionally as viewing tool as per context of say previous post.

I setup as much as can / am inclined only to use UEFI settings as I need for a profile.


----------



## nick name

rdr09 said:


> Do you recommend Ryzen Master?


I use Ryzen Master for adjusting EDC so I can manipulate the CPU multiplier while using Performance Enhancer Level 3 or Level 4. All you have to do is set the EDC value one you like and then close Ryzen Master after you have. It allows you to choose your all core speed and I use it to overclock my CPU combined with BCLK adjustments in BIOS.


----------



## nick name

cowboy44mag said:


> You guys have been a lot of help and answered a lot of my questions for getting my Ryzen R7 2700X system up and optimized, and I can't thank you enough. I am having a rather strange issue. First off just a recap of my computer I have a X470-F Strix Gaming motherboard, R7 2700X, 16GB of G.Skill Trident Z RGB 3200Mhz RAM, EVGA Supernova 750 P2 80+ Platinum PSU, Crucial MX500 1TB NAND SSD, All in a Phanteks Pro M Tempered Glass tower. I also have 6 140mm case fans and all the temp readings are cool. The only components I reused from my old FX 8370 build were two addition HDDs for storage and my Sapphire R9 290 Vapor X, everything else is brand new.
> 
> 
> My problem is confounding me as I have my system "optimized" to my liking with the only overclock on the processor being Precision Boost Overdrive enabled, I have a negative offset on the Vcore of just over 1.1V, have the SOC set to 1.1V and the RAM overclocked to 3600Mhz @ 1.36V. I pass every test I can think to throw at my rig, I've passed Prime 95 blend test without error, I've passed several hours of memtest without error, every benchmark I can run passes without issue with results well within what is expected. So on the surface my rig is running perfectly, and it does the entire time I'm using it, and I can even do several restarts without issue and even total power downs for an hour or so and startup without issue. My problem is when I turn my rig off for the night the next morning for the past week or so it won't post anything at all on cold start. I get no bios screen, just no output at all to the monitor. All the fans are running, all the lights are on, I get no sound code errors, just no output at all to the monitor. I have to switch the power off on the power supply wait a couple seconds, switch it back on and power back on. The computer then goes through the cycle of turning itself off and back on 3 times tells me it didn't boot properly and press F1 to enter bios. If I change nothing at all and just save and restart from bios it will then start up properly and I have no issues the entire day will I turn it off at night and have the same issue the next morning. I just don't understand what it could be.



Does your BIOS have an option to set boot voltage for DRAM? If it doesn't you may want to consider adding a little voltage to your RAM to see if it remedies the problem.


----------



## glnn_23

cowboy44mag said:


> Yea, I was wondering if maybe I'm pushing the RAM too far, I've already scaled back to 3466Mhz (I think) and 1.355V on the RAM. I've left the SOC at 1.1V as I think that is more than high enough for stability. I will try tinkering with lowing the negative offset on the Vcore if that doesn't work. Unfortunately it only happens when my rig has been off for a long period of time, like overnight. This may take weeks to find the culprit...



I settled on 3667c14 and use 1.425v vdimm. Never once have I had a cold boot problem. I would try raising this voltage first.
For Vcore I now run offset at -0.075 PE L2 and LLC 2 , SOC 1.1 on a Strix z470 itx. Boot time is very fast cold.


----------



## TalosTHG

cowboy44mag said:


> Yea, I was wondering if maybe I'm pushing the RAM too far, I've already scaled back to 3466Mhz (I think) and 1.355V on the RAM. I've left the SOC at 1.1V as I think that is more than high enough for stability. I will try tinkering with lowing the negative offset on the Vcore if that doesn't work. Unfortunately it only happens when my rig has been off for a long period of time, like overnight. This may take weeks to find the culprit...


I agree with the other comments

probably the cpu offset or the dram voltage

but first, since you have my very same mobo, try manually setting CLDO_VDDP to 1000 - not to be confused with VDDP standby voltage 
(you can find it under the memory timings menu, it's the last one, check the attached image)


then test if it boots, if it doesn't try lowering it by 50 each time
it should help with the "pc not posting" thing

remember that you'll need to cold boot for it to apply, and you'll need to do that every time you change it.

https://community.amd.com/community/gaming/blog/2017/05/25/community-update-4-lets-talk-dram


> CLDO_VDDP
> Voltage for the DDR4 PHY on the SoC. Somewhat counterintuitively, lowering VDDP can often be more beneficial for stability than raising CLDO_VDDP. Advanced overclockers should also know that altering CLDO_VDDP can move or resolve memory holes. Small changes to VDDP can have a big effect, and VDDP cannot not be set to a value greater than VDIMM-0.1V (not to exceed 1.05V). A cold reboot is required if you alter this voltage.
> 
> Sidenote: pre-1.0.0.6 BIOSes may also have an entry labeled “VDDP” that alters the external voltage level sent to the CPU VDDP pins. This is not the same parameter as CLDO_VDDP in AGESA 1.0.0.6.
> )






Anyway I spent a whole day testing and optimizing the whole XFR + PBO thing ( because I didn't want to use ryzen master every single time ) so basically set the scalar to 10x and tweaked the cpu offset 
it will stay around 1.356V @4.125MHz full load-all cores,
~1.46/1.48V to ~1.53/1.54V when boosting (and it'll boost cores up to 4350 MHz: sometimes up to 4250/4300 sometimes 4325 but mostly 4350 ) 
0.819V at idle 


temps are fine so I guess it's ok 


Also
Using BCLK on this mobo automatically disables the AUTO multiplier and sets it to fixed, resulting in a fixed frequency of 3700MHZ and I believe it's because in the bios you can't really set core performance boost to ENABLED but only to AUTO
It seems that for now BCLK oc is not a thing on the Strix


----------



## nick name

TalosTHG said:


> Anyway I spent a whole day testing and optimizing the whole XFR + PBO thing ( because I didn't want to use ryzen master every single time ) so basically set the scalar to 10x and tweaked the cpu offset
> it will stay around 1.356V @4.125MHz full load-all cores,
> ~1.46/1.48V to ~1.53/1.54V when boosting (and it'll boost cores up to 4350 MHz: sometimes up to 4250/4300 sometimes 4325 but mostly 4350 )
> 0.819V at idle


What were you using Ryzen Master to adjust each time?


----------



## cowboy44mag

TalosTHG said:


> I agree with the other comments
> 
> probably the cpu offset or the dram voltage
> 
> but first, since you have my very same mobo, try manually setting CLDO_VDDP to 1000 - not to be confused with VDDP standby voltage
> (you can find it under the memory timings menu, it's the last one, check the attached image)
> 
> 
> then test if it boots, if it doesn't try lowering it by 50 each time
> it should help with the "pc not posting" thing
> 
> remember that you'll need to cold boot for it to apply, and you'll need to do that every time you change it.
> 
> https://community.amd.com/community/gaming/blog/2017/05/25/community-update-4-lets-talk-dram
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anyway I spent a whole day testing and optimizing the whole XFR + PBO thing ( because I didn't want to use ryzen master every single time ) so basically set the scalar to 10x and tweaked the cpu offset
> it will stay around 1.356V @4.125MHz full load-all cores,
> ~1.46/1.48V to ~1.53/1.54V when boosting (and it'll boost cores up to 4350 MHz: sometimes up to 4250/4300 sometimes 4325 but mostly 4350 )
> 0.819V at idle
> 
> 
> temps are fine so I guess it's ok
> 
> 
> Also
> Using BCLK on this mobo automatically disables the AUTO multiplier and sets it to fixed, resulting in a fixed frequency of 3700MHZ and I believe it's because in the bios you can't really set core performance boost to ENABLED but only to AUTO
> It seems that for now BCLK oc is not a thing on the Strix



Thanks to everyone who replied, I had my pc off for awhile to test cold start after raising the ram voltage, but had the same no boot at all screen. I will try raising the CLDO_VDDP and see if that helps, I am really grateful for the help.


----------



## TalosTHG

nick name said:


> What were you using Ryzen Master to adjust each time?


EDC
manually setting it in bios, although possible, doesn't result in it being set to that exact value or, to be more specific, loaded in the "current profile"

at least for me

I also don't know if it's intended behaviour but everytime I changed edc in bios, Ryzen Master would automatically start at login and load the default/previous EDC limit for the "current profile" ( meaning it didn't apply it ) while setting the EDC limit for the "manual" section of profile 1 and 2 to the exact value I set in bios ( still not loading it for the current profile tho )

so in a way it was working, just not the way one would expect.





cowboy44mag said:


> Thanks to everyone who replied, I had my pc off for awhile to test cold start after raising the ram voltage, but had the same no boot at all screen. I will try raising the CLDO_VDDP and see if that helps, I am really grateful for the help.


no prob. 

but to be totally fair this only happened to me when my cpu offset was too low 
it would start, fan would spin at low rpms ( which they do every time while post-ing even with the "fan monitor" thingy off, for safety reasons -I believe) but never get to the "rog" logo ( which is when fans start spinning at normal speed ) 

and it would basically remain in that state until I powered it off


----------



## cowboy44mag

TalosTHG said:


> I agree with the other comments
> 
> probably the cpu offset or the dram voltage
> 
> but first, since you have my very same mobo, try manually setting CLDO_VDDP to 1000 - not to be confused with VDDP standby voltage
> (you can find it under the memory timings menu, it's the last one, check the attached image)
> 
> 
> then test if it boots, if it doesn't try lowering it by 50 each time
> it should help with the "pc not posting" thing
> 
> remember that you'll need to cold boot for it to apply, and you'll need to do that every time you change it.
> 
> https://community.amd.com/community/gaming/blog/2017/05/25/community-update-4-lets-talk-dram
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anyway I spent a whole day testing and optimizing the whole XFR + PBO thing ( because I didn't want to use ryzen master every single time ) so basically set the scalar to 10x and tweaked the cpu offset
> it will stay around 1.356V @4.125MHz full load-all cores,
> ~1.46/1.48V to ~1.53/1.54V when boosting (and it'll boost cores up to 4350 MHz: sometimes up to 4250/4300 sometimes 4325 but mostly 4350 )
> 0.819V at idle
> 
> 
> temps are fine so I guess it's ok
> 
> 
> Also
> Using BCLK on this mobo automatically disables the AUTO multiplier and sets it to fixed, resulting in a fixed frequency of 3700MHZ and I believe it's because in the bios you can't really set core performance boost to ENABLED but only to AUTO
> It seems that for now BCLK oc is not a thing on the Strix



Ok, I set the CLDO VDDP voltage to 1000, have to see if it has an impact next time I restart. Other than cold booting I've been very happy with my "overclocking" results even though most of it is Precision Boost Overdrive. I have my scalar set to 10X, I have a negative offset on my Vcore so I'm running at 1.345V under load all core boost 4.175 - 4.200Ghz it will bounce between the two but never go below 4.175Ghz. Single and dual core boosts will hit 4.350Mhz and usually stay right there. Like I said except for the cold boot issue I have been very pleased.


----------



## TalosTHG

cowboy44mag said:


> Ok, I set the CLDO VDDP voltage to 1000, have to see if it has an impact next time I restart. Other than cold booting I've been very happy with my "overclocking" results even though most of it is Precision Boost Overdrive. I have my scalar set to 10X, I have a negative offset on my Vcore so I'm running at 1.345V under load all core boost 4.175 - 4.200Ghz it will bounce between the two but never go below 4.175Ghz. Single and dual core boosts will hit 4.350Mhz and usually stay right there. Like I said except for the cold boot issue I have been very pleased.



I edited my last comment to reply to your previous one


Yup your oc is not bad, mine boosts to 4.125 - 1.356V , I do believe mine's not the luckiest cpu but yours is good anyway... 4.2GHz at that voltage is pretty damn good imho.


----------



## cowboy44mag

TalosTHG said:


> I edited my last comment to reply to your previous one
> 
> 
> Yup your oc is not bad, mine boosts to 4.125 - 1.356V , I do believe mine's not the luckiest cpu but yours is good anyway... 4.2GHz at that voltage is pretty damn good imho.



I think mine might actually be a really good overclocker, but I haven't decided to push it yet. I have a NH-D15 ready to go with the proper mounts, but I am still running with the stock Prism cooler which is why I haven't push the voltage higher. I really got into overclocking with the FX series from AMD and overclocked the heck out of my own FX 8370. The biggest issue with overclocking my 2700X right now is it doesn't seem like it needs it. The 8370 was a dog unless overclocked- overclocking was really a necessity. When I was rendering on it, even pushing over 5Ghz it would take hours to do large projects. With this machine I can render the same type jobs in a quarter of the time or less. Playing games is literally night and day compared to the 8370 and when I upgrade my GPU I never have to worry about bottlenecking a high end model. I guess what I'm getting at is it really doesn't feel like it needs to be overclocked as it is already a beast. I think in a way its even more impressive as all I've really overclocked is the RAM and I'm still using the stock Prism cooler.


----------



## cowboy44mag

TalosTHG said:


> EDC
> manually setting it in bios, although possible, doesn't result in it being set to that exact value or, to be more specific, loaded in the "current profile"
> 
> at least for me
> 
> I also don't know if it's intended behaviour but everytime I changed edc in bios, Ryzen Master would automatically start at login and load the default/previous EDC limit for the "current profile" ( meaning it didn't apply it ) while setting the EDC limit for the "manual" section of profile 1 and 2 to the exact value I set in bios ( still not loading it for the current profile tho )
> 
> so in a way it was working, just not the way one would expect.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> no prob.
> 
> but to be totally fair this only happened to me when my cpu offset was too low
> it would start, fan would spin at low rpms ( which they do every time while post-ing even with the "fan monitor" thingy off, for safety reasons -I believe) but never get to the "rog" logo ( which is when fans start spinning at normal speed )
> 
> and it would basically remain in that state until I powered it off





I already made the change to CLDO VDDP, so I guess I'll find out tomorrow if that makes a difference. If not I'll adjust my CPU offset, although I hope its not that as it will give the CPU more voltage and raise the thermals of the system.


----------



## nick name

TalosTHG said:


> EDC
> manually setting it in bios, although possible, doesn't result in it being set to that exact value or, to be more specific, loaded in the "current profile"
> 
> at least for me
> 
> I also don't know if it's intended behaviour but everytime I changed edc in bios, Ryzen Master would automatically start at login and load the default/previous EDC limit for the "current profile" ( meaning it didn't apply it ) while setting the EDC limit for the "manual" section of profile 1 and 2 to the exact value I set in bios ( still not loading it for the current profile tho )
> 
> so in a way it was working, just not the way one would expect.


Yeah I was searching for a way to do it in BIOS but learned that if using any Performance Enhancer it doesn't work. But honestly I prefer using Ryzen Master to adjust EDC because I can change my clock speed within Windows. It's super useful when overclocking. Almost like using EVGA XOC to change the clock speed of your GPU .


----------



## rdr09

gupsterg said:


> I don't use it TBH, only occasionally as viewing tool as per context of say previous post.
> 
> I setup as much as can / am inclined only to use UEFI settings as I need for a profile.


Will i have to set optimized default in BIOS before using RM? Thanks.



nick name said:


> I use Ryzen Master for adjusting EDC so I can manipulate the CPU multiplier while using Performance Enhancer Level 3 or Level 4. All you have to do is set the EDC value one you like and then close Ryzen Master after you have. It allows you to choose your all core speed and I use it to overclock my CPU combined with BCLK adjustments in BIOS.


I will use it and see if that setting even applies to a non X cpu. Thanks.


----------



## DevilDinosaur

Hi, i bought a 2700x about 4 months ago. I am running it 4.35ghz using 1.394volts but with SMT disabled.


----------



## cowboy44mag

TalosTHG said:


> EDC
> manually setting it in bios, although possible, doesn't result in it being set to that exact value or, to be more specific, loaded in the "current profile"
> 
> at least for me
> 
> I also don't know if it's intended behaviour but everytime I changed edc in bios, Ryzen Master would automatically start at login and load the default/previous EDC limit for the "current profile" ( meaning it didn't apply it ) while setting the EDC limit for the "manual" section of profile 1 and 2 to the exact value I set in bios ( still not loading it for the current profile tho )
> 
> so in a way it was working, just not the way one would expect.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> no prob.
> 
> but to be totally fair this only happened to me when my cpu offset was too low
> it would start, fan would spin at low rpms ( which they do every time while post-ing even with the "fan monitor" thingy off, for safety reasons -I believe) but never get to the "rog" logo ( which is when fans start spinning at normal speed )
> 
> and it would basically remain in that state until I powered it off





SOLVED!!!
It was my negative offset, I had it set too low. That is just very strange, I passed Aida64 stability testing, Prime95 Torture testing, but it was the negative offset. Bumped it up (or down depending on how your looking at it) and that's all it needed. Started this morning from a total cold start and had no issues. I've never seen before with any processor I've overclocked just no post at all, usually you will at least see a bios "press del to enter settings" screen. Very strange, but I'm glad its figured out. Can't thank you enough:specool:


----------



## MNMadman

cowboy44mag said:


> SOLVED!!!
> It was my negative offset, I had it set too low. That is just very strange, I passed Aida64 stability testing, Prime95 Torture testing, but it was the negative offset. Bumped it up (or down depending on how your looking at it) and that's all it needed. Started this morning from a total cold start and had no issues. I've never seen before with any processor I've overclocked just no post at all, usually you will at least see a bios "press del to enter settings" screen. Very strange, but I'm glad its figured out. Can't thank you enough:specool:


I've had that happen before. Seems like it takes slightly more voltage to boot when the system is cold. Just like it's harder to start a car engine when it's cold (but I'm sure the actual reasons are totally different).

Glad you got it working.


----------



## DevilDinosaur

if u ditch smt, not only will u get 10 degree temp drop and 25% power drop, u get a bit more headroom for clocks. 

depends what ur doing obviously, if u got more than 8 threads that need cookin' u wouldn't .


----------



## rdr09

DevilDinosaur said:


> if u ditch smt, not only will u get 10 degree temp drop and 25% power drop, u get a bit more headroom for clocks.
> 
> depends what ur doing obviously, if u got more than 8 threads that need cookin' u wouldn't .



But you will lose sleep function and develop insomnia 


Hibernate does not work either.


----------



## DevilDinosaur

i do not require any of those functions anymore.


----------



## MishelLngelo

DevilDinosaur said:


> if u ditch smt, not only will u get 10 degree temp drop and 25% power drop, u get a bit more headroom for clocks.
> 
> depends what ur doing obviously, if u got more than 8 threads that need cookin' u wouldn't .


Disabling SMT just kills performance, better results with running 6 or even 4 cores.


----------



## DevilDinosaur

MishelLngelo said:


> Disabling SMT just kills performance, better results with running 6 or even 4 cores.


nah not really. smt gives you somewhere between 0 and 100 percent boost, but its averages around 30% , but the last thing I want is work being handed to fake cores when the real core is not doing much. Like I said if u need more than 8 threads its very beneficial, but if you dont, its detrimental in the grand scheme of things. Plus you possibly mitigate some undiscovered security risks.


----------



## TalosTHG

cowboy44mag said:


> SOLVED!!!
> It was my negative offset, I had it set too low. That is just very strange, I passed Aida64 stability testing, Prime95 Torture testing, but it was the negative offset. Bumped it up (or down depending on how your looking at it) and that's all it needed. Started this morning from a total cold start and had no issues. I've never seen before with any processor I've overclocked just no post at all, usually you will at least see a bios "press del to enter settings" screen. Very strange, but I'm glad its figured out. Can't thank you enough:specool:


Glad to read that


----------



## nick name

I got some new high scores in Cinebench last night. Had to open a window and let the room get to about 50*F to do it, but it was definitely worth it.


----------



## lightsout

nick name said:


> I got some new high scores in Cinebench last night. Had to open a window and let the room get to about 50*F to do it, but it was definitely worth it.


I bumped the base clock up a hair on my 2600 and it wouldn't boot. Any pointers?


----------



## DevilDinosaur

nick name said:


> I got some new high scores in Cinebench last night. Had to open a window and let the room get to about 50*F to do it, but it was definitely worth it.


Are you in a cold environment?


----------



## nick name

DevilDinosaur said:


> Are you in a cold environment?


Not really. Texas. But winter is coming.


----------



## nick name

lightsout said:


> I bumped the base clock up a hair on my 2600 and it wouldn't boot. Any pointers?


I'm sorry I don't know more than using higher voltages and using load line calibration. I use BCLK, Performance Enhancer level 3 that ASUS uses in its BIOS, and then adjust EDC in Ryzen Master to manipulate the multiplier after boot, and use offset on the voltage.


----------



## cowboy44mag

MNMadman said:


> I've had that happen before. Seems like it takes slightly more voltage to boot when the system is cold. Just like it's harder to start a car engine when it's cold (but I'm sure the actual reasons are totally different).
> 
> Glad you got it working.





Seriously many thanks to everyone who has helped me with getting my rig stable:thumb::thumb:. I think I'm happy with were it is now. I have a NH-D15 but haven't mounted it, still on the stock cooler and may just keep it that way. Its my gaming and rendering rig, but its also the family computer and my wife really loves the way the Prism looks. When she saw me getting the NH-D15 ready she said "your not putting that ugly thing in there right".... So I guess I'm going with stock cooling, for now at least. Even so with the "adjustments" I've made (PBO enabled, my offset and RAM overclocked) I have an all core boost of 4.175 - 4.225 when torture testing and benchmarking, and when video editing (usually only utilizes 3 or 4 cores) I am getting boost that remain between 4.3 and 4.35Ghz on 3 maybe 4 cores. My Cinebench R15 scores are all above 1900 usually between 1906 and 1920cb. Saying I haven't adjusted multipliers or anything I'm very happy with the performance


----------



## lightsout

nick name said:


> I'm sorry I don't know more than using higher voltages and using load line calibration. I use BCLK, Performance Enhancer level 3 that ASUS uses in its BIOS, and then adjust EDC in Ryzen Master to manipulate the multiplier after boot, and use offset on the voltage.


Ok so that wasn't with a manual OC. That makes sense.


----------



## nick name

lightsout said:


> Ok so that wasn't with a manual OC. That makes sense.


Yeah my motherboard isn't cooperative when trying to do a manual OC. But my method allows me to change my CPU speed on-the-fly so that's cool.


----------



## lightsout

nick name said:


> Yeah my motherboard isn't cooperative when trying to do a manual OC. But my method allows me to change my CPU speed on-the-fly so that's cool.


I have a non-x chip so this method is kind of pointless for me. Because it boosts much lower.


----------



## rdr09

DevilDinosaur said:


> nah not really. smt gives you somewhere between 0 and 100 percent boost, but its averages around 30% , but the last thing I want is work being handed to fake cores when the real core is not doing much. Like I said if u need more than 8 threads its very beneficial, but if you dont, its detrimental in the grand scheme of things. Plus you possibly mitigate some undiscovered security risks.


That's fast. But mine is faster. After I hit Enter, I get to the desktop even before I finish the meme - Holy smoke Batman! Less than a second to open any browser or app cached. 



nick name said:


> I got some new high scores in Cinebench last night. Had to open a window and let the room get to about 50*F to do it, but it was definitely worth it.


Nice.


----------



## waltercaorle

hi guys I'm working on my 2700x @4.2 ghz, without pbo. despite the vcore in offset, in idle it does not drop. the frequencies decrease (core performance boost/c-state enable) but the vcore does not.

tips


----------



## lightsout

waltercaorle said:


> hi guys I'm working on my 2700x @4.2 ghz, without pbo. despite the vcore in offset, in idle it does not drop. the frequencies decrease (core performance boost/c-state enable) but the vcore does not.
> 
> tips


I think thats normal with Ryzen?


----------



## MishelLngelo

Try with Ryzen Balanced power Plan and set minimum CPU at 5 - 10%.


----------



## lightsout

MishelLngelo said:


> Try with Ryzen Balanced power Plan and set minimum CPU at 5 - 10%.


I tried it when I got my board, it dropped the cpu clock, actually it bounced all over the place, and so did the temp it would go up and down 8-10c every couple seconds. At least that's what Ryzen Master said, the voltage didn't move so I scrapped it.


----------



## rdr09

lightsout said:


> I tried it when I got my board, it dropped the cpu clock, actually it bounced all over the place, and so did the temp it would go up and down 8-10c every couple seconds. At least that's what Ryzen Master said, the voltage didn't move so I scrapped it.


Both should drop but this is using Windows power plan in Balance and minimum processor state at 25%. Temps showing were just for a short run of CPUZ bench. It goes over 60c in Real Bench.


----------



## lightsout

rdr09 said:


> Both should drop but this is using Windows power plan in Balance and minimum processor state at 25%. Temps showing were just for a short run of CPUZ bench. It goes over 60c in Real Bench.


Are you using offset, manual or auto for vcore? Does your clock jump around constantly?


----------



## rdr09

lightsout said:


> Are you using offset, manual or auto for vcore? Does your clock jump around constantly?



Offset. I was gonna verify in BIOS but when i was about to restart the choices are Update and restart or Update and shutdown. I want to stay at Windows update 1803. How can i avoid the update? Ugh


----------



## MNMadman

rdr09 said:


> Offset. I was gonna verify in BIOS but when i was about to restart the choices are Update and restart or Update and shutdown. I want to stay at Windows update 1803. How can i avoid the update? Ugh


It has already downloaded and installed whatever update was triggered. You cannot avoid it now.

Note that this isn't necessarily a big update like the October update. It will also do the "Update and Restart/Shutdown" thing for regular Windows updates.


----------



## rdr09

rdr09 said:


> Offset. I was gonna verify in BIOS but when i was about to restart the choices are Update and restart or Update and shutdown. I want to stay at Windows update 1803. How can i avoid the update? Ugh





lightsout said:


> Are you using offset, manual or auto for vcore? Does your clock jump around constantly?



Ok, I was able to check. 

CPU Core is in Auto. Multiplier set to 40.

CPU Vcore is in Offset. +0.3625

LLC set to High.



MNMadman said:


> It has already downloaded and installed whatever update was triggered. You cannot avoid it now.
> 
> Note that this isn't necessarily a big update like the October update. It will also do the "Update and Restart/Shutdown" thing for regular Windows updates.



I went ahead and restarted. Still in 1803. I don't think will see 1809 at all.


----------



## MishelLngelo

I just did a clean install of 1809 on another SSD and it's nothing to be afraid of. That's in addition to my regular Skip ahead Insider version which is so old, it's from W7 upgraded with first version of W10.


----------



## rdr09

MishelLngelo said:


> I just did a clean install of 1809 on another SSD and it's nothing to be afraid of. That's in addition to my regular Skip ahead Insider version which is so old, it's from W7 upgraded with first version of W10.



Good to know. Thanks.


----------



## respoda

TalosTHG said:


> Anyway I spent a whole day testing and optimizing the whole XFR + PBO thing ( because I didn't want to use ryzen master every single time ) so basically set the scalar to 10x and tweaked the cpu offset
> it will stay around 1.356V @4.125MHz full load-all cores,
> ~1.46/1.48V to ~1.53/1.54V when boosting (and it'll boost cores up to 4350 MHz: sometimes up to 4250/4300 sometimes 4325 but mostly 4350 )
> 0.819V at idle


I have the same setup with the strix and 2700x,
also using PBO and XFR instead of manual oc.

May I ask what are your settings are in bios ?
Do you have everything on auto or some settings tweaked ...

I'm getting the exact same boost frequencies and voltages,
but the all core boosts in my case only go up to 4.066
with 1.325v, with PE on L3 and LLC on L3. Temps around 75°

I do have my vrm current set to 140% and 400khz switching freq.
which could be causing the extra heat ?

I'd appreciate any pointers, cause I can't get above 4.1 all core boost without exceeding 80°C


----------



## TalosTHG

respoda said:


> I have the same setup with the strix and 2700x,
> also using PBO and XFR instead of manual oc.
> May I ask what are your settings are in bios ?
> I'd appreciate any pointers, cause I can't get above 4.1 all core boost without exceeding 80°C


First of all my cpu is liquid cooled so that may play a big role for the actual temps

in the digi+vrm menu I left the switching freq for both cpu and soc to auto -as you can see in the attached pic- because I've found the system to be more stable that way
PBO settings (advanced menu) are on AUTO


But to be honest idk if it will make any difference since that oc has been stable for 4 days straight of heavy testing ( gaming, cinebench, unigine, 3dmark, IBT and OCCT all cores high mem load and 1 core low mem/small data set, normal usage , surfing the internet, watching movies and so on ) but after the last windows update it failed to cold boot and now if I set the cpu voltage to auto ( or if i set an offset ) it changes every time my system boots and will vary according to the "type" of boot

ie:
-the first time I apply that profile (it always shuts down and then boot , it doesn't "simply" reboot) let's say hwinfo reads 1.38 and 1.358/1.36 under load (it always shuts down and then restart )
-warm boot hwinfo reads 1.365 and 1.350 under load 
-cold boot hwinfo reads 1.375 and 1.369 under load

also all core boost frequencies will change 

-first time I apply the profile : all core boost = 4.125 
-warm boot 4.1
-cold boot 4.1


sometimes it keeps the "right" voltage even after a cold boot but still lowers the frequency to 4.1

this really bothers me 'cause now it's stable only when I first apply it , mostly because of single thread voltage spikes which cause instability in the other 2 scenarios, and it really makes me want to change it back to a manual 4.125MHz oc which was 100% stable with cpu voltage fixed to 1.38 ( SVI2 TFN 1.36v under ibt load - LLC4 )



I don't know why but it pretty much randomly f***** everything up

so right now I need pointers too, because it makes absolutely no sense to use xfr+pbo and leave the voltage on auto/negative offset if it keeps changing everytime


----------



## rdr09

Anyone here who can recommend a PC store in Cape Town, South Africa? I need another AM4 motherboard. Thank you.


----------



## respoda

TalosTHG said:


> First of all my cpu is liquid cooled so that may play a big role for the actual temps
> 
> in the digi+vrm menu I left the switching freq for both cpu and soc to auto -as you can see in the attached pic- because I've found the system to be more stable that way
> PBO settings (advanced menu) are on AUTO
> 
> 
> But to be honest idk if it will make any difference since that oc has been stable for 4 days straight of heavy testing ( gaming, cinebench, unigine, 3dmark, IBT and OCCT all cores high mem load and 1 core low mem/small data set, normal usage , surfing the internet, watching movies and so on ) but after the last windows update it failed to cold boot and now if I set the cpu voltage to auto ( or if i set an offset ) it changes every time my system boots and will vary according to the "type" of boot
> 
> ie:
> -the first time I apply that profile (it always shuts down and then boot , it doesn't "simply" reboot) let's say hwinfo reads 1.38 and 1.358/1.36 under load (it always shuts down and then restart )
> -warm boot hwinfo reads 1.365 and 1.350 under load
> -cold boot hwinfo reads 1.375 and 1.369 under load
> 
> also all core boost frequencies will change
> 
> -first time I apply the profile : all core boost = 4.125
> -warm boot 4.1
> -cold boot 4.1
> 
> 
> sometimes it keeps the "right" voltage even after a cold boot but still lowers the frequency to 4.1
> 
> this really bothers me 'cause now it's stable only when I first apply it , mostly because of single thread voltage spikes which cause instability in the other 2 scenarios, and it really makes me want to change it back to a manual 4.125MHz oc which was 100% stable with cpu voltage fixed to 1.38 ( SVI2 TFN 1.36v under ibt load - LLC4 )
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know why but it pretty much randomly f***** everything up
> 
> so right now I need pointers too, because it makes absolutely no sense to use xfr+pbo and leave the voltage on auto/negative offset if it keeps changing everytime



Huh, remarkable.

I must say, I have the same thing going on with cold boot, 
and also restart after changing a bios setting -> From a certain point onwards when oc'ing, I always get the shutdown-restart too...

Also when cold-booting the pc always starts for 2 seconds, then shuts down and starts again and boots.
I have been told it is because I unplug from the wall each night, so BIOS needs to 'learn' the settings again each time I plug back in
and do a cold boot. Others have told me it is a 'safety' feature of the motherboard, where the capacitors are protected by first charging up before
the PC boots, requiring a start and shutdown first. Don't know if it's one or the other or both...

But I'm not getting those weird scenarios, my settings are 100% stable and they do not change at all, but they are a little more modest than yours (1.325v under full load).

Some have suggested that when having cold boot issues, it can help to slightly raise the DRAM boot voltage,
BUT since our mobo doesn't have this option, it is recommended to slightly raise RAM voltage in stead, perhaps also SOC by one increment.
It could solve your issue, since cold boot issues usually indicate some unstable setting, often being RAM not getting the voltage it needs at cold boot...

I'm hardly an expert in all of this, but I have read a lot about it since I got this CPU.
You could try it if you haven't yet.

I guess in my case you kind of confirm what I already suspected, that my cooling solution is limiting me compared to a water-cooled solution.


----------



## Velheibgnar

Guys, what is you average "game mode" boost? Mine is quite strange, like only LoL client opened, Windows thinks it's a game running. So Ryzen thinks the same, so voltage is 1.4+ While CPU load is like 1-2%.

I have normal values with battle net opened. Just noticed that a "game launched" (like lol client) makes the voltage very high. I mean the boost is beautiful  but why when I don't need it ?









Also where do I set up a cold boot +voltage so that an undervolt more than -0.0562smth will be stable? Like 0.075. and what value is safe?


----------



## MNMadman

Velheibgnar said:


> Guys, what is you average "game mode" boost? Mine is quite strange, like only LoL client opened, Windows thinks it's a game running. So Ryzen thinks the same, so voltage is 1.4+ While CPU load is like 1-2%.
> 
> I have normal values with battle net opened. Just noticed that a "game launched" (like lol client) makes the voltage very high. I mean the boost is beautiful  but why when I don't need it ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also where do I set up a cold boot +voltage so that an undervolt more than -0.0562smth will be stable? Like 0.075. and what value is safe?


Boost varies from CPU to CPU, just like overclocks do. The most common range I've seen is 4.1-4.2GHz.

I have never seen a voltage or offset that only applies on cold boot, and I've had Asus, ASRock, and MSI boards recently. I don't think such a thing exists.

"Safe" voltage also varies from CPU to CPU. You'll have to experiment to find what voltage offsets work best for your particular system.


----------



## TalosTHG

Velheibgnar said:


> Guys, what is you average "game mode" boost? Mine is quite strange, like only LoL client opened, Windows thinks it's a game running. So Ryzen thinks the same, so voltage is 1.4+ While CPU load is like 1-2%.
> I have normal values with battle net opened. Just noticed that a "game launched" (like lol client) makes the voltage very high. I mean the boost is beautiful  but why when I don't need it ?
> Also where do I set up a cold boot +voltage so that an undervolt more than -0.0562smth will be stable? Like 0.075. and what value is safe?


I think that's how the boost is supposed to work, mine does the same 
bear in mind that lol client isn't the best optimized client ( in fact there's an option for "low specs client" in the settings ) and that usually when the whole cpu load is low it may be using just 1 or 2 cores with let's say a 20/50% load 




MNMadman said:


> Boost varies from CPU to CPU, just like overclocks do. The most common range I've seen is 4.1-4.2GHz.
> I have never seen a voltage or offset that only applies on cold boot, and I've had Asus, ASRock, and MSI boards recently. I don't think such a thing exists.
> "Safe" voltage also varies from CPU to CPU. You'll have to experiment to find what voltage offsets work best for your particular system.


well I suppose mine does that on its own if I set the voltage to Auto/Offset
after the issues I've complained about in the last post I decided to settle back to 4.1GHz with a -0.0125 offset and for a cold boot it will use up to 1.38V (1.362V under IBT load) but after a restart/shutdown it'll use only 1.368V (1.35v under IBT load )
I tested it and it's stable both ways, so I suppose it was something "smart" the mobo was doing on its own and I'm the stupid one to blame 

well those 0.25GHz mean ~5pts less in cinebench but oh well after some tests I noticed that it will boost more frequently up to 4.3 in games ( except bf1 that does a pretty good job at using multicore cpus ) so it's fine for me



respoda said:


> I guess in my case you kind of confirm what I already suspected, that my cooling solution is limiting me compared to a water-cooled solution.


Yup I think so, also note that at the moment I have a cpu only loop with 2x240mm rads ( 1 fat, 1 slim ) which is quite overkill for a normal cpu and also a good waterblock but still this cpu runs pretty hot in IBT stress tests (you'll probably never reach that kind of load tho)


----------



## mtrai

@TalosTHG Please keep in mind..when ever you boot up...one of the things the CPU checks in determining the boost level is the current temp. It is quite important in the boost limit in the boot up. THis is the big reason why it varies from boot to boot.


----------



## DevilDinosaur

rdr09 said:


> That's fast. But mine is faster. After I hit Enter, I get to the desktop even before I finish the meme - Holy smoke Batman! Less than a second to open any browser or app cached.
> 
> 
> 
> Nice.


I don't know what you are trying to say, but if you wanted to see my magic oscillation accumulator and purifier that makes it possible to turn a stock boosted, overclocked, overvolted 3.7Ghz-4-3Ghz erratic 8 headed beast with bi-polar into a a dependable, predictable 4.35Ghz 8-headed rock, v8 titan (in amd mainstream terms of course), that sips the juice, but is always ready to go, I would show you


----------



## DevilDinosaur

MishelLngelo said:


> Disabling SMT just kills performance, better results with running 6 or even 4 cores.


care to elaborate on this?


----------



## MishelLngelo

DevilDinosaur said:


> care to elaborate on this?


Simple, I just turned SMT off and run tests like CB15 and PT9 and scores where way lower than when running with 6 cores and slightly lower when only 4 cores are used.


----------



## DevilDinosaur

MishelLngelo said:


> Simple, I just turned SMT off and run tests like CB15 and PT9 and scores where way lower than when running with 6 cores and slightly lower when only 4 cores are used.


Yeah that is a benchmark, but in real life smt reduces performance of the real core. There is overhead involved. So sacrificing smt gives me a 10degree cooler cpu, a more secure cpu, the ability to run faster clocks, and gets rid of the detrimental performance smt brings to gaming. wa~la


----------



## MishelLngelo

DevilDinosaur said:


> Yeah that is a benchmark, but in real life smt reduces performance of the real core. There is overhead involved. So sacrificing smt gives me a 10degree cooler cpu, a more secure cpu, the ability to run faster clocks, and gets rid of the detrimental performance smt brings to gaming. wa~la


Well, if that fulfills your needs...... but than you could have just saved money and gone with 2600(x).


----------



## DevilDinosaur

MishelLngelo said:


> Well, if that fulfills your needs...... but than you could have just saved money and gone with 2600(x).


That makes no sense.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

I think I know what both of you are talking about... let me see if I can explain... or make a fool of myself.


1. If you are using less than 8 threads, the SMT can actually be detrimental because windows will inevitably route two threads through the same core instead of sending each to a separate physical core... when two threads are going through the same physical core the performances is less on each thread than the same two threads going through separate physical cores assuming that no other threads are using the cores.


2. If you are using more than 8 threads (which is pretty common these days) then having SMT enabled can and usually will help because threads are not having to wait in the queue as often as when SMT is off... this of course assumes that no one thread is using the core to the fullest extent... this is why SMT boost in performance varies from benchmark to benchmark... some loads use more of the core resources than others which is why sometimes SMT being enabled only has marginal performance improvement over no SMT


----------



## Minotaurtoo

on a completely unrelated note, I just put together an old as S#!+ rig to play 90's and early 2000's games on... and realized only after I put it together that I used an amd 2600 cpu... the old Athlon 2600 from the last time that AMD cpu's were competitive with intel and coincidentally using the same naming scheme as they are now... 



It's a bit of a miss match rig built on what I found laying around the house and an old HP a222n pc that was dead... I ended up with a small 40GB hdd and 2GB of ram... pc came with 120GB hdd (was completely dead) and only 512MB of ram... I'm using a Flash drive to add storage space to it... I wish it took sata drives, but it only takes IDE drives.... I managed to get one of the two optical drives to work and it can't read dvd's... doesn't matter though, because all the games back then were on cd or floppy and yes it has a 3.5" floppy drive that works! you know how we all want a HEDT PC... well I have a POS PC now to play OAS games on ^_^


before anyone says (virtual machines) I'm going say, didn't work... tried it several times, everytime audio didn't work right or games just wouldn't play on it... apparently there are some issues with vm's that make it difficult to get a smooth audio output... some games work, others crap out... My son was even excited... he loved Unreal Gold...and on vm's it just wouldn't work right.


----------



## MishelLngelo

When I engage "Game Mode" this is what I get:
4 cores are disabled and SMT is on.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

game mode is really meant for threadripper, not the 2700x... not sure why they even put it in ryzen master for the am4 cpu's... in games you would definitely be better off with 8 real cores vs 4 real 8 logical.


----------



## bmaxa

Minotaurtoo said:


> I think I know what both of you are talking about... let me see if I can explain... or make a fool of myself.
> 
> 
> 1. If you are using less than 8 threads, the SMT can actually be detrimental because windows will inevitably route two threads through the same core instead of sending each to a separate physical core... when two threads are going through the same physical core the performances is less on each thread than the same two threads going through separate physical cores assuming that no other threads are using the cores.
> 
> 
> 2. If you are using more than 8 threads (which is pretty common these days) then having SMT enabled can and usually will help because threads are not having to wait in the queue as often as when SMT is off... this of course assumes that no one thread is using the core to the fullest extent... this is why SMT boost in performance varies from benchmark to benchmark... some loads use more of the core resources than others which is why sometimes SMT being enabled only has marginal performance improvement over no SMT


I think that all OS's now are aware of SMT. SMT has one advantage that if you have more running processes then physical cores OS does not have to do context switch which saves lot of time.


----------



## MishelLngelo

I think it's because with less cores it can boost higher and raise IPC speed which helps games with low core/tread requirements. When I tried it, voltage didn't hit over 1.2v and practically no heat up.


----------



## DevilDinosaur

smt, its a burden, it causes chaos and confusion, and it makes your games slower



bmaxa said:


> I think that all OS's now are aware of SMT. SMT has one advantage that if you have more running processes then physical cores OS does not have to do context switch which saves lot of time.


They are, but really, it's more trouble than it's worth. (pssst... this is how they spy on you.. through the threads)


----------



## MishelLngelo

DevilDinosaur said:


> smt, its a burden, it causes chaos and confusion, and it makes your games slower


I wouldn't say so, game/program either uses so many threads or not where would be confusion ? Who's spying ???


----------



## DevilDinosaur

MishelLngelo said:


> I wouldn't say so, game/program either uses so many threads or not where would be confusion ? Who's spying ???


meltdown/spectre ? u know that thing that has been going around for a year, that had been going around for ten years or so?

i'm not linking u to meldown spectre stuff, but heres some smt



https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/...rks-core-i7-6700k-hyperthreading-test.219417/
https://forums.guru3d.com/threads/gaming-benchmarks-skylake-core-i7-hyperthreading-test.405383/
https://superuser.com/questions/1166529/performance-impact-of-hyper-threading
https://www.gamersnexus.net/game-bench/3227-ffxv-hyperthreading-smt-on-vs-off-benchmarks-cpu


----------



## bmaxa

DevilDinosaur said:


> They are, but really, it's more trouble than it's worth. (pssst... this is how they spy on you.. through the threads)


No, they are spying on you normally with ease. You use software, software spies on you. 
eg: https://thenextweb.com/microsoft/20...ducts-covertly-gather-personal-data-on-users/


----------



## DevilDinosaur

bmaxa said:


> No, they are spying on you normally with ease. You use software, software spies on you.
> eg: https://thenextweb.com/microsoft/20...ducts-covertly-gather-personal-data-on-users/


no i am talking snowden level ****


----------



## bmaxa

Any level, you have to run software on your computer in order to spy. And they don't need any CPU vulnerability for that.... meltdown and spectre are more for Amazon, MS, VPS providers generally.


----------



## DevilDinosaur

bmaxa said:


> Any level, you have to run software on your computer in order to spy. And they don't need any CPU vulnerability for that.... meltdown and spectre are more for Amazon, MS, VPS providers generally.


oh, its just targeting them is it...


----------



## mtrai

DevilDinosaur said:


> oh, its just targeting them is it...


Quick people get you tin foil hats on. /rolls eyes /s 

This is not the thread for this...start your own if you want to discuss it.


----------



## rdr09

rdr09 said:


> Anyone here who can recommend a PC store in Cape Town, South Africa? I need another AM4 motherboard. Thank you.


No one? How about in Naples, Italy? 



DevilDinosaur said:


> I don't know what you are trying to say, but if you wanted to see my magic oscillation accumulator and purifier that makes it possible to turn a stock boosted, overclocked, overvolted 3.7Ghz-4-3Ghz erratic 8 headed beast with bi-polar into a a dependable, predictable 4.35Ghz 8-headed rock, v8 titan (in amd mainstream terms of course), that sips the juice, but is always ready to go, I would show you


I want to see that. Disabling SMT on my 2700 at stock lowers the watts from 65 to 45W. Reminds me of my Sempron. But i have to wait 20 secs for the Desktop to come up from cold boot. HDD


----------



## MishelLngelo

bmaxa said:


> No, they are spying on you normally with ease. You use software, software spies on you.
> eg: https://thenextweb.com/microsoft/20...ducts-covertly-gather-personal-data-on-users/


Somebody has been asleep for about 20 years bringing up that story recently.


----------



## TalosTHG

mtrai said:


> @TalosTHG Please keep in mind..when ever you boot up...one of the things the CPU checks in determining the boost level is the current temp. It is quite important in the boost limit in the boot up. THis is the big reason why it varies from boot to boot.


yep sure but no matter the voltage, when cold booting it will fail the first time and then rise the voltage (to 1.381 in this case) to boot succesfully 

I mean I thought temps could be the reason why voltage was changing so I boot it up, launched ibt, made sure the cpu reached 65-70°C and then shut it down, took the plug off and waited for the capacitors/mobo etc. to "discharge" ( 10s-15s more or less- pretty sure they did since mobo's rgb lighting went off ) and then boot it up again 

the tubes near the cpu wb were still "warm" so it shouldn't have been so much different from a simple restart with the pc at idle temps but still it failed the first attempt and boot up with 1.381v 
I then restarted it and the voltage was 1.36



so I guess it is a pattern related to cold booting idk if it is intended or not but still it is stable with both voltages ( tested multicore and single core boost since initially ST voltage spikes were causing freezes )
thanks anyway tho, I really appreciate the help


----------



## EDSin87

jprovido said:


> I decided to stick to my 4.1ghz overclock. I’ve tried a few games and usually it boosts below 4100mhz and games like pubg it hovers around 3975-4000mhz. I’ll just keep it at 4.1ghz I think I’ll get a more consistent performance with this OC


New to the forums. I recently picked up the 2700x. 

This is exactly what I did! I didn't like the spikes in voltage just to get that 4.3ghz. I couldn't get 4.2 stable no matter how much I tried. 4.1ghz seems to be the most stable I can get it. But I noticed a lot of people are using the voltage of 1.4v or more. I'm using an offset of +0.03125v. I ran Cinebench and RealBench for about 1 hour. I passed both. I ran BF1, BF4, and a few other games. Stable so far.


----------



## rdr09

With SMT disabled and CPU oc'ed to 4GHz, the cpu temp during gaming stays below 60c with a CM T4 cooler. Cpu power package shows @ 65W. At stock it was only showing 35W. CPU temps stayed below 50c.


----------



## lightsout

rdr09 said:


> With SMT disabled and CPU oc'ed to 4GHz, the cpu temp during gaming stays below 60c with a CM T4 cooler. Cpu power package shows @ 65W. At stock it was only showing 35W. CPU temps stayed below 50c.


Have you benched any games to compare with smt on or off?


----------



## polkfan

rdr09 said:


> With SMT disabled and CPU oc'ed to 4GHz, the cpu temp during gaming stays below 60c with a CM T4 cooler. Cpu power package shows @ 65W. At stock it was only showing 35W. CPU temps stayed below 50c.


Why haha do you live in a country where electricity cost a lot of money? Or are you trying to make a 100% silent rig?


----------



## rdr09

lightsout said:


> Have you benched any games to compare with smt on or off?



I wish I can help you but I really am short of free time. Did not notice any difference. Prolly becos I only have a GTX 1060. 



polkfan said:


> Why haha do you live in a country where electricity cost a lot of money? Or are you trying to make a 100% silent rig?


So silent i can hear the hardrives spinning. lol. Just tested it but went back to enabling SMT. Sleep function is a must. CPU Package power was 35W. lol


----------



## lightsout

rdr09 said:


> I wish I can help you but I really am short of free time. Did not notice any difference. Prolly becos I only have a GTX 1060.
> 
> 
> 
> So silent i can hear the hardrives spinning. lol. Just tested it but went back to enabling SMT. Sleep function is a must. CPU Package power was 35W. lol


No difference? I wasn't asking you to run a bench, just curious if you had and decided it was better with it disabled. So are you doing it purely for power/heat?


----------



## rdr09

lightsout said:


> No difference? I wasn't asking you to run a bench, just curious if you had and decided it was better with it disabled. So are you doing it purely for power/heat?



I was just testing it out of curiousity. It started with conversation with DevilDinosaur back in post # 999. He's got his Oc'ed at 4.3GHz with SMT off. Anyway, i keep SMT enabled since i need the 4.1 boost at stock. Disabled the cores only boost to 3.5GHz. That and the sleep function.


----------



## CJMitsuki

rdr09 said:


> I was just testing it out of curiousity. It started with conversation with DevilDinosaur back in post # 999. He's got his Oc'ed at 4.3GHz with SMT off. Anyway, i keep SMT enabled since i need the 4.1 boost at stock. Disabled the cores only boost to 3.5GHz. That and the sleep function.



I think that was bc the extra threads were spying on him :lachen:


----------



## TalosTHG

SMT off in games like Battlefield degrades performances by a considerable amount and only marginally helps in poorly optimized games EVEN if you get higher clocks with SMT off 

From my tests :
4.1 all cores is far better than 4.2/4.3 half cores in BF1 multiplayer (lost 5/10 fps average with SMT off ) 
4.1 all cores vs 4.2/4.3 half cores is almost the same in The Division Bench ( gained ~1.2 average fps in the benchmark with SMT off )
In games like league of legends ( no real multicore optimization ) you'll get the same boost ( no difference )


edit : 2700x + gtx 1080 max settings @ 1080p


----------



## MishelLngelo

TalosTHG said:


> SMT off in games like Battlefield degrades performances by a considerable amount and only marginally helps in poorly optimized games EVEN if you get higher clocks with SMT off
> 
> From my tests :
> 4.1 all cores is far better than 4.3 half cores in BF1 multiplayer (lost 5/10 fps average with SMT off )
> 4.1 all cores vs 4.3 half cores is almost the same in The Division Bench ( gained ~1.2 average fps in the benchmark with SMT off )
> In games like league of legends ( no real multicore optimization ) you'll get the same 4.3 boost ( no difference )


I don't have or play games like that, don't have GPU for them either but that's about what benchmarks show and in serious applications like CAD (physics sim), video and heavy graphics, performance drop is really dismal with SMT off. It's better even with half cores off.
That's why I was really skeptical about any claims that it helps performance.


----------



## nick name

With SMT off I lose about 500+ points in Cinebench.


----------



## bmaxa

With AMD, SMT has much more gains, then with Intel.


----------



## TalosTHG

nick name said:


> With SMT off I lose about 500+ points in Cinebench.


yep that's normal, heavy "multicore" applications hugely benefit from SMT


----------



## nick name

TalosTHG said:


> yep that's normal, heavy "multicore" applications hugely benefit from SMT


I was just posting so others wouldn't have to bother testing it out themselves. Just trying to provide some data.


----------



## mtrai

People please just read...this has all been covered many times as has many other things that are "PSA". Sorry if this is gonna be harsh...but I guarantee you are not the first to discover this at this point. SO please read up.

Seriously I want to see break throughs etc...not re hashing things we all have already posted and proved. Where as the knowledge is there, with just a bit of reading.

Show me hitting 4000 Mhz on ram or something...but repeating things does nothing.

I appreciate you just realized this or figured it out...even though the info is already out there and available.

Now to the newcomers...please feel free to ask and do not get offended if pointed to certain posts or get a curt answer...but seriously answering these things over and over gets tiresome for all when search works just fine.


----------



## nick name

mtrai said:


> People please just read...this has all been covered many times as has many other things that are "PSA". Sorry if this is gonna be harsh...but I guarantee you are not the first to discover this at this point. SO please read up.
> 
> Seriously I want to see break throughs etc...not re hashing things we all have already posted and proved. Where as the knowledge is there, with just a bit of reading.
> 
> Show me hitting 4000 Mhz on ram or something...but repeating things does nothing.
> 
> I appreciate you just realized this or figured it out...even though the info is already out there and available.
> 
> Now to the newcomers...please feel free to ask and do not get offended if pointed to certain posts or get a curt answer...but seriously answering these things over and over gets tiresome for all when search works just fine.


A lot of folks do come here to discuss things for the company and topics get recycled.

And I never heard back from the guy running 4000GHz on his Threadripper build. I think I am gonna message him again.


----------



## mtrai

nick name said:


> A lot of folks do come here to discuss things for the company and topics get recycled.
> 
> And I never heard back from the guy running 4000GHz on his Threadripper build. I think I am gonna message him again.


Well first 4.0 Mhz ram on Threadripper...I would say right off the bat you will not hear back from them. Second IF and do not believe he was at 4.0 Mhz ram he had to be running only 2 sticks. Has nothing to do you with you. I just recently showed running at 3800 actually 3806 at CL 14 on a 2700X with C7H WiFI with the beta bios with AGESA 1.0.0.6. So I doubt the claim.

Anyhow I was delayed in working with this AGESA due to hurricane Michael, as I live in Panama City Beach, Florida.

But search works...no need to recycle ad nauseum, a lot of us will not go back to something that has been discussed over and over or that a simple google search will show. This was not directed at you. And seriously they need read all 1039 posts in this thread..and read every post in other thread or use search.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

mtrai said:


> Well first 4.0 Mhz ram on Threadripper...I would say right off the bat you will not hear back from them. Second IF and do not believe he was at 4.0 Mhz ram he had to be running only 2 sticks. Has nothing to do you with you. I just recently showed running at 3800 actually 3806 at CL 14 on a 2700X with C7H WiFI with the beta bios with AGESA 1.0.0.6. So I doubt the claim.
> 
> Anyhow I was delayed in working with this AGESA due to hurricane Michael, as I live in Panama City Beach, Florida.
> 
> But search works...no need to recycle ad nauseum, a lot of us will not go back to something that has been discussed over and over or that a simple google search will show. This was not directed at you. And seriously they need read all 1039 posts in this thread..and read every post in other thread or use search.


I'm glad to see you made it through the storm, how's the recovery coming... I heard it got seriously bad down there... I used to live on the Gulf near Mobile, and I never saw anything like that before...


----------



## mtrai

Minotaurtoo said:


> I'm glad to see you made it through the storm, how's the recovery coming... I heard it got seriously bad down there... I used to live on the Gulf near Mobile, and I never saw anything like that before...


Across the Hathaway bridge from Panama CIty Beach...so Panama City and everything east to Mexico Beach looks like a war zone. It looks like it was bombed. Don't get me wrong we had all kinds of damage on the Beach as well...just nothing like that.


----------



## specialedge

mtrai said:


> Across the Hathaway bridge from Panama CIty Beach...so Panama City and everything east to Mexico Beach looks like a war zone. It looks like it was bombed. Don't get me wrong we had all kinds of damage on the Beach as well...just nothing like that.


I think we have already discussed the weather in this thread. If not, it has been discussed in other threads. We should not clog the thread with redundant questions and discussions when the search function works perfectly well.

Not to mention off-topic thread derailing. If you want to keep the thread clean from repetitive topics, now is the time to take your own advice from above. 

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## lightsout

specialedge said:


> I think we have already discussed the weather in this thread. If not, it has been discussed in other threads. We should not clog the thread with redundant questions and discussions when the search function works perfectly well.
> 
> Not to mention off-topic thread derailing. If you want to keep the thread clean from repetitive topics, now is the time to take your own advice from above.
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


Thank you.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

When I started this club, I intended it to be a place where people could openly discuss and even rehash topics openly... 



Also, since it's a "club" thread and not a topic focused thread, off topic discussions are fine IMO as long as it's kept civil... I'm a member of a steelworkers group and I promise we rarely discuss steel, but when we do it's nice to have a group of people familiar with the intricacys of the topic at hand...Our common bond here is Ryzen 2700/2700x ownership, but it's not all we are allowed to talk about here, yes generally that is where the conversation is expected to be centered, but as long as the topic is related to Ryzen or club memebers I'm perfectly fine with the limited amount of off topic discussions I'm seeing... 



Also, since new people can't seriously be expected to read over a thousand posts, I strongly disagree with the idea of forcing them to... It's far easier to just ask for the information you need, not to mention that someone else might see it this time where as the last time they missed it... 



as for the sites search engine... it's crap at best.


Lastly, lets just be civil... we are a special class of PC owners here and we can occasionally act like it...


----------



## TalosTHG

nick name said:


> I was just posting so others wouldn't have to bother testing it out themselves. Just trying to provide some data.


sorry buddy, I misinterpreted your message 



mtrai said:


> People please just read...this has all been covered many times as has many other things that are "PSA". Sorry if this is gonna be harsh...but I guarantee you are not the first to discover this at this point. SO please read up.


yep, sure, nothing new and I also suppose most of the people in here know that but since this is more of a "let's have a friendly chat" type of topic ( at least from what I understand ) I see nothing wrong in discussing, sharing opinions and personal preferences and even asking for tips/helps about SMT on/off or manual oc vs PBO+xfr and other topics that have already been discussed 


I mean at this point there's really not that much to talk about, at least not much that is "new" and this topic would be "dead" if it wasn't what it actually is 
also, to be quite honest I personally find it very nice to have a place where you help each other and share opinions

_____

Anyway here's something semi-related I wanted to post some days ago ( it's semi-ot tho )

apparently the mitigation patches in Linux 4.20 for the new spectre flaws discovered ( https://arxiv.org/abs/1811.05441 ) affect intel cpus way more than the previous ones while leaving amd cpus almost unaffected 
https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=linux-420-bisect&num=1

I think it's interesting, we're talking about a significant performance hit, to be honest if this is the "trend" we'll see in the near future, I'm even happier I chose the 2700x and saved those extra 200euros


----------



## Minotaurtoo

I'm not sure where all in the world that Thanksgiving is celebrated, but to all those who celebrate it, Happy Thanksgiving and to the rest... Just have yourself a great day anyway!


----------



## MishelLngelo

Minotaurtoo said:


> I'm not sure where all in the world that Thanksgiving is celebrated, but to all those who celebrate it, Happy Thanksgiving and to the rest... Just have yourself a great day anyway!


At this date it's USA only, in Canada we have it on second Monday in October so it's not a set date.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

MishelLngelo said:


> At this date it's USA only, in Canada we have it on second Monday in October so it's not a set date.


well drat... sorry I missed it for you... still, I hope it was a good one for you.


----------



## rdr09

Minotaurtoo said:


> I'm not sure where all in the world that Thanksgiving is celebrated, but to all those who celebrate it, Happy Thanksgiving and to the rest... Just have yourself a great day anyway!


Americans all over the world celebrate Thanksgiving. American schools overseas take time off to be thankful. American families gather just like back home. Here in one country in Africa (this is my second), we will gather this Saturday to celebrate. 

Happy Thanksgiving!


----------



## azanimefan

SO I've been working on my CPU since installing it mostly because I was unhappy with the max clock speed being around 4.1ghz before temps nuked the overclocking (and voltage seemed high to get it there, granted it could be a lame chip, or just poor cooling from the cpu cooler, but I wanted to learn everything I could about these things since this is the first Ryzen I've overclocked), found some interesting issues, that seemed to have been affecting stability and overclocking. For example the P-state settings... Not sure how well known that is, but I found if I disabled most of them (except the first, which I set to manual and left at default settings) it seems to have stabilized my cpu and it's weird "undervolt" crashing issue. It also massively reduced the voltage I needed (and subsequently, the temps gained) for overclocking, so I've been working on a new overclock on the CPU since disabling the p-states. 

Currently I'm almost 0.5V lower in power need to keep this thing stable at each 100mhz over 3700. Which is pretty cool. it keeps the temps down as well, which is nice since my cpu cooler isn't amazing (being a mitx case meaning limited cooling options). Currently sitting at 4.1ghz and 1.3685V on the vCore, which is much less then the 1.4125V needed for the same clock prior to disabling the p-states.

Now my GPU is a carry over from my old PC (planning to replace it in a few weeks) however I ran into a weird issue with it in the new pc where I need to give it some extra voltage in order to stabilize it as well. Not sure why it suddenly needs a voltage bump (and it's not a big one). But I'm thinking it might have to do with the motherboard.


----------



## lightsout

New 2600x owner here (swapped out my non x) I know this is the 2700 thread but the R5 thread is dead.

Is there any sort of guide or info on PB2 overclocking. I am just finding info on standard OCing.

I am running an Asus board and can not use the level 3 and 4 oc settings for PB2. When I run cinibench it freezes or the system locks up. What sucks is I saw the voltage hitting 1.5v, which I originally wanted to drop with the offset but now it may just be that my chip can't do those clocks? 

I always get good cpu's lol.


----------



## nick name

lightsout said:


> New 2600x owner here (swapped out my non x) I know this is the 2700 thread but the R5 thread is dead.
> 
> Is there any sort of guide or info on PB2 overclocking. I am just finding info on standard OCing.
> 
> I am running an Asus board and can not use the level 3 and 4 oc settings for PB2. When I run cinibench it freezes or the system locks up. What sucks is I saw the voltage hitting 1.5v, which I originally wanted to drop with the offset but now it may just be that my chip can't do those clocks?
> 
> I always get good cpu's lol.



Are you saying you can't use the PE Levels 3 and 4 because they aren't available to you or that when you use them they aren't stable?


----------



## lightsout

nick name said:


> Are you saying you can't use the PE Levels 3 and 4 because they aren't available to you or that when you use them they aren't stable?


My apologies they aren't stable. Cinibench froze on one profile, and the system locked up on the other profile.

The bummer part is I was hitting 1.5v, so not much room there. But this is without touching anything else, besides setting DOCP (had to bump the dram voltage to 1.37 for windows to boot, wasn't the case with the 2600 (non-x)


----------



## nick name

lightsout said:


> My apologies they aren't stable. Cinibench froze on one profile, and the system locked up on the other profile.
> 
> The bummer part is I was hitting 1.5v, so not much room there. But this is without touching anything else, besides setting DOCP (had to bump the dram voltage to 1.37 for windows to boot, wasn't the case with the 2600 (non-x)


Have you observed what multiplier you boot at using Level 3? And when you were hitting 1.5V was that during the Cinebench run or was that just the recorded highest voltage? With the 2700X those 1.5+V correlate with single core speeds. 

I'd recommend using load line calibration to help stabilize your voltages. I use level 4 and when I do I can use a negative offset of .075 on VCORE. I don't know where you'll end up voltage wise, but those two combined keep my voltages below 1.5V at all times. 

I'd also recommend setting SOC to 1.1V though you could probably find stability at a lower voltage. Perhaps as low as 1.03V.


----------



## lightsout

nick name said:


> Have you observed what multiplier you boot at using Level 3? And when you were hitting 1.5V was that during the Cinebench run or was that just the recorded highest voltage? With the 2700X those 1.5+V correlate with single core speeds.
> 
> I'd recommend using load line calibration to help stabilize your voltages. I use level 4 and when I do I can use a negative offset of .075 on VCORE. I don't know where you'll end up voltage wise, but those two combined keep my voltages below 1.5V at all times.
> 
> I'd also recommend setting SOC to 1.1V though you could probably find stability at a lower voltage. Perhaps as low as 1.03V.


Level 3 is at x41.5. And yes 1.5 was during cinibench. 

I did what you said, level 4 LLC, offset of .075, vcore was like: 
1.438v system lockup
.050 offset = 1.48v = system lockup during cinibench
.025 offset = 1.537v !! = system lockup and temps in 80's. 

Is this just a terrible chip, jeez. Where should I be monitoring vcore, it's annoying to get different readings in different apps. I usually use cpu-z and hwmonitor. Is ryzen master better for voltage reading?

Al level 2 I'm booting with a x40 multi, and am around 1.4v depending on the software reading it.


----------



## lightsout

So I set everything back to auto, level 2 where I previously had it. Put the ram to DOCP settings, manual ram voltage of 1.37v which it previously needed to boot, now I get a memory settings failed from the bios. Have to set to 1.385v to get into windows.

This memory ran fine at 1.35v on the previous cpu. Could there be an issue here? The board and ram are pre-existing and didn't have an issue.


----------



## nick name

lightsout said:


> Level 3 is at x41.5. And yes 1.5 was during cinibench.
> 
> I did what you said, level 4 LLC, offset of .075, vcore was like:
> 1.438v system lockup
> .050 offset = 1.48v = system lockup during cinibench
> .025 offset = 1.537v !! = system lockup and temps in 80's.
> 
> Is this just a terrible chip, jeez. Where should I be monitoring vcore, it's annoying to get different readings in different apps. I usually use cpu-z and hwmonitor. Is ryzen master better for voltage reading?
> 
> Al level 2 I'm booting with a x40 multi, and am around 1.4v depending on the software reading it.


Hmmm, I guess the 2600X voltages don't resemble the 2700X. I can run at multiplier 42.5 at 1.387V using the LLC 4 and negative -.075V.

What are you using for cooling? 

And I would recommend HWiNFO instead of HWMonitor. 

Lastly, if you can't run 41.5 right now you can reduce the multiplier with Ryzen Master. These instructions should help.

https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...tiplier-adjustments-through-ryzen-master.html

You'll just want to reduce EDC as opposed to increasing it.


----------



## lightsout

nick name said:


> Hmmm, I guess the 2600X voltages don't resemble the 2700X. I can run at multiplier 42.5 at 1.387V using the LLC 4 and negative -.075V.
> 
> What are you using for cooling?
> 
> And I would recommend HWiNFO instead of HWMonitor.
> 
> Lastly, if you can't run 41.5 right now you can reduce the multiplier with Ryzen Master. These instructions should help.
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...tiplier-adjustments-through-ryzen-master.html
> 
> You'll just want to reduce EDC as opposed to increasing it.


I will try out HWinfo. For cooling I am using a Thermalight Macho Rev B, which does a pretty good job cooling these chips. 

Thanks for the instructions I will have a look.

Wondering if the cpu is a dud since it is having issues with the ram at xmp settings.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

PB overclocking can be a bit iffy and not all cpu's will be stable with it... so maybe it's just a no go for that cpu... the question I would have is what clock is it trying to hit at what voltage on the all core loads like cinebench... if it's trying for 4.3 at 1.5v then you likely just aren't lucky with the silicon lottery... if it's trying for 4.2 at that voltage then something else is likely off.


----------



## lightsout

Minotaurtoo said:


> PB overclocking can be a bit iffy and not all cpu's will be stable with it... so maybe it's just a no go for that cpu... the question I would have is what clock is it trying to hit at what voltage on the all core loads like cinebench... if it's trying for 4.3 at 1.5v then you likely just aren't lucky with the silicon lottery... if it's trying for 4.2 at that voltage then something else is likely off.


I can't seem to do x41 at 1.5v? Thats what I'm saying, is it just a dud or something else?


----------



## Minotaurtoo

lightsout said:


> I can't seem to do x41 at 1.5v? Thats what I'm saying, is it just a dud or something else?


could be a number of things... best thing to do is try to isolate it... If you leave all things at default (no xmp or anthing) and manually overclock it to 4.1 and it's still unstable then it's likely a dud... honestly it should be able to hit 4.1 at 1.3v but may take more... vdroop may be killing it too... it's possible that you are setting 1.5 and under load it's dropping to 1.2 even... some boards have very bad vdroop, mine does and it's an ASUS board too... it could also be the board itself for that matter... hard to tell really... I'd almost want to swap it into another board and see if the same thing happens if setting ram to default doesn't help it...


----------



## lightsout

Minotaurtoo said:


> could be a number of things... best thing to do is try to isolate it... If you leave all things at default (no xmp or anthing) and manually overclock it to 4.1 and it's still unstable then it's likely a dud... honestly it should be able to hit 4.1 at 1.3v but may take more... vdroop may be killing it too... it's possible that you are setting 1.5 and under load it's dropping to 1.2 even... some boards have very bad vdroop, mine does and it's an ASUS board too... it could also be the board itself for that matter... hard to tell really... I'd almost want to swap it into another board and see if the same thing happens if setting ram to default doesn't help it...


Yeah I tried to run 41 at 1.48v and cinibench locked up. I don't know what the accurate vcore reading is. HWinfo has vcore that is measured under the mobo section, and then cpu core voltage under the cpu section. They are around .05v different under load. But if I choose the lower one I may be frying my chip.

Plus ryzen master is on the higher side of each of those.???


----------



## Minotaurtoo

lightsout said:


> Yeah I tried to run 41 at 1.48v and cinibench locked up. I don't know what the accurate vcore reading is. HWinfo has vcore that is measured under the mobo section, and then cpu core voltage under the cpu section. They are around .05v different under load. But if I choose the lower one I may be frying my chip.
> 
> Plus ryzen master is on the higher side of each of those.???


hmm, assuming that you had the ram at the "optimized defaults" speed then you likely have a "dud" chip or board... I also assume that you have the latest bios updates, not that I believe it would make that much of a difference. I have heard of people having issues like this when they had a bad mount on the cpu cooler... one time a youtuber traced it to having the cooler too tight... my own son had too much thermal paste and not tight enough cause issues for him once... honestly, without trying the chip in another board it'd be hard to be sure it's the chip, but its starting to sound like it... it's taking voltage more like first gen ryzen.


----------



## Johan45

lightsout said:


> Yeah I tried to run 41 at 1.48v and cinibench locked up. I don't know what the accurate vcore reading is. HWinfo has vcore that is measured under the mobo section, and then cpu core voltage under the cpu section. They are around .05v different under load. But if I choose the lower one I may be frying my chip.
> 
> Plus ryzen master is on the higher side of each of those.???


Not sure what voltage you need for 4.0 but the non"X" don't like too high of voltage which is likely why you're getting lockups. My 2600 runs 4.2 with only 1.35V set in BIOS, If it were me I would try backing off the volts and give it a try


----------



## lightsout

Johan45 said:


> Not sure what voltage you need for 4.0 but the non"X" don't like too high of voltage which is likely why you're getting lockups. My 2600 runs 4.2 with only 1.35V set in BIOS, If it were me I would try backing off the volts and give it a try


This is an X version.




Minotaurtoo said:


> hmm, assuming that you had the ram at the "optimized defaults" speed then you likely have a "dud" chip or board... I also assume that you have the latest bios updates, not that I believe it would make that much of a difference. I have heard of people having issues like this when they had a bad mount on the cpu cooler... one time a youtuber traced it to having the cooler too tight... my own son had too much thermal paste and not tight enough cause issues for him once... honestly, without trying the chip in another board it'd be hard to be sure it's the chip, but its starting to sound like it... it's taking voltage more like first gen ryzen.


I do have another board, I am running ITX here so I know I am limited in that way, but Kyle got a 2700x to 4.2 on this same board so I don't think its the board. Although I couldn't get my non x 2600 past 4.0 either.


----------



## Johan45

lightsout said:


> This is an X version.


Either way, you might still be overvolting it. I tested multiple "X" non "X" your build says R5 2600 BTW, and all of them ran at 4.0 with less than 1.4V

I see your point about the board, it may be having trouble delivering power, have you made any changes to current capability in the Digi section?


----------



## lightsout

Johan45 said:


> Either way, you might still be overvolting it. I tested multiple "X" non "X" your build says R5 2600 BTW, and all of them ran at 4.0 with less than 1.4V
> 
> I see your point about the board, it may be having trouble delivering power, have you made any changes to current capability in the Digi section?


I did try to go down in voltage like you said, cinibench just locked up immediately. The only thing I have done is digi power is change LLC, at level 4 it stays about where its set in the bios.

Any recommendations on any other settings?


----------



## Johan45

As a test try CB15 at 4.0 GHz with 1.35V set in BIOS
Just went and reviewed my notes and every CPU I tested would run at 4.0 with 1.3-1.35V


----------



## lightsout

Johan45 said:


> As a test try CB15 at 4.0 GHz with 1.35V set in BIOS
> Just went and reviewed my notes and every CPU I tested would run at 4.0 with 1.3-1.35V


Thats what I did so at PB (or is it xfr asus labels weird) at level 2 I hit 4ghz, which in cinibench is about 1.35v. So I bumped the multi in ryzen master to 41, no joy. Tried to do it through the bios at said voltage, no joy.

I can see as I go up towards 1.5v that cinibench will try to work longer, so it seems like more voltage is helping. I also played with some current settings in Digi VRM, didn't help. 

The system was fine before this chip, now I get a lot of errors that my memory settings failed, never had that, one time it boots at 1.35v (dram) next time it doesn't like it and wants more to boot.

I think I am going to return the chip for a replacement while I still can, maybe I am expecting too much but it just seems off compared to everything else I am reading.


----------



## Johan45

Have you changed/tried any other BIOS for the board?


----------



## lightsout

Johan45 said:


> Have you changed/tried any other BIOS for the board?


I ma running the current bios, not really looking to flash back, I have updated it since I got it.


----------



## Johan45

I know I have had issues in the past when using Ryzen Master. I ended up having to uninstall it then re-flash the BIOS to get things to run correctly.
I would start by uninstalling it then going to BIOS and hit F5 for defaults and start over. If this behaviour continues after that then re-flash the BIOS. The only CPU I had issues with was a 2700 and it still made it to 4.1 with 1.4V but that was the end of the line for stability but it would still run CB15 at higher speeds just couldn't do P95


----------



## lightsout

Johan45 said:


> I know I have had issues in the past when using Ryzen Master. I ended up having to uninstall it then re-flash the BIOS to get things to run correctly.
> I would start by uninstalling it then going to BIOS and hit F5 for defaults and start over. If this behaviour continues after that then re-flash the BIOS. The only CPU I had issues with was a 2700 and it still made it to 4.1 with 1.4V but that was the end of the line for stability but it would still run CB15 at higher speeds just couldn't do P95


I hardly use ryzen master, but may be worth a try. I actually did have a bios update. Did it and I could get further in cinibench but it still locks up at level 3. At this point I gotta get to work. I know its just 100-200 mhz but its frustrating to see the majority of other chips do it without issue.

Especially when this thing does x40 around 1.35v.

BTW thanks a lot for all your help, it's appreciated.


----------



## Johan45

NP, don't work too hard.


----------



## specialedge

lightsout said:


> I hardly use ryzen master, but may be worth a try. I actually did have a bios update. Did it and I could get further in cinibench but it still locks up at level 3. At this point I gotta get to work. I know its just 100-200 mhz but its frustrating to see the majority of other chips do it without issue.
> 
> Especially when this thing does x40 around 1.35v.
> 
> BTW thanks a lot for all your help, it's appreciated.


Regarding your memory issues, what is your setting for SoC? I find with my high speed kits, manual soc voltage of 1.05-1.1v helps out a lot, although I do set my dram at 1.4v

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## lightsout

specialedge said:


> Regarding your memory issues, what is your setting for SoC? I find with my high speed kits, manual soc voltage of 1.05-1.1v helps out a lot, although I do set my dram at 1.4v
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


I had set it to 1.1 at one point. The odd thing is I now have the memory set at 1.35v and it booted. It tried to say the memory settings failed (in bios) and I just rebooted and then it worked, so I don't know what the deal is but this didn't happen with my 2600.

I set up an rma with newegg, but have heard that they are terrible and am not sure I want to go through the hassle.


----------



## serpentmoves

just got a 2700x I run cpuz and it says it running at 2200mhz on stock settings.that cant be right.


----------



## gerardfraser

serpentmoves said:


> just got a 2700x I run cpuz and it says it running at 2200mhz on stock settings.that cant be right.


It should run at 2200mhz on windows balanced power plan.


----------



## serpentmoves

my windows is not validated,i screwed up when i built this computer,i had to buy a copy of windows10 which i havent got yet,so i have not installed anything for the new puter,im running my old config.
]


----------



## serpentmoves

ya im getting a d3 code on my msi x470 m7 ac board,which means ,some of the achitectural protocols are not available,whatever that means,do u know.


----------



## Jspinks020

You're Productivity Build and content Creator. 16 threads still looks kinda overkill, but the six and 12 threads is starting to look even more Realistic I admit. Their route we will remove and retire the quad core lol


----------



## jclafi

My R5 2600 w/ Corsair 3200 CL16 need 1.16v SoC stock. And the RAM need 1.43v to be stable. 

For testing set 1.2v SoC and 1.44v for the DDR4. Should be stable.

I overclocked my R5 and use SoC 1.22v, DDR4 1.43v and 1.42v for CPU, solid as a rock. 

Good Luck !



lightsout said:


> I had set it to 1.1 at one point. The odd thing is I now have the memory set at 1.35v and it booted. It tried to say the memory settings failed (in bios) and I just rebooted and then it worked, so I don't know what the deal is but this didn't happen with my 2600.
> 
> I set up an rma with newegg, but have heard that they are terrible and am not sure I want to go through the hassle.


----------



## lightsout

jclafi said:


> My R5 2600 w/ Corsair 3200 CL16 need 1.16v SoC stock. And the RAM need 1.43v to be stable.
> 
> For testing set 1.2v SoC and 1.44v for the DDR4. Should be stable.
> 
> I overclocked my R5 and use SoC 1.22v, DDR4 1.43v and 1.42v for CPU, solid as a rock.
> 
> Good Luck !


At what clock on the CPU? My ram seems fine but I can get the CPU to do much past 4.0


----------



## kcuestag

Hey guys,

Recently installed a Ryzen 2700X with a Gigabyte X470 Ultra Gaming, I'd like to undervolt, so I've set the voltage on negative Offfset (So far at -0.080) and I was wondering if this will affect the CPU's maximum boost, or it'll still boost to 4.3GHz when needed?

I'm not looking to OC, but I'd rather undervolt it to keep it as cool as possible while still mantaining the max boost possible on stock clocks. Is this ok?


----------



## Johan45

kcuestag said:


> Hey guys,
> 
> Recently installed a Ryzen 2700X with a Gigabyte X470 Ultra Gaming, I'd like to undervolt, so I've set the voltage on negative Offfset (So far at -0.080) and I was wondering if this will affect the CPU's maximum boost, or it'll still boost to 4.3GHz when needed?
> 
> I'm not looking to OC, but I'd rather undervolt it to keep it as cool as possible while still mantaining the max boost possible on stock clocks. Is this ok?


You'd have to test if it'll still boost, try Cinebench single core and monitor, should hit 4.3 and all core should be around 4.0


----------



## kcuestag

Johan45 said:


> You'd have to test if it'll still boost, try Cinebench single core and monitor, should hit 4.3 and all core should be around 4.0


What software is best for monitoring all core speeds? I don't think CPU-Z is accurate, it sits at 4GHz all the time while running Prime95.


----------



## MishelLngelo

kcuestag said:


> What software is best for monitoring all core speeds? I don't think CPU-Z is accurate, it sits at 4GHz all the time while running Prime95.


HW Info is still best and with most data.


----------



## kcuestag

MishelLngelo said:


> HW Info is still best and with most data.


Playing Battlefield 5 I see all of them at 4GHz, does this mean it needs more voltage? Or it's that it doesn't need more power?

I'm very confused with this CPU's boost.


----------



## MishelLngelo

Can't expect every program/game to push CPU all the way, not if it's powerful enough for the task.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

as previously stated, hwinfo is pretty much the best for monitoring these chips... if your board offers precision boost overdrive, turn it on, it will help it hit higher boost clocks longer... usually power limit is why these chips will not boost all core to 4.2, so voltage as low as you can be stable will help in most cases... but then again, I'm on an Asus board and it might be different. good luck and I hope you like it : )


----------



## kcuestag

So far I've left everything on AUTO:

Max voltage according to HWInfo is 1.475v on Core 6 and average around 1.3009v. Max temperatures:

Tctl: 70ºC
Tdie: 60ºC

Are these good for 24/7 use? should I be worried of that max voltage reported? Everything on the BIOS is on AUTO/default except the RAM which I've set to XMP for 3200MHz CL14 (As they're spec'd).

I don't plan on pushing this 2700X any further than what it gives me on stock, more than enough for what I do.


----------



## eXteR

kcuestag said:


> So far I've left everything on AUTO:
> 
> Max voltage according to HWInfo is 1.475v on Core 6 and average around 1.3009v. Max temperatures:
> 
> Tctl: 70ºC
> Tdie: 60ºC
> 
> Are these good for 24/7 use? should I be worried of that max voltage reported? Everything on the BIOS is on AUTO/default except the RAM which I've set to XMP for 3200MHz CL14 (As they're spec'd).
> 
> I don't plan on pushing this 2700X any further than what it gives me on stock, more than enough for what I do.


That voltage is only when boosting 4.35, don't worry.

I recommend to do a little undervolt using offset if your mobo is capable of it.

-0,05v should be safe and you'll get better temps.

I'm using PBO settings with -0,1 offset voltage. 1,425 max vcore and 1,32 on all cores 4150 on Intel burn test.

Playing i usually get around 4175-4200 and 50° tdie or less.

Enviado desde mi SM-P550 mediante Tapatalk


----------



## kcuestag

eXteR said:


> That voltage is only when boosting 4.35, don't worry.
> 
> I recommend to do a little undervolt using offset if your mobo is capable of it.
> 
> -0,05v should be safe and you'll get better temps.
> 
> I'm using PBO settings with -0,1 offset voltage. 1,425 max vcore and 1,32 on all cores 4150 on Intel burn test.
> 
> Playing i usually get around 4175-4200 and 50° tdie or less.
> 
> Enviado desde mi SM-P550 mediante Tapatalk


Will try undervolting it a bit. I tried -0.100v but that gave me some crashes on Battlefield V and honestly wasn't sure if they were related or the game's fault.

What do you mean by PBO? I've been off the grid for months, and off the grid on AMD for years.


----------



## kcuestag

Something weird on this motherboard (Gigabyte X470 Ultra Gaming):

Dynamic Voltage at AUTO -> ~1.250v running Prime 95.
Dynamic Voltage at -0.102v -> ~1.288v running Prime 95.

Doesn't make much sense at all... Am I doing it wrong? 

Seeing those voltages, I'd rather keep it on AUTO as it stays at a lower voltage.

Edit:

Nevermind, what increased on HWINFO was the VID, not the Core Voltage. 

Currently testing at -0.102v Dynamic Voltage, running Prime 95 with 1.281v and so far max temps of 62ºC (Tdie).

Edit2:

How reliable is HWINFO reading voltages?

Dynamic Voltage on AUTO = 1.250v Core Voltage on HWInfo while running Prime 95.
Dynamic Voltage at -0.102v = 1.281v Core Voltage while running Prime 95.

Doesn't make sense.


----------



## CJMitsuki

kcuestag said:


> Something weird on this motherboard (Gigabyte X470 Ultra Gaming):
> 
> Dynamic Voltage at AUTO -> ~1.250v running Prime 95.
> Dynamic Voltage at -0.102v -> ~1.288v running Prime 95.
> 
> Doesn't make much sense at all... Am I doing it wrong?
> 
> Seeing those voltages, I'd rather keep it on AUTO as it stays at a lower voltage.
> 
> Edit:
> 
> Nevermind, what increased on HWINFO was the VID, not the Core Voltage.
> 
> Currently testing at -0.102v Dynamic Voltage, running Prime 95 with 1.281v and so far max temps of 62ºC (Tdie).
> 
> Edit2:
> 
> How reliable is HWINFO reading voltages?
> 
> Dynamic Voltage on AUTO = 1.250v Core Voltage on HWInfo while running Prime 95.
> Dynamic Voltage at -0.102v = 1.281v Core Voltage while running Prime 95.
> 
> Doesn't make sense.


HwInfo is pretty accurate on voltages. It depends which reading you are looking at. Depending on mobo you can have multiple readings for cpu, DRAM, etc. Mine has the VID, the voltage at the VRM and then a reading after the VRm on the core itself. I wouldnt worry about any voltages you are seeing being too high as with your undervolt they will be fine. I overvolt mine and I consistently see 1.55-1.6v and have had it this way since around April id say. As long as your temps are fine then you are golden. As far as temps the one you should go with is Tdie as it is the reading without the 10c compensation factor and thus is the correct reading. Your overclock will depend on many factors with Temperature and voltage headroom being the biggest factors. The cooler you have the cpu at bootup the higher the system will set your core multipliers for single core, all core, 2,4,6 etc core overclocks. If you start getting warm it will back the clocks down for you unless you are using Performance Enhancer or another setting that overrides those safety features. XFR is pretty good about making it easy to get good performance out of the box with Ryzen. If you are after the absolute max potential and want to spend the time then there is plenty of information about PBO and bclk overclocking with Ryzen if you have the capacity to keep it cool. If you just want to game then just set your undervolt thats stable and let the cpu do its thing. Trust me, your cpu wont be bottlenecking your gaming experience at all.


----------



## kcuestag

CJMitsuki said:


> HwInfo is pretty accurate on voltages. It depends which reading you are looking at. Depending on mobo you can have multiple readings for cpu, DRAM, etc. Mine has the VID, the voltage at the VRM and then a reading after the VRm on the core itself. I wouldnt worry about any voltages you are seeing being too high as with your undervolt they will be fine. I overvolt mine and I consistently see 1.55-1.6v and have had it this way since around April id say. As long as your temps are fine then you are golden. As far as temps the one you should go with is Tdie as it is the reading without the 10c compensation factor and thus is the correct reading. Your overclock will depend on many factors with Temperature and voltage headroom being the biggest factors. The cooler you have the cpu at bootup the higher the system will set your core multipliers for single core, all core, 2,4,6 etc core overclocks. If you start getting warm it will back the clocks down for you unless you are using Performance Enhancer or another setting that overrides those safety features. XFR is pretty good about making it easy to get good performance out of the box with Ryzen. If you are after the absolute max potential and want to spend the time then there is plenty of information about PBO and bclk overclocking with Ryzen if you have the capacity to keep it cool. If you just want to game then just set your undervolt thats stable and let the cpu do its thing. Trust me, your cpu wont be bottlenecking your gaming experience at all.


Thank you for all the input! 

I've left it at around -0.042v on the Dynamic Voltage (This is my first Gigabyte board, I'm used to ASUS boards) which seems to be stable on Prime 95, Battlefield V and rendering, plus it runs about 5-6ºC cooler than on AUTO voltage.  

The voltage readings are weird indeed, I'm used to Intel (My last AMD was a Phenom II X6 1055T) and this dynamic voltage functioning is weird. 

Thanks again for the reply, will test this undervolt otherwise I'll just leave it at AUTO which still runs pretty cool for me (60ºC Tdie on Prime95) compared to my last i7 8700k which easily ran at +85ºC even when undervolted on very stressful programs.


----------



## Jspinks020

eXteR said:


> That voltage is only when boosting 4.35, don't worry.
> 
> I recommend to do a little undervolt using offset if your mobo is capable of it.
> 
> -0,05v should be safe and you'll get better temps.
> 
> I'm using PBO settings with -0,1 offset voltage. 1,425 max vcore and 1,32 on all cores 4150 on Intel burn test.
> 
> Playing i usually get around 4175-4200 and 50° tdie or less.
> 
> Enviado desde mi SM-P550 mediante Tapatalk


Probably fine...my wall is low and getting real close about 11.75v Probed...Probably won't be long.


----------



## rdr09

Got my R7 and my R5 rigs online. When the 3000 series come out i will put my last intel rig to an eternal sleep.


----------



## confed

Well, it's been far too long, both for an upgrade and for returning to AMD.

Finally took down the 2500k and grabbed the 2700 + Taichi + 3200 cl14 for this new build. Going to start playing around with overclocking this week and will see what I can get out of this. Cheers


----------



## MishelLngelo

confed said:


> Well, it's been far too long, both for an upgrade and for returning to AMD.
> 
> Finally took down the 2500k and grabbed the 2700 + Taichi + 3200 cl14 for this new build. Going to start playing around with overclocking this week and will see what I can get out of this. Cheers


Should be a good kick in the system. Here's against i7 2600


----------



## The Sandman

Throw in a little OC and hang on 

Posted a few test results in the C6H thread if anyone is interested https://www.overclock.net/forum/27754482-post39488.html


----------



## MishelLngelo

The Sandman said:


> Throw in a little OC and hang on
> 
> Posted a few test results in the C6H thread if anyone is interested https://www.overclock.net/forum/27754482-post39488.html


Lol, 4.4GHz is "a little" ? I can barely validate at 4.3.


----------



## gupsterg

The Sandman said:


> Throw in a little OC and hang on
> 
> Posted a few test results in the C6H thread if anyone is interested https://www.overclock.net/forum/27754482-post39488.html


Nice  , always great to see your results :thumb: .

I've had some nice runs on PE: Default PBO: Enabled BCLK: 102.2



Spoiler






































Just waiting on a rad/fittings and then rehousing+WC'ing the 2700X+C7H. Hopefully should see an uplift in clocks just from temps improving, then gotta tweak the RAM some more.


----------



## kcuestag

I noticed that PBO was on AUTO instead of ENABLED, which I believe was not properly boosting at it's max capacity.

Enabled it, and here is a stress run while rendering some stuff:



Spoiler















Note that this render usually screws with all my overclocks (It was the toughest thing for my previous i7 8700k, much more than P95, OCCT, IBT... etc), so I run it as a stress test and then some Battlefield V gaming sessions.

Are those temperatures and voltages safe for 24/7 use?

Edit:

Prime95 peaks at 75ºC (Tdie sensor).


----------



## lightsout

kcuestag said:


> I noticed that PBO was on AUTO instead of ENABLED, which I believe was not properly boosting at it's max capacity.
> 
> Enabled it, and here is a stress run while rendering some stuff:
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Note that this render usually screws with all my overclocks (It was the toughest thing for my previous i7 8700k, much more than P95, OCCT, IBT... etc), so I run it as a stress test and then some Battlefield V gaming sessions.
> 
> Are those temperatures and voltages safe for 24/7 use?
> 
> Edit:
> 
> Prime95 peaks at 75ºC (Tdie sensor).


Yeah I would say you are looking fine there.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

kcuestag said:


> I noticed that PBO was on AUTO instead of ENABLED, which I believe was not properly boosting at it's max capacity.
> 
> Enabled it, and here is a stress run while rendering some stuff:
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Note that this render usually screws with all my overclocks (It was the toughest thing for my previous i7 8700k, much more than P95, OCCT, IBT... etc), so I run it as a stress test and then some Battlefield V gaming sessions.
> 
> Are those temperatures and voltages safe for 24/7 use?
> 
> Edit:
> 
> Prime95 peaks at 75ºC (Tdie sensor).



yeah, you're good... 85C on tdie is what I've seen from AMD. It's funny on these chips, even water cooling won't keep you below 50c on tdie under certain loads, but basic air cooling will keep you below 80C.... something about the way the precision boost works and transistor density of these chips.


----------



## kcuestag

Minotaurtoo said:


> yeah, you're good... 85C on tdie is what I've seen from AMD. It's funny on these chips, even water cooling won't keep you below 50c on tdie under certain loads, but basic air cooling will keep you below 80C.... something about the way the precision boost works and transistor density of these chips.


These are the temps I've seen with PBO forced to Enabled (AUTO runs much less aggressive and quite cooler):

Prime 95 -> 76ºC on Tdie
Rendering on Maya -> 68ºC on Tdie
Playing Battlefield 5 on Ultra -> About 56-62ºC on Tdie


So I guess they're OK?

I tried undervolting the dynamic voltage at -0.030 but it gave me a BSOD after 2h of gaming so I returned to auto voltage.

Is PBO safe to use without degrading the CPU? Or should I leave it at AUTO (instead of Enabled)? I noticed that between PBO on AUTO or ENABLED makes a lot of difference in temperatures and voltage, about 10ºC. 

Many thanks for your reply, this is my first AMD cpu in many years and I'm a bit lost with these settings.


----------



## lightsout

kcuestag said:


> These are the temps I've seen with PBO forced to Enabled (AUTO runs much less aggressive and quite cooler):
> 
> Prime 95 -> 76ºC on Tdie
> Rendering on Maya -> 68ºC on Tdie
> Playing Battlefield 5 on Ultra -> About 56-62ºC on Tdie
> 
> 
> So I guess they're OK?
> 
> I tried undervolting the dynamic voltage at -0.030 but it gave me a BSOD after 2h of gaming so I returned to auto voltage.
> 
> Is PBO safe to use without degrading the CPU? Or should I leave it at AUTO (instead of Enabled)? I noticed that between PBO on AUTO or ENABLED makes a lot of difference in temperatures and voltage, about 10ºC.
> 
> Many thanks for your reply, this is my first AMD cpu in many years and I'm a bit lost with these settings.


No you are totally safe, those temps are great, prime95 is not a realistic load, so for everything else you are under 70c. Looking great.


----------



## Miiksu

I don't have time to read whole thread atm but here is my realbench numbers. Got new 2700X to the one I bricked.

LLC Auto
Offset +200 mW

Max tdie 77.4°C
Core voltage 1.406 > 1.325
Package power 173W peak
Clock 4.225 GHz

Booted to UEFI @4.525 GHz and 1.4V


Spoiler


----------



## lightsout

Miiksu said:


> I don't have time to read whole thread atm but here is my realbench numbers. Got new 2700X to the one I bricked.
> 
> LLC Auto
> Offset +200 mW
> 
> Max tdie 77.4°C
> Core voltage 1.406 > 1.325
> Package power 173W peak
> Clock 4.225 GHz
> 
> Booted to UEFI @4.525 GHz and 1.4V
> 
> 
> Spoiler


How did you brick the first one?


----------



## cowboy44mag

Hello everyone,


I'm sorry the only time I come on here is to ask dumb questions, but you all are the best when it comes to the Ryzen processors and hardware. I have a very annoying and dangerous situation with my computer. First of all my Specs are ROG X470-F Gaming motherboard, Ryzen 7 2700X, 16GB 3200Mhz Trident Z RGB RAM, Crucial 1TB SSD and two 1TB Seagate HDD (soon to be upgraded), RTX 2070 video card, and 6 140mm Thermaltake RGB case fans. I followed suggestions on this forum to successfully overclock my RAM to 3600Mhz and have set a negative offset Vcore and enabled PBO. I have been very happy with the performance and the processor is boosting itself very well.


My problem is that I am using the stock Prism cooler and while I'm using the computer be it benchmarking, browsing the internet, gaming, rendering video, ect.. the fan will suddenly stop responding. Usually it gets "stuck" at low speed, but today while playing Assassins Creed Odyssey it stopped altogether. I have no idea how long I played the game like that, but when I realized it the temp reading I got was 74C. I never had a drop in performance or anything, but I really think it it wasn't for my case cooling I would have a fried processor right now. Can anyone tell me why the cooler is doing this? Is there a known bug with the motherboard or cooler that can cause this? I have been thinking about upgrading to an AIO, but if its a motherboard bug that won't really help if its going to do the same thing. Does anyone know anything about this or how to fix it? I am also running the latest Bios, updated Dec 4th I think.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

are you using the AI suite? cause if so, I'd say that's your problem


----------



## cowboy44mag

Minotaurtoo said:


> are you using the AI suite? cause if so, I'd say that's your problem



If that was in response to my question about my Prism cooler stopping to respond I have no AI suites installed on my System except Ryzen Master that I only use to monitor core loads and temperature. I set everything in bios. I have also set a more aggressive fan curve that is supposed to boost the fan to full speed once the CPU reaches 55C. Could having Ryzen Master installed when I have made all the important changes in bios be causing the issue?


I just remembered I also have TT RGB Plus software installed, but its there just to control the case fans speed and color control. I keep the case fans running at full speed all the time as they are rather quiet and I rather know that I have very good case cooling.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

cowboy44mag said:


> If that was in response to my question about my Prism cooler stopping to respond I have no AI suites installed on my System except Ryzen Master that I only use to monitor core loads and temperature. I set everything in bios. I have also set a more aggressive fan curve that is supposed to boost the fan to full speed once the CPU reaches 55C. Could having Ryzen Master installed when I have made all the important changes in bios be causing the issue?


I haven't heard of Ryzen master causing that.... AIsuite has been known to.... in your case, I'm not sure then.... with the exception of the ones on my vega, all my fans are directly connected to 12v (very quiet fans)... but I suppose it could be a bios bug, I don't suppose you have tried to set the fan to 100% constant and seen if it happened still? Only other things I could think to do would be flash back the bios to the older one and in the case that doesn't work try to test to see if it does it on a fresh OS install if you can... some software could possibly be taking it over, but it would have to be something designed to control fans like AIsuite... not sure if Ryzen master has that capability or not.


----------



## cowboy44mag

Minotaurtoo said:


> I haven't heard of Ryzen master causing that.... AIsuite has been known to.... in your case, I'm not sure then.... with the exception of the ones on my vega, all my fans are directly connected to 12v (very quiet fans)... but I suppose it could be a bios bug, I don't suppose you have tried to set the fan to 100% constant and seen if it happened still? Only other things I could think to do would be flash back the bios to the older one and in the case that doesn't work try to test to see if it does it on a fresh OS install if you can... some software could possibly be taking it over, but it would have to be something designed to control fans like AIsuite... not sure if Ryzen master has that capability or not.



Never installed any of the software that came with my motherboard. I went directly to Asus update page, downloaded and flashed the latest bios and set the fan curve in bios. Strangely enough the problem seems to have started after I installed PassMark Performace Test v8.0, but I couldn't believe it was that program so I just today uninstalled it. So far haven't had the issue again, but that makes no sense as I haven't even run that benchmark in weeks and don't believe it could be running in the background. I uninstalled that and Ryzen Master, hopefully it was one of those programs, but I guess maybe the fan itself could be faulty? I just don't understand why it stops responding to the fan curve, and today was the first time ever that the fan totally stopped running period. When it does that the only way to get it to work again is a system restart and then it works flawless for a time until I'll notice it isn't "revving up" again.


With uninstalling Ryzen Master what programs do you recommend running on a Ryzen system to monitor temperature, power usage, load, ect? I currently have HW monitor and CPU-Z installed. Are they safe to run on a Ryzen system? I know I've heard that HW monitor can cause issues with Ryzen and possibly the Asus ROG Strix X470-F motherboard that I have. I don't know if its true or not. Do you think HW monitor is safe to run?


----------



## The Sandman

cowboy44mag said:


> With uninstalling Ryzen Master what programs do you recommend running on a Ryzen system to monitor temperature, power usage, load, ect? I currently have HW monitor and CPU-Z installed. Are they safe to run on a Ryzen system? I know I've heard that HW monitor can cause issues with Ryzen and possibly the Asus ROG Strix X470-F motherboard that I have. I don't know if its true or not. Do you think HW monitor is safe to run?



HWInfo64 is the way to go on Asus. Read the SV12 TFN for Core Voltage and SoC Voltage
The creator is also here on OCN with a very good thread.
CPUZ is fine.


Can't help with fan issue other than mention that a few members with C6H (iirc) still appear to have fan issues even with latest Bios w/AGESA 1.0..0.6.
Don't recall hearing of any fan issues on the C7H but I could be mistaken.

Myself I have never trusted mobo/Bios enough to control fans. Fan controller for me and never any issues nor concerns. 

If that isn't enough than Aquaero is the final solution.


----------



## MishelLngelo

HWiNFO v6.00 is available. 
https://www.hwinfo.com/download/


----------



## cowboy44mag

Just wanted to thank everyone who tried to help with my rather strange issue. Believe it or not, it appears to have been fixed after removing Ryzen Master and Passmark Performance Test. I think it was actually Passmark Performance Test, I was running version 8.0 build 1037, which at this point has to be dated and I never checked to see if there were updates available. I suppose it could have been a compatibility issue as when version 8 was made the flagship AMD processor was the FX 8350. While I don't believe the issue was Ryzen Master I'm not reinstalling it just to be certain. I just don't understand how either could be at fault, but after the uninstall my computer has been running flawlessly. I didn't have either program running in the background and in fact haven't run either in weeks so I don't understand how just by being installed but not running how either could have caused the issue. Furthermore other Ryzen owners have used Ryzen Master without issue. It is just very strange, but I ran my PC almost non stop the last two days rendering, photo editing, and playing Odyssey and never had the issue repeat. While it was acting up I could only go maybe 3 or 4 hours before the fan would stop responding. Just strange all the way around.


----------



## Rapidian

cowboy44mag said:


> Hello everyone,
> My problem is that I am using the stock Prism cooler and while I'm using the computer be it benchmarking, browsing the internet, gaming, rendering video, ect.. the fan will suddenly stop responding. Usually it gets "stuck" at low speed, but today while playing Assassins Creed Odyssey it stopped altogether. I have no idea how long I played the game like that, but when I realized it the temp reading I got was 74C. I never had a drop in performance or anything, but I really think it it wasn't for my case cooling I would have a fried processor right now. Can anyone tell me why the cooler is doing this? Is there a known bug with the motherboard or cooler that can cause this? I have been thinking about upgrading to an AIO, but if its a motherboard bug that won't really help if its going to do the same thing. Does anyone know anything about this or how to fix it? I am also running the latest Bios, updated Dec 4th I think.


I have an ASUS B450-I mobo and 2700X. I am on the latest bios (1103). I've had this happen twice to me where the fans shut off (completely). I was playing diablo3 and got horrible FPS when I realized this and checked tems. I propose this soluition.

Fans have a min speed spec. I took the default in the bios which is 200 RPM but I looked up my fans (my cooler is a NH-U12S SE-AM4) and realized that they are 300 RPM min. Therefore, change your min speed in the BIOS. I'm running like this even though I opened a ticket on Asus....the responded to clear the CMOS. I'm dubious this will fix the problem. I'm sticking with my logic of setting the min fan speed. Suggest you look up fan specs and set yours.


----------



## cowboy44mag

Rapidian said:


> I have an ASUS B450-I mobo and 2700X. I am on the latest bios (1103). I've had this happen twice to me where the fans shut off (completely). I was playing diablo3 and got horrible FPS when I realized this and checked tems. I propose this soluition.
> 
> Fans have a min speed spec. I took the default in the bios which is 200 RPM but I looked up my fans (my cooler is a NH-U12S SE-AM4) and realized that they are 300 RPM min. Therefore, change your min speed in the BIOS. I'm running like this even though I opened a ticket on Asus....the responded to clear the CMOS. I'm dubious this will fix the problem. I'm sticking with my logic of setting the min fan speed. Suggest you look up fan specs and set yours.





I already have a custom fan curve, but will look up to see what the default RPM min for the Prism is just so I'm in spec. I can tell you right now, doing a CMOS reset does nothing. I went through the pain of resetting CMOS (was painful for me because afterwards I realized that I hadn't saved my profile anywhere so I had to go back and redo all my bios optimizations) and I still had the same issue after. Whatever was going on with my system I had this issue happening sometimes twice a day but if I ran the system long enough it would happen at least once. I am hoping that this issue was totally fixed via software conflict but I hope its not an issue with Asus motherboards. I've been using Asus for years and was always content that I had made a good decision as they have always had quality products. Just out of curiosity do you have either Ryzen Master or Passmark Performance Test installed on your system?


----------



## cowboy44mag

Rapidian said:


> I have an ASUS B450-I mobo and 2700X. I am on the latest bios (1103). I've had this happen twice to me where the fans shut off (completely). I was playing diablo3 and got horrible FPS when I realized this and checked tems. I propose this soluition.
> 
> Fans have a min speed spec. I took the default in the bios which is 200 RPM but I looked up my fans (my cooler is a NH-U12S SE-AM4) and realized that they are 300 RPM min. Therefore, change your min speed in the BIOS. I'm running like this even though I opened a ticket on Asus....the responded to clear the CMOS. I'm dubious this will fix the problem. I'm sticking with my logic of setting the min fan speed. Suggest you look up fan specs and set yours.





I have had time to just play around with my PC today and found something that was a major dumb move by me. I thought I was running all the latest drivers but I found out that my Chipset drives needed to be updated. I updated directly from AMD. Don't know if that will make a significant difference, but you may want make sure you have the latest chipset drivers from AMD installed.


----------



## cowboy44mag

Here is a question for for the experts here. I updated my bios to 4204 on the 4th or 5th, that update requires having the latest chipset drivers installed, which at that time I thought I had. I was wrong and didn't have the latest chipset drivers installed. I updated to 4204 anyway, would that cause an issue? I just noticed today that AMD has a new bios update to 4207, would you guys recommend I update to that or just keep things as they are saying that at least at the moment I don't seem to have any issues?


----------



## MishelLngelo

BIOS 4207 seems to be just to acomodate newes Athlon processors just announced. https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-athlon-2200ge-240ge-vega-specs,38285.html 
Don't need latest drivers V18.10.20.02 is enough but yes, there's newer package, v5.12.0.38 which has 18.10.20.02 (Chipset) incorporated. 


Chipset
Version 5.12.0.38 2018/08/21721.64 MBytes

AMD Chipset driver
AMD AM4 Chipset Driver V5.12.0.38 for Windows Win10 64bit. (AMD package version is V18.10.20.02, VGA driver version is V 24.20.11020.2003)
NOTICE: Due to the different structure for drivers, suggest you remove the old driver first before install this version driver.


----------



## cowboy44mag

MishelLngelo said:


> BIOS 4207 seems to be just to acomodate newes Athlon processors just announced. https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-athlon-2200ge-240ge-vega-specs,38285.html
> Don't need latest drivers V18.10.20.02 is enough but yes, there's newer package, v5.12.0.38 which has 18.10.20.02 (Chipset) incorporated.
> 
> 
> Chipset
> Version 5.12.0.38 2018/08/21721.64 MBytes
> 
> AMD Chipset driver
> AMD AM4 Chipset Driver V5.12.0.38 for Windows Win10 64bit. (AMD package version is V18.10.20.02, VGA driver version is V 24.20.11020.2003)
> NOTICE: Due to the different structure for drivers, suggest you remove the old driver first before install this version driver.



I just installed that package and chipset drives. The only thing I'm not really sure of is I updated the chipset like 18 days after updating to 4204 which said to update the chipset drivers first. Will that be an issue? Should the PC be fine anyway or should I reflash 4204 or is there anything in 4207 that would make that worthwhile?


----------



## MishelLngelo

I can't be 100% sure because I updated chipset drivers just about a week before BIOS came out but by looking at those sub versions I think newer drivers were needed only fo GPU part.of those new Athlons.


----------



## martinhal

What program can one use to mesure RAM latency ?


----------



## MishelLngelo

Aida 64 > Cache and memory benchmark.


----------



## cowboy44mag

Ok, so I think that I found a fix for all the random issues I was having with my system, and it makes more sense than a software conflict when that software wasn't even running. First of all to give a full range of the issues I was having so if anyone else is having the same issues they know how to fix it. My CPU fan would just stop or run at incredibly slow speed at random which could be dangerous as it could lead to a hardware failure, but was most definitely affecting the performance of my system. Problem two I was trouble shooting all day and was loss of first the rear built in USB ports and then while I was trying to fix it I also lost my front USB ports.


The loss of the USB ports is what actually led me to finding the fix for my system. I don't know if this is a fix that would work on other ASUS motherboards or not, but it did work for me. I lost my USB ports after flashing the latest 4207 bios. Nothing I did in bios or Windows could make them work again. The fix was two part I first had to pull the motherboard battery and reset bios/ cmos but I ran into I was having issues using my saved bios profile to just restore my system to the optimized settings I was running. After resetting bios/ cmos I had to go back into bios and make all the optimized changes again without using the saved profile. When I would load the saved profile I would loose all USB support. The trick/ fix was to rest bios (pull the battery) and then manually enter all your personalized settings. I think that the same issue is what had my CPU fan messed up from previous flash updates to the motherboard. Now that I have the newest bios, have reset cmos and entered all my optimizations by hand and not via a saved profile the computer is running better than ever. I don't know if this fix will work for anyone else having these issues but it is the only solution that worked.


----------



## MishelLngelo

Saved BIOS settings rarely work between BIOS version changes which is fairly logical. Saved settings include all settings so new features need different settings otherwise there wouldn't be anything new. Resetting CMOS before and after flashing is also recommended every time although going all the way by removing battery is rarely needed. I always have a button switch connected to CMOS_Reset posts so I don't have to dig in the case. 
Power right off, press start button for couple of seconds (empties capacitors), press reset CMOS button or short the posts for few seconds never failed me. Same procedure after flashing new BIOS. 
"Press F1 to set BIOS features" is clear indication that CMOS was reset.


----------



## cowboy44mag

MishelLngelo said:


> Saved BIOS settings rarely work between BIOS version changes which is fairly logical. Saved settings include all settings so new features need different settings otherwise there wouldn't be anything new. Resetting CMOS before and after flashing is also recommended every time although going all the way by removing battery is rarely needed. I always have a button switch connected to CMOS_Reset posts so I don't have to dig in the case.
> Power right off, press start button for couple of seconds (empties capacitors), press reset CMOS button or short the posts for few seconds never failed me. Same procedure after flashing new BIOS.
> "Press F1 to set BIOS features" is clear indication that CMOS was reset.



So far I'm using the same exact bios settings I was before, same RAM timing and speed overclock, same RAM voltage and SOC voltage, same Vcore negative offset. In fact every setting is exactly as I had it with the saved profile only entered manually. When I have more time for stress testing I'll have to go back and see if the new bios optimized anything that I can get better timings with or run lower voltage. Right now I'm just really glad to have my system back to where it should be. 



I only posted what I finally figured out as every "guide" you find for updating bios on ASUS motherboards mentions nothing about resetting and clearing CMOS, or saved profiles are now worthless and will cause serious issues. I had to go the extra step of totally removing the battery as I looked but couldn't find a reset CMOS button on my board. I also pushed the power button with it out (remembered that from way back) so I'm sure everything was reset. Why this board doesn't have a reset CMOS button is beyond me, was talking about jumping to pins with a screwdriver- much easier to just remove the battery and you know it was definitely done.


----------



## smeroni68

cowboy44mag said:


> So far I'm using the same exact bios settings I was before, same RAM timing and speed overclock, same RAM voltage and SOC voltage, same Vcore negative offset. In fact every setting is exactly as I had it with the saved profile only entered manually. When I have more time for stress testing I'll have to go back and see if the new bios optimized anything that I can get better timings with or run lower voltage. Right now I'm just really glad to have my system back to where it should be.
> 
> 
> 
> I only posted what I finally figured out as every "guide" you find for updating bios on ASUS motherboards mentions nothing about resetting and clearing CMOS, or saved profiles are now worthless and will cause serious issues. I had to go the extra step of totally removing the battery as I looked but couldn't find a reset CMOS button on my board. I also pushed the power button with it out (remembered that from way back) so I'm sure everything was reset. Why this board doesn't have a reset CMOS button is beyond me, was talking about jumping to pins with a screwdriver- much easier to just remove the battery and you know it was definitely done.


Sorry, the model of your motherboard? Every mobo has a jumper to clear cmos.

Inviato dal mio Xiaomi Mi5 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## MishelLngelo

On mine Asus Prime x470 pro, there are two posts just above front panel connector. I took a switch/button for Start/Reset and connected to those posts. Beats trying to find the posts and short them.


----------



## rdr09

cowboy44mag said:


> So far I'm using the same exact bios settings I was before, same RAM timing and speed overclock, same RAM voltage and SOC voltage, same Vcore negative offset. In fact every setting is exactly as I had it with the saved profile only entered manually. When I have more time for stress testing I'll have to go back and see if the new bios optimized anything that I can get better timings with or run lower voltage. Right now I'm just really glad to have my system back to where it should be.
> 
> 
> 
> I only posted what I finally figured out as every "guide" you find for updating bios on ASUS motherboards mentions nothing about resetting and clearing CMOS, or saved profiles are now worthless and will cause serious issues. I had to go the extra step of totally removing the battery as I looked but couldn't find a reset CMOS button on my board. I also pushed the power button with it out (remembered that from way back) so I'm sure everything was reset. Why this board doesn't have a reset CMOS button is beyond me, was talking about jumping to pins with a screwdriver- much easier to just remove the battery and you know it was definitely done.


Did you update the AMD chipset driver first before updating BIOS? First time i did it and that prolly why i never experienced these issues. Also, there is a way to save oc profiles to a usb.


----------



## cowboy44mag

rdr09 said:


> Did you update the AMD chipset driver first before updating BIOS? First time i did it and that prolly why i never experienced these issues. Also, there is a way to save oc profiles to a usb.



I downloaded and installed the latest chipset drivers from AMD before flashing the latest bios. Still wasn't working properly as I had loss of USB ports. Didn't get the system running properly till I reset CMOS. While my motherboard of course has jumpers to reset CMOS I personally think it is a lot easier to just pull the battery for a couple minutes and depress the power button to empty the capacitors. After CMOS reset and then entering all my bios optimizations manually, erasing my old saved profiles and saving my new one the computer is running great.


----------



## MishelLngelo

Pulling the battery resets more things than F5 and reset by button/posts. Only pulling battery resets time and date for instance, who knows what else.


----------



## man from atlantis

wow bclk pbo is awesome, after the newest bios update agesa 1.0.0.6, my board now can change bclk setting. after setting it to 103mhz, I'm seeing all core 4200-4250Mhz and single core to 4480MHz!. Despite still having no offset control, all core it's around 1.376V and single core only 1.45V, not too shabby. After half an hour autocad session, it boosted to 4480MHz pretty frequently.


----------



## MrPhilo

Has anyone ran there CPU at 1.45v for a over 6 month now? I mean like static, it takes me 1.45v for 4.3Ghz.

I don't use XFR and PBO because it gives me 4.2Ghz at 1.456v etc when playing games when I can run 4.25Ghz at 1.4v


----------



## lightsout

man from atlantis said:


> wow bclk pbo is awesome, after the newest bios update agesa 1.0.0.6, my board now can change bclk setting. after setting it to 103mhz, I'm seeing all core 4200-4250Mhz and single core to 4480MHz!. Despite still having no offset control, all core it's around 1.376V and single core only 1.45V, not too shabby. After half an hour autocad session, it boosted to 4480MHz pretty frequently.


Wow great chip. I tried even 102 on my board but it won't boot at all.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

I hear that bclk overclocking is iffy at best and can cause problems with nvme drives as well... not sure why, but with these boards everything is linked to that clock... in the old days (990fx) the FSB and PCIE clocks were separate and you could OC that way easily... I even hit 280mhz FSB (bclk) on mine stable... but now with everything being linked to that one clock it's a bit more difficult.... my board doesn't even support it.


----------



## Maracus

lightsout said:


> Wow great chip. I tried even 102 on my board but it won't boot at all.


Mine worked with 101 at 102 it booted but was stuck loading windows forever, that was with a nvme 970 evo.


----------



## MishelLngelo

Maracus said:


> Mine worked with 101 at 102 it booted but was stuck loading windows forever, that was with a nvme 970 evo.


BCLK/FSB also speeds up PCIe, SATA and memory buses so if some of those can't take it you are SOL. Great for small corrections but certainly not as main OC tool.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

MishelLngelo said:


> BCLK/FSB also speeds up PCIe, SATA and memory buses so if some of those can't take it you are SOL. Great for small corrections but certainly not as main OC tool.


I know it's for the greater good, but I miss when you had a FSB clock separate from the 100mhz pcie clocks.... you could really push it back then...


----------



## kcuestag

Quick question, I noticed that DRAM Voltage on AUTO shows 1.200v even though I'm running the XMP Profile for my 3200MHz CL14 RAM whichs runs at 1.35v, and shows 1.35v:

https://i.imgur.com/2WTIsxs.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/uweWXus.jpg

Should I manually set that "DRAM Voltage (CH A/B)" vale to 1.350v? Or leave it as it is?

I'm seeing some Crash To Desktop issues on Battlefield V and Show of the Tomb Raider, and wasn't sure if it's RAM related or not.

Edit:

I noticed this on Page 1 of this thread: "Max Supported System Memory Speed 2933MHz".

Should I just drop the RAM multiplier to run them at 2933MHz CL14 instead of 3200MHz CL14? All I do is gaming, will I notice anything?


----------



## man from atlantis

Minotaurtoo said:


> I hear that bclk overclocking is iffy at best and can cause problems with nvme drives as well... not sure why, but with these boards everything is linked to that clock... in the old days (990fx) the FSB and PCIE clocks were separate and you could OC that way easily... I even hit 280mhz FSB (bclk) on mine stable... but now with everything being linked to that one clock it's a bit more difficult.... my board doesn't even support it.


Yeah that's true. First time I set bclk to 101MHz, my UPS' USB communication cable started to not working and gave an error, because of the USB port that linked to As-media chip. Then I've changed it to a USB port that linked to one of the X470's USB ports it started working again. I have 4 SATA drives and an NVMe drive (970 Pro). Fortunately no problem so far. My board(MSI X470 Gaming Plus) allow me to set bclk 103 maximum.


----------



## Jspinks020

Their is some **** with my nvme...if I clr cmos...the drive doesn't get picked up initially again. But when replug my or try a different sata port on my Mushkin it gets picked up again on the reset in the Bios...small things like that.


----------



## gerardfraser

kcuestag said:


> Quick question, I noticed that DRAM Voltage on AUTO shows 1.200v even though I'm running the XMP Profile for my 3200MHz CL14 RAM whichs runs at 1.35v, and shows 1.35v:
> 
> https://i.imgur.com/2WTIsxs.jpg
> 
> https://i.imgur.com/uweWXus.jpg
> 
> Should I manually set that "DRAM Voltage (CH A/B)" vale to 1.350v? Or leave it as it is?
> 
> I'm seeing some Crash To Desktop issues on Battlefield V and Show of the Tomb Raider, and wasn't sure if it's RAM related or not.
> 
> Edit:
> 
> I noticed this on Page 1 of this thread: "Max Supported System Memory Speed 2933MHz".
> 
> Should I just drop the RAM multiplier to run them at 2933MHz CL14 instead of 3200MHz CL14? All I do is gaming, will I notice anything?


I suggest you set 1.38v for DRAM in BIOS with CL14 some Ram Kits just need a little more ump then Check for crashes with those games.
Shadow of the Tomb Raider crashed on me several times during play through especially when going to windows mode with third party monitoring software on(MSI Afterburner,HWinfo64 ETC).
Battlefield V I have installed but have not started the game yet so I do not know about crashes.

Also I tested a few games at 2560 x 1440 and there was no difference in gaming with CL14 from 2933Mhz thru 3600Mhz

You can check out the video below 2933Mhz Vs 3466Mhz,just showing video of one game Shadow Of The Tomb Raider.


----------



## Jspinks020

1.35-1.36v is quite fine...have just perfect stability with that...leave it at that...what it was meant to run at.


----------



## kcuestag

gerardfraser said:


> I suggest you set 1.38v for DRAM in BIOS with CL14 some Ram Kits just need a little more ump then Check for crashes with those games.
> Shadow of the Tomb Raider crashed on me several times during play through especially when going to windows mode with third party monitoring software on(MSI Afterburner,HWinfo64 ETC).
> Battlefield V I have installed but have not started the game yet so I do not know about crashes.
> 
> Also I tested a few games at 2560 x 1440 and there was no difference in gaming with CL14 from 2933Mhz thru 3600Mhz
> 
> You can check out the video below 2933Mhz Vs 3466Mhz,just showing video of one game Shadow Of The Tomb Raider.
> https://youtu.be/_5rQToMbNRs


Dropped RAM multiplier to run them at 2933MHz for now to see if that helps with the CTD's I've been having on those two games.

Seeing your video, I'd rather keep them at 2933MHz than bumping more voltage as there's no gain. 

Thanks for the input! I will try some gaming this week see if lowering RAM speed fixed the crashes.


----------



## MishelLngelo

Minotaurtoo said:


> I know it's for the greater good, but I miss when you had a FSB clock separate from the 100mhz pcie clocks.... you could really push it back then...


Yep, still have my old system with GA-990XA-UD3 and FX6350 at 4.9GHz, Lowered RAM multiplier, set PCIe at 100 and could push FSB pretty far. Only I used combination of CPU multiplier and FSB to fine tune system, practically speaking, that enabled RAM to go higher than 1866NHz. Can't do that on this MB though. First, there's no BCLK change (modified BIOS can only make it even 100 instead of 99.7 - 99.9 but no other adjustments to PCIe or memory bus.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

That's another thing that annoys me about my board... the bclk is always just under 100... I know it doesn't make any real difference, but it's annoying seeing clocks like 4.191 instead of 4.2 when I set an all core OC... I guess it's my OCD kicking in.


----------



## lightsout

Minotaurtoo said:


> That's another thing that annoys me about my board... the bclk is always just under 100... I know it doesn't make any real difference, but it's annoying seeing clocks like 4.191 instead of 4.2 when I set an all core OC... I guess it's my OCD kicking in.


I know I hate that too. I tried to set the board at 100.2 or something like that but it won't stick.


----------



## cowboy44mag

Minotaurtoo said:


> I hear that bclk overclocking is iffy at best and can cause problems with nvme drives as well... not sure why, but with these boards everything is linked to that clock... in the old days (990fx) the FSB and PCIE clocks were separate and you could OC that way easily... I even hit 280mhz FSB (bclk) on mine stable... but now with everything being linked to that one clock it's a bit more difficult.... my board doesn't even support it.



Early on I tried it, but never got "proper boots" I could boot and even run benchmarks with bclk at 102, never tried 103 because at 102 I would have random issues like total system freezes at complete random. I also found it strange that on my board it was actually called "APU frequency" for some reason. I could understand when it would freeze during a benchmark, but it would also freeze web browsing and a couple of times just moving the mouse to open a program. Reset blck to 100 and did further research and found that bclk overclocking on Ryzen is known to kill SSD devices, so what was probably happening was my SSD was entering a kind of safe mode which would freeze the system (at least that is the best I could come up with). If you research bclk overclocking on Ryzen you will find a lot of people talking about killing SSDs devices of all kinds. As stated bclk overclocking on Ryzen overclocks much more than traditional bclk overclocking, who knows what else it getting extra voltage or frequency and somethings just can't handle it and make no sense to overclock.


----------



## cowboy44mag

lightsout said:


> I know I hate that too. I tried to set the board at 100.2 or something like that but it won't stick.



From what I have tried and researching as much as I could most boards don't allow decimal point overclocking on bclk. I'm still confounded as to why on my board they don't call it what it is and instead label it as "APU frequency", but I have noticed that it will only accept whole number overclocking and bumping it at all results in some strange and random issues that could occur right at first boot or could take a day or two to show up. I just figured it wasn't worth it when reading several posts of people who killed SSDs, and the newer and still expensive M.2 SSDs. I'm installing a 1TB NVMe M.2 SSD as soon as it gets here and sure don't want there to be any chance of killing it, I can't afford another for awhile. I did an experiment where I installed Windows on an older 500GB HHD I had laying around, overclocked the "APU frequency" to 102 and ran it that way for a couple of days. Didn't have any issues with system freezes and it all seemed to work as it should, but the loss of using SSDs just to utilize bclk just wasn't worth it to me. It also started to worry me that if it affects SSD devices like that what other hardware could be at risk that I don't know about. Just seemed safer not to utilize bclk with Ryzen. Who knows, the random issues I just when through with my board having my CPU fan stop at random and loosing USB ports front and back could have been a result of my bclk experiments. A couple of chipset updates, bios flashes, and battery cmos resets and my system is 100% again, but it could have all started with my attempts to bclk overclock. Its a shame to loose bclk overclocking with Ryzen as I always liked using a mix of multiplier and bclk to overclock Piledriver.


----------



## cowboy44mag

On a side note, what do you guys use when quoting overall all core boost frequency and single core boost? I have noticed that when I had Ryzen Master installed I would get all core boost readings of 4.215Ghz and single/ quad boosts of 4.350Ghz, however using HWmonitor I'm showing all core boost of 4.16 to 4.19Ghz and single core 4.250 to 4.3Ghz. Its obvious both can't be right, so what is the "standard" for reporting frequency? I know with the old Piledriver processors you could only trust temp readings using AMD software, is it still only AMD software that reports the true frequency and temp? I usually trust CPUid to show the voltage, and that is always almost identical to the voltage reported by HWmonitor but I noticed that Ryzen Master (when I had it installed) was reporting higher voltage than either CPUid or HWmonitor. What is the best monitoring software to use for Ryzen and what is the "standard" for reporting frequency, temp and voltage?


----------



## kcuestag

gerardfraser said:


> I suggest you set 1.38v for DRAM in BIOS with CL14 some Ram Kits just need a little more ump then Check for crashes with those games.
> Shadow of the Tomb Raider crashed on me several times during play through especially when going to windows mode with third party monitoring software on(MSI Afterburner,HWinfo64 ETC).
> Battlefield V I have installed but have not started the game yet so I do not know about crashes.
> 
> Also I tested a few games at 2560 x 1440 and there was no difference in gaming with CL14 from 2933Mhz thru 3600Mhz
> 
> You can check out the video below 2933Mhz Vs 3466Mhz,just showing video of one game Shadow Of The Tomb Raider.


Confirmed, after dropping the RAM To 2933MHz I no longer get crashes to desktop on either games, all is good now! 

Thanks!


----------



## CJMitsuki

gerardfraser said:


> kcuestag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Quick question, I noticed that DRAM Voltage on AUTO shows 1.200v even though I'm running the XMP Profile for my 3200MHz CL14 RAM whichs runs at 1.35v, and shows 1.35v:
> 
> https://i.imgur.com/2WTIsxs.jpg
> 
> https://i.imgur.com/uweWXus.jpg
> 
> Should I manually set that "DRAM Voltage (CH A/B)" vale to 1.350v? Or leave it as it is?
> 
> I'm seeing some Crash To Desktop issues on Battlefield V and Show of the Tomb Raider, and wasn't sure if it's RAM related or not.
> 
> Edit:
> 
> I noticed this on Page 1 of this thread: "Max Supported System Memory Speed 2933MHz".
> 
> Should I just drop the RAM multiplier to run them at 2933MHz CL14 instead of 3200MHz CL14? All I do is gaming, will I notice anything?
> 
> 
> 
> I suggest you set 1.38v for DRAM in BIOS with CL14 some Ram Kits just need a little more ump then Check for crashes with those games.
> Shadow of the Tomb Raider crashed on me several times during play through especially when going to windows mode with third party monitoring software on(MSI Afterburner,HWinfo64 ETC).
> Battlefield V I have installed but have not started the game yet so I do not know about crashes.
> 
> Also I tested a few games at 2560 x 1440 and there was no difference in gaming with CL14 from 2933Mhz thru 3600Mhz
> 
> You can check out the video below 2933Mhz Vs 3466Mhz,just showing video of one game Shadow Of The Tomb Raider.
Click to expand...

Actually, this isn’t entirely true. It’s true that you will not see FPS gains with faster memory but you will absolutely see reduced frame times. This is more dramatic the more the game relies on the cpu. Frametimes are what matters most bc no matter if you are running at 144hz+ it will all be garbage if you have lag spikes or microstutters. Now this is all providing that your memory overclock is stable, especially once it warms up. So, if you look at what faster memory does then it makes sense. Faster memory feeds the cpu at a much faster rate giving a much more smooth frame time on the cpu side of things. Same on the gpu side but with the VRAM instead. Faster Vram will reduce the frametimes as it will be able to feed the gpu at a much faster and more responsive rate. DRam is to the Cpu as VRAM is to the Gpu. So if you increase your cpu overclock and neglect the dram it would make as much sense as overclocking the gpu core and leaving the VRAM stock. In short, there is most certainly a benefit to faster memory in gaming. FPS does not equate to better performance, you want to look more at the frametimes for that. They both work together but frametime is more important and the more the FPS increases the more true this becomes.

Regarding dram voltage, you won’t hurt the dram with 1.4v or even 1.5v but as the temp of the dram increases the stability decreases. Ideally you want to stay below 35c as I’ve noticed stability drops quite a bit above that. Don’t be afraid to throw 1.425v on the dram as that was likely the cause of a good portion of the ram instability and possibly the subtimings. That’s why it stopped crashing once you dropped to 2933mhz because the voltage was probably fine for that speed.


----------



## cowboy44mag

I have a question for the experts on the forum. I have a ROG X470-F Strix board. I noticed that after enabling Precision Boost Overdrive I see no scalar option. I would assume that on this board it is not possible to set the PBO scalar, and there is a mystery setting that I can't seem to find an explanation of anywhere called Mode 0. It is a setting right under where you enable PBO, but I have no idea what it is or what it does. The options are AUTO, Enabled, and Disabled. Does anyone know what Mode 0 is or what you should set it at? I wish with this motherboard I could at least see the PBO scalar. I would like to have the scalar set to 10X but I have no idea how to manually set it. I do have performance enhancer set to 2. That is another thing that really doesn't have a good explanation that I can find online. What do the different levels of performance enhancer actually do? I know that 1 and 2 "use AMD approved settings" and 3 and 4 are considered overclocks and use settings supplied from the Stilt, but other than that there really isn't a good explanation of what these settings actually do.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

I've wondered about that mode 0 too, it's on my B350 board, but I can't tell what it does...


----------



## MishelLngelo

It kinda depends on BIOS version, my MB lost it at BIOS 4204, while previous one 4018 had 10 steps. That's when AGESA code got to 1006.


----------



## gupsterg

martinhal said:


> What program can one use to mesure RAM latency ?


AIDA64 shows best case, Intel Memory Latency checker (link) is somewhat better and allows configuration for testing, etc.



cowboy44mag said:


> I have a question for the experts on the forum. I have a ROG X470-F Strix board. I noticed that after enabling Precision Boost Overdrive I see no scalar option. I would assume that on this board it is not possible to set the PBO scalar, and there is a mystery setting that I can't seem to find an explanation of anywhere called Mode 0. It is a setting right under where you enable PBO, but I have no idea what it is or what it does. The options are AUTO, Enabled, and Disabled. Does anyone know what Mode 0 is or what you should set it at? I wish with this motherboard I could at least see the PBO scalar. I would like to have the scalar set to 10X but I have no idea how to manually set it. I do have performance enhancer set to 2. That is another thing that really doesn't have a good explanation that I can find online. What do the different levels of performance enhancer actually do? I know that 1 and 2 "use AMD approved settings" and 3 and 4 are considered overclocks and use settings supplied from the Stilt, but other than that there really isn't a good explanation of what these settings actually do.


Limiters tweaks for PBO were removed in AGESA 1.0.0.6 by AMD, link.

We only have ever so slight info on Mode 0, link.

PE1/2 are not "use AMD approved settings", all are presets for limiters for PBO.

When you select say PE: [Default] PBO: [Enabled] then PPT 1000W, TDC 114A EDC 168A, this is basically AMDs guided PBO setup.



> The "Precision Boost Override" feature available on 400-series motherboards allows increasing the physical limiters mentioned earlier. On SKUs belonging to the 105W TDP infrastructure group, the default limiters are following: PPT 141.75W, TDC 95A, EDC 140A and tJMax of 85°C (absolute, excl. offset).
> 
> When "Precision Boost Override" mode is enabled (AGESA default), PPT becomes essentially unrestricted (1000W), TDC is set to 114A and EDC to 168A. These limits can be customized by the ODM so that the new limits will comply with the electrical characteristics of the motherboard design in question.
> 
> Essentially this means that the entry-level or the tiny ITX boards with more limited VRM should use much more conservative limits than the high-end enthusiast-oriented motherboards. If (or rather how exactly) AMD will enforce these good configuration practices remains to be seen thou.


Quote source link (See under heading The changes).

There are links for info on PE1-4 under heading ASUS Performance Enhancer within OP here.


----------



## cowboy44mag

gupsterg said:


> AIDA64 shows best case, Intel Memory Latency checker (link) is somewhat better and allows configuration for testing, etc.
> 
> 
> 
> Limiters tweaks for PBO were removed in AGESA 1.0.0.6 by AMD, link.
> 
> We only have ever so slight info on Mode 0, link.
> 
> PE1/2 are not "use AMD approved settings", all are presets for limiters for PBO.
> 
> When you select say PE: [Default] PBO: [Enabled] then PPT 1000W, TDC 114A EDC 168A, this is basically AMDs guided PBO setup.
> 
> 
> 
> Quote source link (See under heading The changes).
> 
> There are links for info on PE1-4 under heading ASUS Performance Enhancer within OP here.



Thanks for that information, it was exactly what I have been looking for and trying to understand fully:thumb: Its too bad that we don't have a better explanation of "Mode 0" but if its for Linux then I guess it really isn't important for a Windows 10 environment. I am going to be ordering a NZXT Kraken X62 next time I get paid but until then I'm on the stock cooler so I am using PE2. My processor seems to be a good overclocking candidate as it is cool running considering that with the stock cooler I was able to get all core boost of 4166Mhz - 4215Mhz (depending on ambient room temp- I am happy at 65F, but my wife when she is home likes the house at 80F) and single core boosts of 4350Mhz. Even running Prime 95 I've never seen a temp higher than 73C on the stock cooler. 



Looking forward to see what I can get with premium cooling. Saying that PBO is limited by voltage and the temp derived from that higher voltage the most important factor comes down to thermal overhead. With a Kraken X62 I hope to see all core boost of 4350Mhz and single core boost of 4500Mhz utilizing PE4.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

I know I'm a bit late for some and early for others, but... Happy New Year! 



On a lighter note... after tuning in my new gpu I took a look at the errors it generated... funny how windows never give a "user picked wrong settings" error...


----------



## cssorkinman

Probably as far as I better push it on the stock cooler in a mini itx case - not disappointed at all


----------



## Minotaurtoo

cssorkinman said:


> Probably as far as I better push it on the stock cooler in a mini itx case - not disappointed at all


not bad.


----------



## MrWhiteRX7

cssorkinman said:


> Probably as far as I better push it on the stock cooler in a mini itx case - not disappointed at all


Nice! Do you plan on pushing the ram more?


----------



## cssorkinman

MrWhiteRX7 said:


> cssorkinman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Probably as far as I better push it on the stock cooler in a mini itx case - not disappointed at all /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
> 
> 
> 
> Nice! Do you plan on pushing the ram more?
Click to expand...

 thats about all that's left on the table until I get better cooling. Little gunshy as I've corrupted an os doing so on Ryzen.


----------



## constructorx

*My new 2700x Scores*

I have had my new 2700x system a couple of weeks. Here are some of my scores:

Everything in bios is default (set as 'Auto') except:



Precision Boost Overdrive set to 'Enabled'
CPU voltage set to 1.3v
Memory timings set to 'fast' via Ryzen Memory Calc

Scores:



Cinebench: https://i.imgur.com/UFYIlve.png
Aida64: https://i.imgur.com/kfZZwAv.png
CPU-Z: https://valid.x86.fr/44yek4
CPU Mark: https://i.imgur.com/IMB8ARb.jpg
CPU Mark Chart: https://i.imgur.com/WyDF652.jpg
Corona (Position 19 and 20): https://corona-renderer.com/benchmark/results/cpu/2700x
UserBenchmark: https://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/13438858

With BCLK of 102:



Cinebench (Score: 1984): https://i.imgur.com/oCSUmJs.png
CPU-Z: https://valid.x86.fr/fpwr56
UserBenchmark: https://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/13450764


----------



## kcuestag

CJMitsuki said:


> Actually, this isn’t entirely true. It’s true that you will not see FPS gains with faster memory but you will absolutely see reduced frame times. This is more dramatic the more the game relies on the cpu. Frametimes are what matters most bc no matter if you are running at 144hz+ it will all be garbage if you have lag spikes or microstutters. Now this is all providing that your memory overclock is stable, especially once it warms up. So, if you look at what faster memory does then it makes sense. Faster memory feeds the cpu at a much faster rate giving a much more smooth frame time on the cpu side of things. Same on the gpu side but with the VRAM instead. Faster Vram will reduce the frametimes as it will be able to feed the gpu at a much faster and more responsive rate. DRam is to the Cpu as VRAM is to the Gpu. So if you increase your cpu overclock and neglect the dram it would make as much sense as overclocking the gpu core and leaving the VRAM stock. In short, there is most certainly a benefit to faster memory in gaming. FPS does not equate to better performance, you want to look more at the frametimes for that. They both work together but frametime is more important and the more the FPS increases the more true this becomes.
> 
> Regarding dram voltage, you won’t hurt the dram with 1.4v or even 1.5v but as the temp of the dram increases the stability decreases. Ideally you want to stay below 35c as I’ve noticed stability drops quite a bit above that. Don’t be afraid to throw 1.425v on the dram as that was likely the cause of a good portion of the ram instability and possibly the subtimings. That’s why it stopped crashing once you dropped to 2933mhz because the voltage was probably fine for that speed.


But, if my RAM (G-Skill FlareX 3200MHz CL14) is rated at those speeds and timings with 1.35v, shouldn't it be stable as it is? Never had that issue before on Intel running XMP Profiles.

Currently it's 100% stable at 2933MHz, not very convinced of pumping 1.4v to the RAM tbh, I don't see performance difference to be fair.


----------



## CJMitsuki

kcuestag said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, this isn’t entirely true. It’s true that you will not see FPS gains with faster memory but you will absolutely see reduced frame times. This is more dramatic the more the game relies on the cpu. Frametimes are what matters most bc no matter if you are running at 144hz+ it will all be garbage if you have lag spikes or microstutters. Now this is all providing that your memory overclock is stable, especially once it warms up. So, if you look at what faster memory does then it makes sense. Faster memory feeds the cpu at a much faster rate giving a much more smooth frame time on the cpu side of things. Same on the gpu side but with the VRAM instead. Faster Vram will reduce the frametimes as it will be able to feed the gpu at a much faster and more responsive rate. DRam is to the Cpu as VRAM is to the Gpu. So if you increase your cpu overclock and neglect the dram it would make as much sense as overclocking the gpu core and leaving the VRAM stock. In short, there is most certainly a benefit to faster memory in gaming. FPS does not equate to better performance, you want to look more at the frametimes for that. They both work together but frametime is more important and the more the FPS increases the more true this becomes.
> 
> Regarding dram voltage, you won’t hurt the dram with 1.4v or even 1.5v but as the temp of the dram increases the stability decreases. Ideally you want to stay below 35c as I’ve noticed stability drops quite a bit above that. Don’t be afraid to throw 1.425v on the dram as that was likely the cause of a good portion of the ram instability and possibly the subtimings. That’s why it stopped crashing once you dropped to 2933mhz because the voltage was probably fine for that speed.
> 
> 
> 
> But, if my RAM (G-Skill FlareX 3200MHz CL14) is rated at those speeds and timings with 1.35v, shouldn't it be stable as it is? Never had that issue before on Intel running XMP Profiles.
> 
> Currently it's 100% stable at 2933MHz, not very convinced of pumping 1.4v to the RAM tbh, I don't see performance difference to be fair.
Click to expand...

If you are satisfied with it then by all means keep it where it’s at as that’s all that really matters. That kit is a really nice kit and seems a shame to keep it at 2933mhz though. Literally the best memory kit you can buy for Ryzen. With 1.425v with manually setting all timings and other settings you could potentially run that kit at 3466-3533mhz mine does 3533 with half tightened subtimings at 1.4v and fully tightened to max with 1.48v. but the important thing is that if you are satisfied with performance. If so then no need to do anything at all. I was merely throwing some information out there and I enjoy spending many hours tweaking ram and the rest of my system. Some want it stable and performing nicely then off to gaming. I don’t really game anymore, this is my hobby so that’s why I push for more and more. Just for the hell of it. Memory OC is long and sometimes frustrating so don’t follow anything I say without knowing that 😆


----------



## cssorkinman

constructorx said:


> I have had my new 2700x system a couple of weeks. Here are some of my scores:
> 
> Everything in bios is default (set as 'Auto') except:
> 
> 
> 
> Precision Boost Overdrive set to 'Enabled'
> CPU voltage set to 1.3v
> Memory timings set to 'fast' via Ryzen Memory Calc
> 
> Scores:
> 
> 
> 
> Cinebench: https://i.imgur.com/UFYIlve.png
> Aida64: https://i.imgur.com/kfZZwAv.png
> CPU-Z: https://valid.x86.fr/44yek4
> CPU Mark: https://i.imgur.com/IMB8ARb.jpg
> CPU Mark Chart: https://i.imgur.com/WyDF652.jpg
> Corona (Position 19 and 20): https://corona-renderer.com/benchmark/results/cpu/2700x
> UserBenchmark: https://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/13438858
> 
> With BCLK of 102:
> 
> 
> 
> Cinebench (Score: 1984): https://i.imgur.com/oCSUmJs.png
> CPU-Z: https://valid.x86.fr/fpwr56
> UserBenchmark: https://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/13450764


Nice job - are you liking that motherboard?


----------



## Minotaurtoo

constructorx said:


> I have had my new 2700x system a couple of weeks. Here are some of my scores:
> 
> Everything in bios is default (set as 'Auto') except:
> 
> 
> 
> Precision Boost Overdrive set to 'Enabled'
> CPU voltage set to 1.3v
> Memory timings set to 'fast' via Ryzen Memory Calc
> 
> Scores:
> 
> 
> 
> Cinebench: https://i.imgur.com/UFYIlve.png
> Aida64: https://i.imgur.com/kfZZwAv.png
> CPU-Z: https://valid.x86.fr/44yek4
> CPU Mark: https://i.imgur.com/IMB8ARb.jpg
> CPU Mark Chart: https://i.imgur.com/WyDF652.jpg
> Corona (Position 19 and 20): https://corona-renderer.com/benchmark/results/cpu/2700x
> UserBenchmark: https://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/13438858
> 
> With BCLK of 102:
> 
> 
> 
> Cinebench (Score: 1984): https://i.imgur.com/oCSUmJs.png
> CPU-Z: https://valid.x86.fr/fpwr56
> UserBenchmark: https://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/13450764


very good cpu scores... I'm just curious though, have you tried overclocking that 2070? I was surprised my vega 64 out scored it in userbench... very surprised actually..


----------



## umeng2002

Double post


----------



## umeng2002

Mode0 might be related to x86 ring 0



constructorx said:


> I have had my new 2700x system a couple of weeks. Here are some of my scores:
> 
> Everything in bios is default (set as 'Auto') except:
> 
> 
> 
> Precision Boost Overdrive set to 'Enabled'
> CPU voltage set to 1.3v
> Memory timings set to 'fast' via Ryzen Memory Calc
> 
> Scores:
> 
> 
> 
> Cinebench: https://i.imgur.com/UFYIlve.png
> Aida64: https://i.imgur.com/kfZZwAv.png
> CPU-Z: https://valid.x86.fr/44yek4
> CPU Mark: https://i.imgur.com/IMB8ARb.jpg
> CPU Mark Chart: https://i.imgur.com/WyDF652.jpg
> Corona (Position 19 and 20): https://corona-renderer.com/benchmark/results/cpu/2700x
> UserBenchmark: https://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/13438858
> 
> With BCLK of 102:
> 
> 
> 
> Cinebench (Score: 1984): https://i.imgur.com/oCSUmJs.png
> CPU-Z: https://valid.x86.fr/fpwr56
> UserBenchmark: https://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/13450764


I have the darn near same setup as you... using Ryzen Calc "fast" timings to, and my Cinebench score is like 1890 (the highest I've seen).


----------



## Handrox

Always improving, the taste of this AM4 platform is this taste of constant improvement.


----------



## cowboy44mag

constructorx said:


> I have had my new 2700x system a couple of weeks. Here are some of my scores:
> 
> Everything in bios is default (set as 'Auto') except:
> 
> 
> 
> Precision Boost Overdrive set to 'Enabled'
> CPU voltage set to 1.3v
> Memory timings set to 'fast' via Ryzen Memory Calc
> 
> Scores:
> 
> 
> 
> Cinebench: https://i.imgur.com/UFYIlve.png
> Aida64: https://i.imgur.com/kfZZwAv.png
> CPU-Z: https://valid.x86.fr/44yek4
> CPU Mark: https://i.imgur.com/IMB8ARb.jpg
> CPU Mark Chart: https://i.imgur.com/WyDF652.jpg
> Corona (Position 19 and 20): https://corona-renderer.com/benchmark/results/cpu/2700x
> UserBenchmark: https://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/13438858
> 
> With BCLK of 102:
> 
> 
> 
> Cinebench (Score: 1984): https://i.imgur.com/oCSUmJs.png
> CPU-Z: https://valid.x86.fr/fpwr56
> UserBenchmark: https://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/13450764



Just a couple of quick questions for you 1. Did you use a negative offset on the Vcore or just set the Vcore at 1.3V? I thought for PBO to work properly a negative offset had to be utilized. and 2. What cooling are you using? My setup isn't that different but I'm on stock cooling. The highest score I've ever gotten in Cinebench is 1920, and my all core boost is 4.166Mhz to 4.215Mhz. It would appear your all core boost is closer to 4.3Ghz, maybe a little better? I've been looking at getting a NZXT Kraken X64 AIO and was wondering how much of a boost the better cooling would give me. Are you using an AIO?


----------



## rdr09

kcuestag said:


> But, if my RAM (G-Skill FlareX 3200MHz CL14) is rated at those speeds and timings with 1.35v, shouldn't it be stable as it is? Never had that issue before on Intel running XMP Profiles.
> 
> Currently it's 100% stable at 2933MHz, not very convinced of pumping 1.4v to the RAM tbh, I don't see performance difference to be fair.


When i built my first Ryzen back in Oct 2017, the B350F Strix motherboard had bios back in May 2017. Updated to Sep 2017's 0902 enabled me to run my FlareX using DOCP (XMP) 3200 from 2933. After about 4 months i updated the BIOS to the latest to make way for the 2000 series cpu but this made the RAM unstable. I had to use the DRAM Calculator to set 3200 MHz and was even able to oc to 3466 using the same.

Currently using an Asus Prime X470 Pro and latest Agesa, i'm able to oc my FlareX to 3533 MHz Fast preset.


----------



## kcuestag

CJMitsuki said:


> If you are satisfied with it then by all means keep it where it’s at as that’s all that really matters. That kit is a really nice kit and seems a shame to keep it at 2933mhz though. Literally the best memory kit you can buy for Ryzen. With 1.425v with manually setting all timings and other settings you could potentially run that kit at 3466-3533mhz mine does 3533 with half tightened subtimings at 1.4v and fully tightened to max with 1.48v. but the important thing is that if you are satisfied with performance. If so then no need to do anything at all. I was merely throwing some information out there and I enjoy spending many hours tweaking ram and the rest of my system. Some want it stable and performing nicely then off to gaming. I don’t really game anymore, this is my hobby so that’s why I push for more and more. Just for the hell of it. Memory OC is long and sometimes frustrating so don’t follow anything I say without knowing that 😆





rdr09 said:


> When i built my first Ryzen back in Oct 2017, the B350F Strix motherboard had bios back in May 2017. Updated to Sep 2017's 0902 enabled me to run my FlareX using DOCP (XMP) 3200 from 2933. After about 4 months i updated the BIOS to the latest to make way for the 2000 series cpu but this made the RAM unstable. I had to use the DRAM Calculator to set 3200 MHz and was even able to oc to 3466 using the same.
> 
> Currently using an Asus Prime X470 Pro and latest Agesa, i'm able to oc my FlareX to 3533 MHz Fast preset.


I'll check this RAM calculator, would be nice having them at 3200MHz or higher.

I'm confused as my Gigabyte board mentions "DRMA Voltage (CH A/B)". Is that the voltage I should be tweaking? Not sure what CH A/B relates to, channels?

I have 2x8GB sticks, and I run them at slots 2 and 4 further from CPU so it would be -> CPU | empty | stick1 | empty | stick 2

Are those slots correct? Board is Gigabyte X470 Ultra Gaming.


----------



## rdr09

kcuestag said:


> I'll check this RAM calculator, would be nice having them at 3200MHz or higher.
> 
> I'm confused as my Gigabyte board mentions "DRMA Voltage (CH A/B)". Is that the voltage I should be tweaking? Not sure what CH A/B relates to, channels?
> 
> I have 2x8GB sticks, and I run them at slots 2 and 4 further from CPU so it would be -> CPU | empty | stick1 | empty | stick 2
> 
> Are those slots correct? Board is Gigabyte X470 Ultra Gaming.



If im reading it correctly, it looks like sockets 1 and 2 closest to the cpu. Weird.

http://download.gigabyte.eu/FileList/Memory/mb_memory_x470-aorus-ultra-gaming_pinnacle.pdf


----------



## umeng2002

rdr09 said:


> If im reading it correctly, it looks like sockets 1 and 2 closest to the cpu. Weird.
> 
> http://download.gigabyte.eu/FileList/Memory/mb_memory_x470-aorus-ultra-gaming_pinnacle.pdf


That PDF doesn't specify which spot.

With daisy-chained memory wiring, which most boards are, you want the 2nd and 4th slot farthest away from the CPU.


----------



## rdr09

umeng2002 said:


> That PDF doesn't specify which spot.
> 
> With daisy-chained memory wiring, which most boards are, you want the 2nd and 4th slot farthest away from the CPU.
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3vQwGGbW1AE&t=1s


Scroll down to the bottom of last page and read footnote. I may be reading it wrong.


----------



## umeng2002

rdr09 said:


> Scroll down to the bottom of last page and read footnote. I may be reading it wrong.


That board labels the mem slots out of order, they label them 4, 2, 3, and 1 starting from closest to the the farthest away from the CPU. What they recommend is still what I was saying. Slots 4 and 2 are on one channel, 2 being the furthest away in the daisy chain. Slots 3 and 1 are the next daisy chained channel, slot 1 being the farthest away.

That's why they recommend slots "1" and "2." Those aren't the actual positions. YOU MUST READ THE PCB LABELS and follow the manual's naming scheme.

For Asus, those slot would be B2 and A2; which is what Asus recommend you install two sticks into... again those two slots are at the end of each channel's slot chain.


----------



## rdr09

umeng2002 said:


> That board labels the mem slots out of order, they label them 4, 2, 3, and 1 starting from closest to the the farthest away from the CPU. What they recommend is still what I was saying. Slots 4 and 2 are on one channel, 2 being the furthest away in the daisy chain. Slots 3 and 1 are the next daisy chained channel, slot 1 being the farthest away.
> 
> That's why they recommend slots "1" and "2." Those aren't the actual positions. YOU MUST READ THE PCB LABELS and follow the manual's naming scheme.
> 
> For Asus, those slot would be B2 and A2; which is what Asus recommend you install two sticks into... again those two slots are at the end of each channel's slot chain.



I see. I'm aware of the slots A2,B2. Even my Asus AM3 and Biostar Z77 recommend those slots. Difference is, these boards clearly state with drawings and stuff. Now, as to the issue @kcuestag is having, then i recommend swapping the sticks. It is very unusual for a FlareX to not run at spec this late, especially with the newest agesa. Thanks for the info.


----------



## lightsout

rdr09 said:


> I see. I'm aware of the slots A2,B2. Even my Asus AM3 and Biostar Z77 recommend those slots. Difference is, these boards clearly state with drawings and stuff. Now, as to the issue @kcuestag is having, then i recommend swapping the sticks. It is very unusual for a FlareX to not run at spec this late, especially with the newest agesa. Thanks for the info.


Newest agesa comes with the newest bios right?


----------



## MishelLngelo

lightsout said:


> Newest agesa comes with the newest bios right?


Yes with Asus brand 4xxx chipset MBs. Actually it came with next to last 4204 BIOS for mine and last is 4207.


----------



## lightsout

MishelLngelo said:


> Yes with Asus brand 4xxx chipset MBs. Actually it came with next to last 4204 BIOS for mine and last is 4207.


Ok thanks just making sure I wasn't missing something.


----------



## umeng2002

It's always good to read the release notes of the BIOSes... all of them to see which version changed what. The Asus X470 Prime Pro didn't get the latest AGESA until a few weeks ago. I don't think AMD would allow a new BIOS to revert to an older AGESA, or mobo makes wouldn't do it anyways.


----------



## MishelLngelo

Not much of a change log, this was for first BIOS with AGESA 1006
Version 4204 2018/12/048.38 MBytes

PRIME X470-PRO BIOS 4204
Update AGESA 1006
Update AMD chipset driver 18.10.20.02 or latest version before update this BIOS.

And next and present BIOS

Version 4027 2018/12/178.38 MBytes

PRIME X470-PRO BIOS 4207
Improve compatibility and performance for Athlon™ with Radeon™ Vega Graphics 

They even had number wrong in first line.


----------



## umeng2002

English isn't motherboard makers' strongest area, nor is specificity.



Typical UEFI BIOS said:


> crypticXYZ123 [Auto/Disable]
> Description: Turn crypticXYZ123 function on or off


----------



## The Sandman

kcuestag said:


> But, if my RAM (G-Skill FlareX 3200MHz CL14) is rated at those speeds and timings with 1.35v, shouldn't it be stable as it is? Never had that issue before on Intel running XMP Profiles.
> 
> Currently it's 100% stable at 2933MHz, not very convinced of pumping 1.4v to the RAM tbh, I don't see performance difference to be fair.


 Just for reference, on the C6H "The Stilts memory preset" for even 3200MHz Safe has Dram Voltage set to 1.4v.
Some are able to run less voltage depending how HW matches up.


You may not see a blinding difference with 3200MHz compared to 2933MHz but if you were to try say 3466MHz, that's a different story 

The Flare-X running 3466MHz c14 @ 1.43v for me looks like this and is very noticeable.
umeng2002 edit: if it's of any help I added RTC view.


----------



## umeng2002

The Sandman said:


> Just for reference, on the C6H "The Stilts memory preset" for even 3200MHz Safe has Dram Voltage set to 1.4v.
> Some are able to run less voltage depending how HW matches up.
> 
> 
> You may not see a blinding difference with 3200MHz compared to 2933MHz but if you were to try say 3466MHz, that's a different story
> 
> The Flare-X running 3466MHz c14 @ 1.43v for me looks like this and is very noticeable.


I might try that next.


----------



## kcuestag

Update on my 3200MHZ CL14 RAM issue.

Tried bumping DRAM voltage as high as 1.42v and still would crash to desktop (and even BSOD) while playing BFV.

Lowered to 3000MHz and all is good at default XMP profile (1.35v).

Could it be a faulty RAM kit, or is it just that my 2700X/mobo doesn't like 3200MHz CL14?

I would have prefered having them at 3200MHz, but it's not a big deal as I can't notice any performance impact at all, so all good to me.


----------



## rdr09

kcuestag said:


> Update on my 3200MHZ CL14 RAM issue.
> 
> Tried bumping DRAM voltage as high as 1.42v and still would crash to desktop (and even BSOD) while playing BFV.
> 
> Lowered to 3000MHz and all is good at default XMP profile (1.35v).
> 
> Could it be a faulty RAM kit, or is it just that my 2700X/mobo doesn't like 3200MHz CL14?
> 
> I would have prefered having them at 3200MHz, but it's not a big deal as I can't notice any performance impact at all, so all good to me.



Try 3133 at same voltage. And, yes, not much difference just that thought you bought a 3200 ram and shld run at that speed.


----------



## J0stik

Hey Guys, wana buy 16GB of ram for my 2700x and asus prime x470 - pro .... which one ? willing to give 200-300 eur ... thanks a lot. i am really confused with all those specs :O thanks


----------



## MishelLngelo

J0stik said:


> Hey Guys, wana buy 16GB of ram for my 2700x and asus prime x470 - pro .... which one ? willing to give 200-300 eur ... thanks a lot. i am really confused with all those specs :O thanks


I'm not sure about $$ amount you can get them for but this one works for me with same setup: Kingston HyperX XMP Predator HX436C17PB3K2/16


----------



## kcuestag

rdr09 said:


> Try 3133 at same voltage. And, yes, not much difference just that thought you bought a 3200 ram and shld run at that speed.


Tried RAM at 3133MHz and it was stable, so I will call it a day and leave it there.


----------



## cowboy44mag

The Sandman said:


> Just for reference, on the C6H "The Stilts memory preset" for even 3200MHz Safe has Dram Voltage set to 1.4v.
> Some are able to run less voltage depending how HW matches up.
> 
> 
> You may not see a blinding difference with 3200MHz compared to 2933MHz but if you were to try say 3466MHz, that's a different story
> 
> The Flare-X running 3466MHz c14 @ 1.43v for me looks like this and is very noticeable.
> umeng2002 edit: if it's of any help I added RTC view.





I've done extensive testing on my system and have a bit of a "head scratcher". I can run my RAM up to I 3666Mhz totally stable with CL16-18-18-38. I currently run my system at 3600Mhz CL16-18-18-38, although I can run it stable with tighter timings. I can run almost the same timing that you show as well, 3466Mhz CL14-14-14-28 and get AIDA 64 scores that are just slightly under your scores and just slightly better than yours depending on the run, but all that fall within error. The problem I have is although I score higher in AIDA 64 I score consistently lower in all other benchmarks I try, for example my Cinebench scores go from 1930 - 1915 on average with 3600Mhz CL16-18-18-38 to scores of 1890 - 1900 on average with tighter timings. With my RAM set at 3466Mhz CL14-14-14-28 the highest Cinebench score I could get was 1905. All the other benchmarks I have tried shows similar results, lower scores on Fire Strike, Time Spy, RealBench, Heaven and Superposition. With better timings I would have expected better scores and I have tested the stability with MemCheck for everything. For some reason my system performs the best when the memory is clocked at 3600Mhz with timings of CL16-18-18-38. I am running Trident Z RGB 3200Mhz RAM if that makes a difference, but I have noticed that from what other people have reported about this RAM I am able to push mine further and remain totally stable (Memcheck and game testing).


The only thoughts I have is even though I can run Memcheck for hours without a single error and have no issues in games or running any program I still have some sort of weird instability with tighter timings. If anyone has thoughts on this I would really appreciate the feedback as it seem to go against all I thought I knew about RAM timings and speed. I am always tinkering with settings trying to get a little bit more performance, although I think I have pushed it as far as I can while still on the stock cooler. Can't wait to see what I can tweak with an AIO.


----------



## umeng2002

J0stik said:


> Hey Guys, wana buy 16GB of ram for my 2700x and asus prime x470 - pro .... which one ? willing to give 200-300 eur ... thanks a lot. i am really confused with all those specs :O thanks


For that amount of money, get one in the 3200 or more speed range with the lowest latency you can find... preferable B-die

https://benzhaomin.github.io/bdiefinder/

I got 3200 speed with CL14 ratings (14-14-14-31).

The "cheaper" 3200 speed kits have a latency of CL16.

Remember to look at the "latency" rating in Nano-seconds. 3200 RAM at CL14 has better latency than 3400 at CL16; while 3600 at CL15 has better latency than 3200 CL14.

For games and typical tasks other than benchmarks, lower latency is usually a better improvement over higher bandwidth.


----------



## martinhal

Other than mesuring the actual voltage , what software gives the most accurate Vcore value on these chips ?


----------



## nick name

martinhal said:


> Other than mesuring the actual voltage , what software gives the most accurate Vcore value on these chips ?


I think it depends a lot on which motherboard you're using, but HWiNFO seems to be the preferred software for Ryzen users.


----------



## martinhal

nick name said:


> I think it depends a lot on which motherboard you're using, but HWiNFO seems to be the preferred software for Ryzen users.


Im using the MSI x470 M7


----------



## constructorx

cssorkinman said:


> Nice job - are you liking that motherboard?


Very much so. The VRM and the overall performance is really something.


----------



## constructorx

constructorx said:


> I have had my new 2700x system a couple of weeks. Here are some of my scores:
> 
> Everything in bios is default (set as 'Auto') except:
> 
> 
> 
> Precision Boost Overdrive set to 'Enabled'
> CPU voltage set to 1.3v
> Memory timings set to 'fast' via Ryzen Memory Calc
> 
> Scores:
> 
> 
> 
> Cinebench: https://i.imgur.com/UFYIlve.png
> Aida64: https://i.imgur.com/kfZZwAv.png
> CPU-Z: https://valid.x86.fr/44yek4
> CPU Mark: https://i.imgur.com/IMB8ARb.jpg
> CPU Mark Chart: https://i.imgur.com/WyDF652.jpg
> Corona (Position 19 and 20): https://corona-renderer.com/benchmark/results/cpu/2700x
> UserBenchmark: https://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/13438858
> 
> With BCLK of 102:
> 
> 
> 
> Cinebench (Score: 1984): https://i.imgur.com/oCSUmJs.png
> CPU-Z: https://valid.x86.fr/fpwr56
> UserBenchmark: https://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/13450764
> 
> 
> 
> cowboy44mag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Just a couple of quick questions for you 1. Did you use a negative offset on the Vcore or just set the Vcore at 1.3V? I thought for PBO to work properly a negative offset had to be utilized. and 2. What cooling are you using? My setup isn't that different but I'm on stock cooling. The highest score I've ever gotten in Cinebench is 1920, and my all core boost is 4.166Mhz to 4.215Mhz. It would appear your all core boost is closer to 4.3Ghz, maybe a little better? I've been looking at getting a NZXT Kraken X64 AIO and was wondering how much of a boost the better cooling would give me. Are you using an AIO?
Click to expand...

In response to question 1: I did not set the Vcore exactly. Here is a screenshot of where my voltage is set on my bios. Now, ignore the 1.35V in that screenshot, that was for another overclock (details here : https://www.overclock.net/forum/10-amd-cpus/1717200-2700x-performance-pbo-precision-boost-overdrive-only.html)

When I set that value to 1.3V or lower it acts like an offset to the Vcore. I can set it as low as 1.263V (I have not tried lower). Here are some more results:

*CPU Core Voltage at 1.2875V*
Idle:

*CPU *

Core #1 VID 1.288 (solid on all cores)


CPU Core Voltage (SVI2 TFN): 1.287V
Vcore: 1.296V-1.304V (bouncing)
CPU Temp (Tdie): 24
CPU Temp (Tctl): 34

__________________________________________________________

During Cinebench run

*CPU *

Core #1 VID 1.288 (solid on all cores)


CPU Core Voltage (SVI2 TFN): 1.287V
Vcore: 1.336V
CPU Temp (Tdie): 61.8
CPU Temp (Tctl): 71.8

__________________________________________________________


Cinebench 1965 - 1972

__________________________________________________________

CPUZ 5418 - 491

https://valid.x86.fr/uu8rqa​
__________________________________________________________

I have also gone lower with CPU Core Voltage set to 1.275V (results) and 1.263V (results). Both runs were good. The only difference is that when at 1.263V CPU Cores did not boost to 4.35GHz solidly like at CPU Core Voltage 1.3V and 1.2875V. They were bouncing between 4.2GHz and 4.35GHz. They still scored highly though and it was cooler.


----------



## cowboy44mag

constructorx said:


> In response to question 1: I did not set the Vcore exactly. Here is a screenshot of where my voltage is set on my bios. Now, ignore the 1.35V in that screenshot, that was for another overclock (details here : https://www.overclock.net/forum/10-amd-cpus/1717200-2700x-performance-pbo-precision-boost-overdrive-only.html)
> 
> When I set that value to 1.3V or lower it acts like an offset to the Vcore. I can set it as low as 1.263V (I have not tried lower). Here are some more results:
> 
> *CPU Core Voltage at 1.2875V*Idle:
> 
> *CPU *
> 
> Core #1 VID 1.288 (solid on all cores)
> 
> 
> CPU Core Voltage (SVI2 TFN): 1.287V
> Vcore: 1.296V-1.304V (bouncing)
> CPU Temp (Tdie): 24
> CPU Temp (Tctl): 34
> 
> __________________________________________________________
> 
> During Cinebench run
> 
> *CPU *
> 
> Core #1 VID 1.288 (solid on all cores)
> 
> 
> CPU Core Voltage (SVI2 TFN): 1.287V
> Vcore: 1.336V
> CPU Temp (Tdie): 61.8
> CPU Temp (Tctl): 71.8
> 
> __________________________________________________________
> 
> 
> Cinebench 1965 - 1972
> 
> __________________________________________________________
> 
> CPUZ 5418 - 491
> 
> https://valid.x86.fr/uu8rqa​__________________________________________________________
> 
> I have also gone lower with CPU Core Voltage set to 1.275V (results) and 1.263V (results). Both runs were good. The only difference is that when at 1.263V CPU Cores did not boost to 4.35GHz solidly like at CPU Core Voltage 1.3V and 1.2875V. They were bouncing between 4.2GHz and 4.35GHz. They still scored highly though and it was cooler.



I have a negative offset, but it sounds like with your motherboard you have it set up for basically a negative offset as well. My voltages are very similar/ close to your reported voltages. I've done a little more tweaking in bios and now have Cinebench scores up to 1925, may be able to get 1930, but that looks like it will be as far as I can push it. All my other scores (ie CPUz, Realbench, AIDA 64, Firestrike, Time Spy, ect.. have improved slightly as well). I think my limiting factor has now become thermals as I am still on the stock cooler.


What cooling option are you using? Are you still on stock, premium air, AIO, custom loop...? I've been looking into ordering a NZXT Kraken X64 but have to "bide my time" a little bit as I'm still recovering from taxes and Christmas and the wife doesn't see a benchmark improvement or taking a few minutes off rendering/ video editing times as a good enough reason at this time... I advertise my boarding/ lesson/ horse training business online and also make some training DVDs/ flash sticks so the more productive I can make my rig the better. I've been trying to figure out how to totally create my own webpage/ site and have a membership fee to just access all videos on that but it is turning out to be a little more complicated than I thought it would be so for now I'm stuck burning to DVD or flash drives... I've been trying to figure out on average what the typical boost in performance is using Ryzen's built in PBO self overclocking/ boosting going from stock cooling to a premium AIO like the Kraken. Most purchases I make I have to back up with a few facts as to why they were needed, especially when it gets delivered to the house in a large box and there is a 95% chance I won't be the one home to receive it first...


----------



## cssorkinman

constructorx said:


> Very much so. The VRM and the overall performance is really something.



People are having exceptionally good luck with it's boost feature compared to other boards - may have a cpu temp advantage over other boards that explains part of this. 

I was a little surprised at how well they seem to be doing with memory tuning/clocking as well.


----------



## 6950X

Is the Flare-X Samsung B-die 3200’s C14 really the best option for a 2700X cpu? 

Because for about $30 bucks more, I can buy a DDR4 4266mhz kit samsung b-die. 

I know I won’t reach 4266mhz, but I could potentially run 3600-3800mhz with extremely tight timings.

We are talking $200 vs $230..

Plus, this memory kit would probably work on next gen Ryzen at it’s rated speed increasing usage and longevity.

Any input on this?


----------



## MishelLngelo

Get faster ones, why skimp now for that price diff.


----------



## The Sandman

MishelLngelo said:


> Get faster ones, why skimp now for that price diff.



Agreed :thumb: 

I've had the Flare-X since C6H release and love em but now with 1.0.0.6 I would definitely drop 30 bucks for 4266 instead.


----------



## 6950X

Anyone getting over 2,000 in R15, and running the same system daily stable like this? Or is that to much ask for? I’m OCD about performance lol.


----------



## constructorx

6950X said:


> Anyone getting over 2,000 in R15, and running the same system daily stable like this? Or is that to much ask for? I’m OCD about performance lol.


The settings I have for everyday use give me Cinebench of 1972 (I have literally just ran it a minute ago to check). I think the 2K club for daily use would be a bit too far.

I think anything around 1900 for day to day is really very good.


----------



## constructorx

cowboy44mag said:


> I have a negative offset, but it sounds like with your motherboard you have it set up for basically a negative offset as well. My voltages are very similar/ close to your reported voltages. I've done a little more tweaking in bios and now have Cinebench scores up to 1925, may be able to get 1930, but that looks like it will be as far as I can push it. All my other scores (ie CPUz, Realbench, AIDA 64, Firestrike, Time Spy, ect.. have improved slightly as well). I think my limiting factor has now become thermals as I am still on the stock cooler.
> 
> 
> What cooling option are you using? Are you still on stock, premium air, AIO, custom loop...? I've been looking into ordering a NZXT Kraken X64 but have to "bide my time" a little bit as I'm still recovering from taxes and Christmas and the wife doesn't see a benchmark improvement or taking a few minutes off rendering/ video editing times as a good enough reason at this time... I advertise my boarding/ lesson/ horse training business online and also make some training DVDs/ flash sticks so the more productive I can make my rig the better. I've been trying to figure out how to totally create my own webpage/ site and have a membership fee to just access all videos on that but it is turning out to be a little more complicated than I thought it would be so for now I'm stuck burning to DVD or flash drives... I've been trying to figure out on average what the typical boost in performance is using Ryzen's built in PBO self overclocking/ boosting going from stock cooling to a premium AIO like the Kraken. Most purchases I make I have to back up with a few facts as to why they were needed, especially when it gets delivered to the house in a large box and there is a 95% chance I won't be the one home to receive it first...


Memory timings made a big impact when I first tuned them. I remember the scores caught my attention after tightening the sub-timings with Ryzen Memory Calculator.

As far as cooling goes, I have NH D15 SE AM4. It is performing great. I think reducing the voltage to the CPU has a much greater effect on PBO performance on my system than cooling.


----------



## 6950X

Man Where is Ryzen 2800X at?

Is it ever happening?


----------



## frong

6950X said:


> Man Where is Ryzen 2800X at?
> 
> Is it ever happening?



2800X?


----------



## 6950X

Hey everyone this a build I’ve put together in my Newegg shopping cart. Curious to see what everyone thinks. I’ll have my taxes back within a month, or if I sell my current 6950X and a few other things I have for sale whichever comes first! 

AMD Ryzen 2700X CPU
ASUS X470 Strix Mobo
TridentZ 2x8GB DDR4 3600 CAS15
Samsung 512GB 970 Evo
Nvidia RTX2080 8GB 
Using Stock wraith cooler “temp”

^ around $1,500 bucks

Gonna probably get this monitor too.
Dell S2716DG G-Sync used 165hz
2560x1440P TN used eBay $275?


Looking to get maximum FPS in 1440P. I tried Gsync with 4K only with a slower GPU for nearly a year, and it was just the best thing ever.. mostly when the frame rate would drop to the 30’s range, it felt like 45fps and was still butter smooth.

I think 1440P would be better though. 

Any thoughts? I’m hoping I’ll be satisfied with Ryzen 2700X as a high FPS 1440P cpu. I’m sure my memory choice will greatly help this. I would absolutely never spend $530 bucks on a 9900K. Can’t do it, won’t do it..whoever spends that is crazy for a tick tock cpu lol


----------



## umeng2002

Pretty solid build, but Intel is still king for high FPS. It depends on the game though.


----------



## 6950X

umeng2002 said:


> Pretty solid build, but Intel is still king for high FPS. It depends on the game though.


Well, I’ve got a i7 6950X for that. Broadwell-e does better than even Skylake X in gaming, even if it’s clocked a lot slower too. So, at 4.4Ghz it’s doing really good at lower resolutions.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

frong said:


> 2800X?


2800x is not happening ; )


----------



## J0stik

umeng2002 said:


> For that amount of money, get one in the 3200 or more speed range with the lowest latency you can find... preferable B-die
> 
> https://benzhaomin.github.io/bdiefinder/
> 
> I got 3200 speed with CL14 ratings (14-14-14-31).
> 
> The "cheaper" 3200 speed kits have a latency of CL16.
> 
> Remember to look at the "latency" rating in Nano-seconds. 3200 RAM at CL14 has better latency than 3400 at CL16; while 3600 at CL15 has better latency than 3200 CL14.
> 
> For games and typical tasks other than benchmarks, lower latency is usually a better improvement over higher bandwidth.


Will probably buy G.SKILL Trident Z RGB F4-3200C14D-16GTZRX, because i have 32GB of 2400mhz cl too damn high ... and in arma 3 got 30-40 fps .. no mater what settings (low/ultra)


----------



## MishelLngelo

Minotaurtoo said:


> 2800x is not happening ; )


2800x not but 3800x YEEEEEESSSSS. https://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/amd-ryzen-9-3800z-cpu-leak-16-core/ will see at CES on Tuesday, AMD booked a news conference at that time. .


----------



## 6950X

They say the 3850X will be a (16) core, and the 3800X is (12) cores. 

I hope AMD can push the frequency barrier to where intel is. 

Intel and AMD IPC is practically identical. Someone locked the 2700X and 9900K at the same speed and the 2700X was 3% faster in multithreaded applications.


----------



## 6950X

MishelLngelo said:


> Minotaurtoo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 2800x is not happening ; )
> 
> 
> 
> 2800x not but 3800x YEEEEEESSSSS. https://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/amd-ryzen-9-3800z-cpu-leak-16-core/ will see at CES on Tuesday, AMD booked a news conference at that time. .
Click to expand...

If I owned a 9900K! I’d cash out right now haha! I’d pay $500 for that thing for sure. 

Take my F’ing money AMD!


----------



## 6950X

That means intel would have to release a mainstream (16) core to compete?

They hardly wanted to release the (8) core. Man what are they gonna do? 

It’s like a bloody battle between these two haha.

Can you imagine a (16) core ryzen 2?!? It’ll run down 4,000 in R15 

I hope it’s $499!


----------



## lightsout

MishelLngelo said:


> 2800x not but 3800x YEEEEEESSSSS. https://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/amd-ryzen-9-3800z-cpu-leak-16-core/ will see at CES on Tuesday, AMD booked a news conference at that time. .


I think its Wednesday but either way looking forward to it!


----------



## cowboy44mag

I'm back with another dumb question for you guys. I have been wanting to upgrade my cooling to something that both looks good (important to the wife and kids) and cools well for better performance (important to me). I was just about ready to pull the trigger on the NZXT Kraken X62 when I started to read the horrible reviews of the CAM software. The NZXT software has been called out as basically spyware that can't be disabled via firewall as it won't work without an internet connection. Other reviews I read were complaining about early pump failure rates and a few were even saying that out of the box their coolers had leaks. After reading about all these horror stories I started looking at alternative water coolers and alternatives that were much more "simple" ie air coolers. I could get away with replacing the "cool effects" of the Prism cooler with the Kraken X62 but there aren't really any other options I have found for "RGB cool effects" that the rest of the family has put as a top priority. Even I have to admit when you enter the darkened room and see the PC with the RGB fans, RAM, and Prism it looks stunning and is quite the centerpiece, so I guess I can understand.


I think I have narrowed down my choices to the NH-U14S and of course adding a couple "cool effect" Corsair 140mm fans to it in a push pull, or the NZXT Kraken and hope the software isn't the nightmare it seems to be. From research the two should have roughly equal cooling capabilities, of course if I'm work please tell me. In your expert opinions which is the better route? I have a Strix X470-F motherboard and one review for the NH-U14S said some motherboards the U14S won't fit in properly and you won't be able to mount your GPU in the top slot (X16) which would be a huge problem. Does anyone with a X470-F know if the U14S is totally compatible with this motherboard?


I'm tempted to stay on air as I've never had an AIO and after some research am now unsure of pump failure, water leaks, and buggy software that may be spying on you. I would really like some expert opinions based on performance, features (ie the damn RGB stuff), and reliability (on average how long will an AIO last? With the U14S in a few years you may have to replace a fan but that's it, and an AIO you have to replace the entire unit- unless I'm mistaken).


----------



## Bruizer

cowboy44mag said:


> I'm back with another dumb question for you guys. I have been wanting to upgrade my cooling to something that both looks good (important to the wife and kids) and cools well for better performance (important to me). I was just about ready to pull the trigger on the NZXT Kraken X62 when I started to read the horrible reviews of the CAM software. The NZXT software has been called out as basically spyware that can't be disabled via firewall as it won't work without an internet connection. Other reviews I read were complaining about early pump failure rates and a few were even saying that out of the box their coolers had leaks. After reading about all these horror stories I started looking at alternative water coolers and alternatives that were much more "simple" ie air coolers. I could get away with replacing the "cool effects" of the Prism cooler with the Kraken X62 but there aren't really any other options I have found for "RGB cool effects" that the rest of the family has put as a top priority. Even I have to admit when you enter the darkened room and see the PC with the RGB fans, RAM, and Prism it looks stunning and is quite the centerpiece, so I guess I can understand.
> 
> 
> I think I have narrowed down my choices to the NH-U14S and of course adding a couple "cool effect" Corsair 140mm fans to it in a push pull, or the NZXT Kraken and hope the software isn't the nightmare it seems to be. From research the two should have roughly equal cooling capabilities, of course if I'm work please tell me. In your expert opinions which is the better route? I have a Strix X470-F motherboard and one review for the NH-U14S said some motherboards the U14S won't fit in properly and you won't be able to mount your GPU in the top slot (X16) which would be a huge problem. Does anyone with a X470-F know if the U14S is totally compatible with this motherboard?
> 
> 
> I'm tempted to stay on air as I've never had an AIO and after some research am now unsure of pump failure, water leaks, and buggy software that may be spying on you. I would really like some expert opinions based on performance, features (ie the damn RGB stuff), and reliability (on average how long will an AIO last? With the U14S in a few years you may have to replace a fan but that's it, and an AIO you have to replace the entire unit- unless I'm mistaken).


This doesn't answer your question, but I have a 2700x with the Strix X470-F and the Thermalright True Spirit 140 POWER (NOT THE DIRECT).

http://thermalright.com/product/true-spirit-140-power/

Got it for $50 off of amazon several weeks back and even with a single fan it has been phenomenal and gave me no issues with installation. Just giving you something to think about and making sure you've examined all of your options. 

Also, I love my Strix x470-F!


----------



## Mike-EEE

*Is Conductonaut Safe for 2700x?*

Hello all,

I've been doing some searching here and found there is a page that mentions this liquid metal. I did try to search for it in the tread but it is saying that this term does not show up which seems like a bug because it clearly shows up in the page that brought me here.

So I am posting my question here instead. 

Without getting into too much details (I'm a clutz), I ended up needing more paste for my Wraith cooler, and started looking online into new pastes.

The Conductonaut seems legit, but I am seeing warnings that the substance will eat through aluminum (and that perhaps there is aluminum in the Ryzen?).

Anyways, I was hoping to get an answer to this. Apologies if this has already been asked, but again I did search but didn't find anything.

Thank you in advance for any assistance!


----------



## The Sandman

cowboy44mag said:


> I'm back with another dumb question for you guys. I have been wanting to upgrade my cooling to something that both looks good (important to the wife and kids) and cools well for better performance (important to me). I was just about ready to pull the trigger on the NZXT Kraken X62 when I started to read the horrible reviews of the CAM software.
> 
> I'm tempted to stay on air as I've never had an AIO and after some research am now unsure of pump failure, water leaks, and buggy software that may be spying on you.



Depends on how bad the OC bug bites!

What I've learned from 9 years here myself is it's much cheaper in the long run to just go BIG the first time around if you plan to OC.
Otherwise you may end up with a collection of under powered want-a-be solutions that aren't quite what you hoped they'd be and of course at a price. Everybody has learn right?

It starts with a HS/AIO. After a short while, oh now I want hi perf fans, might take 2 or 3 sets as time goes by and you learn how to raise your OC. 

Next it'll be now it's too noisy etc, need a bigger HS/AIO and the process repeats lol. If you add all these up over a say 3 year period here at OCN well....

I'm good with ACing, but only because I now know their limitations and when I OC I prefer NOT to be limited by temps.
AIO's IMHO are not worth the money when looking at the long term for the reasons you've listed.

WCing is always a scary thought at first (me included). I started with a XSPC setup and expanded from there over time. That was 7 years ago 
Never any leaks or issues of any kind. It's hard to explain what it's like when you can OC and don't have to worry about temps. Won't even mention how much less voltage you'll use.
A "quality" cooling solution simply makes OCing so much more enjoyable.

Quality components truly make the difference no matter ACing or WCing.
I'm also a big fan of Noctua and run a NH-C14S (850 RPMs) on a FX6350 @ default in my media server (Bruce 2nd in rig sig) and also have NH-D14 but it has retired to the extra parts closet.





Mike-EEE said:


> Hello all,
> 
> I've been doing some searching here and found there is a page that mentions this liquid metal. I did try to search for it in the tread but it is saying that this term does not show up which seems like a bug because it clearly shows up in the page that brought me here.
> 
> So I am posting my question here instead.
> 
> Without getting into too much details (I'm a clutz), I ended up needing more paste for my Wraith cooler, and started looking online into new pastes.
> 
> The Conductonaut seems legit, but I am seeing warnings that the substance will eat through aluminum (and that perhaps there is aluminum in the Ryzen?).



First, it appears you're still new here  so I'll forgive you for attempting to hi-jack another thread lol.

If it were me I'd stay away from LM unless 2 - 4 degrees meant a whole lot to me, and it doesn't. Some may argue. 
The reaction possibilities (not so much with the chip) combined with the PITA it can be to remove after install is just not worth it to me.
Ever had a chip pull/rip right out of the socket? Bent pins? Don't need the headache myself.

The gains may be there, bit it's a matter of what they're worth to you.
May get the same results with better fans?


----------



## cowboy44mag

The Sandman said:


> Depends on how bad the OC bug bites!
> 
> What I've learned from 9 years here myself is it's much cheaper in the long run to just go BIG the first time around if you plan to OC.
> Otherwise you may end up with a collection of under powered want-a-be solutions that aren't quite what you hoped they'd be and of course at a price. Everybody has learn right?
> 
> It starts with a HS/AIO. After a short while, oh now I want hi perf fans, might take 2 or 3 sets as time goes by and you learn how to raise your OC.
> 
> Next it'll be now it's too noisy etc, need a bigger HS/AIO and the process repeats lol. If you add all these up over a say 3 year period here at OCN well....
> 
> I'm good with ACing, but only because I now know their limitations and when I OC I prefer NOT to be limited by temps.
> AIO's IMHO are not worth the money when looking at the long term for the reasons you've listed.
> 
> WCing is always a scary thought at first (me included). I started with a XSPC setup and expanded from there over time. That was 7 years ago
> Never any leaks or issues of any kind. It's hard to explain what it's like when you can OC and don't have to worry about temps. Won't even mention how much less voltage you'll use.
> A "quality" cooling solution simply makes OCing so much more enjoyable.
> 
> Quality components truly make the difference no matter ACing or WCing.
> I'm also a big fan of Noctua and run a NH-C14S (850 RPMs) on a FX6350 @ default in my media server (Bruce 2nd in rig sig) and also have NH-D14 but it has retired to the extra parts closet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> First, it appears you're still new here  so I'll forgive you for attempting to hi-jack another thread lol.
> 
> If it were me I'd stay away from LM unless 2 - 4 degrees meant a whole lot to me, and it doesn't. Some may argue.
> The reaction possibilities (not so much with the chip) combined with the PITA it can be to remove after install is just not worth it to me.
> Ever had a chip pull/rip right out of the socket? Bent pins? Don't need the headache myself.
> 
> The gains may be there, bit it's a matter of what they're worth to you.
> May get the same results with better fans?



I was a hard core overclocker with the Piledriver arch, but with Ryzen I am more than content to have the processor do all the "heavy lifting" for me. I have tweaked and overclocked my RAM and GPU as far as they can be pushed and have tweaked some of the performance settings in bios but for the most part I am very content to have PBO do all the rest for me. I want to have adequate cooling to hopefully have PBO hitting 4250 - 4300Mhz all core boost all the time. On my stock cooler I can sometimes hit upwards of 4250Mhz when I let the room get chilly, however it can't sustain that for more than four or five minutes before thermals force the clockspeed down to 4166Mhz all core on average. I'm looking for an aftermarket cooler with the capabilities of cooling the processor to sustain 4250 - 4300Mhz all core through an entire render.


Looking at some of the reviews and benchmarks the NH-U14S can come very close to the NZXT Kraken X62 without the need of worrying about compromised software spying on me or water pumps breaking down. I would be using two 140mm fans in a push pull configuration for extra cooling. I was wondering if anyone else using a NH-U14S could verify if this is accurate, how high of an overclock (or in my case boost clock) can the NH-U14S handle? And does anyone know if it will fit on my Strix X470-F motherboard without overlapping my top PCI-e slot rendering it useless. By measurement it looks like it will, but independent verification would be great.


----------



## Mike-EEE

The Sandman said:


> First, it appears you're still new here  so I'll forgive you for attempting to hi-jack another thread lol.
> 
> If it were me I'd stay away from LM unless 2 - 4 degrees meant a whole lot to me, and it doesn't. Some may argue.
> The reaction possibilities (not so much with the chip) combined with the PITA it can be to remove after install is just not worth it to me.
> Ever had a chip pull/rip right out of the socket? Bent pins? Don't need the headache myself.
> 
> The gains may be there, bit it's a matter of what they're worth to you.
> May get the same results with better fans?


Hah! I deserve that.  The only reason I attempted my newb takeover in confidence is that I am indeed a 2700x Owner... whether or not I am in the "club" yet remains to be seen.  

FWIW I have taken the chip out of the socket now a few times, but it is still under Amazon's grace period, so in a few weeks I might not be so daring, hehe.

But you are right @The Sandman ... it's not worth it. I ended up getting the Kryonaut, mostly due/because that it isn't 100% certain whether there is a small amount of aluminum in Ryzen IHS's and I am not going to risk having my chip eaten 6-1year+ down the road. I will let someone else take that bullet and report back. 



cowboy44mag said:


> I was a hard core overclocker with the Piledriver arch, but with Ryzen I am more than content to have the processor do all the "heavy lifting" for me. I have tweaked and overclocked my RAM and GPU as far as they can be pushed and have tweaked some of the performance settings in bios but for the most part I am very content to have PBO do all the rest for me. I want to have adequate cooling to hopefully have PBO hitting 4250 - 4300Mhz all core boost all the time. On my stock cooler I can sometimes hit upwards of 4250Mhz when I let the room get chilly, however it can't sustain that for more than four or five minutes before thermals force the clockspeed down to 4166Mhz all core on average. I'm looking for an aftermarket cooler with the capabilities of cooling the processor to sustain 4250 - 4300Mhz all core through an entire render.
> 
> 
> Looking at some of the reviews and benchmarks the NH-U14S can come very close to the NZXT Kraken X62 without the need of worrying about compromised software spying on me or water pumps breaking down. I would be using two 140mm fans in a push pull configuration for extra cooling. I was wondering if anyone else using a NH-U14S could verify if this is accurate, how high of an overclock (or in my case boost clock) can the NH-U14S handle? And does anyone know if it will fit on my Strix X470-F motherboard without overlapping my top PCI-e slot rendering it useless. By measurement it looks like it will, but independent verification would be great.


That is very close to what I am thinking @cowboy44mag ... This might sound silly but I love that RGB Wraith and do not want to part with it in favor of that terrible, drab Noctua brown. I also got the 64GB Corsair RGB and it is very lovely with my Wraith, a very nice red + white combo that pairs well with my Rosewell Red case. 

If I can get away with a max spurt 42.5 + 3200 ram then I will be happy. Cinebench scores are around 1913 @ 42, temps at 80-82, on MX-4 which is why I am looking for cheap cooling solutions to retain my RGB awesome.


----------



## The Sandman

Mike-EEE said:


> Hah! I deserve that.  The only reason I attempted my newb takeover in confidence is that I am indeed a 2700x Owner... whether or not I am in the "club" yet remains to be seen.


Completely my bad you did nothing out of line. I thought I was in a different thread when writing. Please except my apologies


----------



## Mike-EEE

The Sandman said:


> Completely my bad you did nothing out of line. I thought I was in a different thread when writing. Please except my apologies


Hah! No worries, I try to be a good citizen about this stuff, but I do get impatient sometimes, especially when there's over 100 pages of texts and the searching doesn't work as expected.

I appreciate the thoughts and assistance!


----------



## Minotaurtoo

Mike-EEE said:


> Hah! I deserve that.  The only reason I attempted my newb takeover in confidence is that I am indeed a 2700x Owner... whether or not I am in the "club" yet remains to be seen.


If you own one, you're in the club :thumb:... I haven't bothered with an actual roster, was going to try a google doc or similar, but I was informed that since the site migrated from huddler they no longer work...


----------



## Mike-EEE

Minotaurtoo said:


> If you own one, you're in the club :thumb:... I haven't bothered with an actual roster, was going to try a google doc or similar, but I was informed that since the site migrated from huddler they no longer work...


Cool! To both statements.  Happy to be aboard here (and with my 2700x! :thumb: ).


----------



## cowboy44mag

That is very close to what I am thinking @*cowboy44mag* ... This might sound silly but I love that RGB Wraith and do not want to part with it in favor of that terrible, drab Noctua brown. I also got the 64GB Corsair RGB and it is very lovely with my Wraith, a very nice red + white combo that pairs well with my Rosewell Red case. 

If I can get away with a max spurt 42.5 + 3200 ram then I will be happy. Cinebench scores are around 1913 @ 42, temps at 80-82, on MX-4 which is why I am looking for cheap cooling solutions to retain my RGB awesome.[/QUOTE]


I have to admit the Prism cooler looks really good, it is more important to the wife and kids though. My PC is in the "rec" room but really the rec room has turned from my man cave getaway to the new living room... My PC is the centerpiece of the room and looks totally stunning when entering with the lights off. I have the RBG RAM as well, I also am rocking 6 140mm high performance RGB case fans so with the Prism in place it makes for one heck of a nightlight. With the case cooling I have my top Cinebench R15 score is 1932 on the stock Prism cooler and my temps never exceed 72C (even after an hour of Prime 95). I think that the processor starts to "step down" once it reaches 70C as I have noticed it will be hitting 4.250Ghz all core until around 70C and then it will down clock to 4.166Ghz for the rest of the render. With the wife and kids "needing" the RGB candy I have been looking at the Kraken X64 and the NH-U14S. The NH-U14S would cost me extra (yet still be overall cheaper than the X64) because if I go that route I would be buying 2 140mm TT or Corsair RGB "ring" fans to have all the same (in some cases better) cool effects of the Prism. 



I was just hoping that one of the great people here might have been using a NH-U14S and know what the cooling is like on the R7 2700X and could give me verification that it will clear my top PCIe port. I've seen some reviews that say it hangs over the port on some motherboards rendering the top port useless, which would be a deal breaker. I've also been considering removing my Prism and reapplying it with Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut and see if I can get better thermals while just sticking with the actually very good (for stock) Prism. I haven't attempted it yet as I would hate to just be wasting Kryonaut if it won't make a noticeable difference.


----------



## rdr09

cowboy44mag said:


> That is very close to what I am thinking @*cowboy44mag* ... This might sound silly but I love that RGB Wraith and do not want to part with it in favor of that terrible, drab Noctua brown. I also got the 64GB Corsair RGB and it is very lovely with my Wraith, a very nice red + white combo that pairs well with my Rosewell Red case.
> 
> If I can get away with a max spurt 42.5 + 3200 ram then I will be happy. Cinebench scores are around 1913 @ 42, temps at 80-82, on MX-4 which is why I am looking for cheap cooling solutions to retain my RGB awesome.



I have to admit the Prism cooler looks really good, it is more important to the wife and kids though. My PC is in the "rec" room but really the rec room has turned from my man cave getaway to the new living room... My PC is the centerpiece of the room and looks totally stunning when entering with the lights off. I have the RBG RAM as well, I also am rocking 6 140mm high performance RGB case fans so with the Prism in place it makes for one heck of a nightlight. With the case cooling I have my top Cinebench R15 score is 1932 on the stock Prism cooler and my temps never exceed 72C (even after an hour of Prime 95). I think that the processor starts to "step down" once it reaches 70C as I have noticed it will be hitting 4.250Ghz all core until around 70C and then it will down clock to 4.166Ghz for the rest of the render. With the wife and kids "needing" the RGB candy I have been looking at the Kraken X64 and the NH-U14S. The NH-U14S would cost me extra (yet still be overall cheaper than the X64) because if I go that route I would be buying 2 140mm TT or Corsair RGB "ring" fans to have all the same (in some cases better) cool effects of the Prism. 



I was just hoping that one of the great people here might have been using a NH-U14S and know what the cooling is like on the R7 2700X and could give me verification that it will clear my top PCIe port. I've seen some reviews that say it hangs over the port on some motherboards rendering the top port useless, which would be a deal breaker. I've also been considering removing my Prism and reapplying it with Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut and see if I can get better thermals while just sticking with the actually very good (for stock) Prism. I haven't attempted it yet as I would hate to just be wasting Kryonaut if it won't make a noticeable difference.[/QUOTE]

You prolly measure it with a small rule. Its 150mm in width. I have a 12S which uses 120mm fans. 

https://noctua.at/en/nh-u14s/specification


----------



## Mike-EEE

cowboy44mag said:


> I have to admit the Prism cooler looks really good, it is more important to the wife and kids though.


Hey, what are you trying to say? 



cowboy44mag said:


> I was just hoping that one of the great people here might have been using a NH-U14S and know what the cooling is like on the R7 2700X and could give me verification that it will clear my top PCIe port. I've seen some reviews that say it hangs over the port on some motherboards rendering the top port useless, which would be a deal breaker. I've also been considering removing my Prism and reapplying it with Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut and see if I can get better thermals while just sticking with the actually very good (for stock) Prism. I haven't attempted it yet as I would hate to just be wasting Kryonaut if it won't make a noticeable difference.


Wouldn't you know it, but I have that cooler.  I had it for my last motherboard (Rampage IV Extreme), which fried mid-video processing in November and I have been cleaning up the mess since.

I have been fighting against having to salvage that sucker, mostly for the aesthetic reasons denoted earlier. However, now that I am so close to 4.3, it's starting to look a little more tempting. 

I put in an order for the mounting bracket, and I will let you know what I do.

BTW, what temperature do you get for your Cinebench? I am scoring a 1935 right now @ 4.25, but it's going up to around 83.


----------



## cowboy44mag

Mike-EEE said:


> Hey, what are you trying to say?
> 
> 
> 
> Wouldn't you know it, but I have that cooler.  I had it for my last motherboard (Rampage IV Extreme), which fried mid-video processing in November and I have been cleaning up the mess since.
> 
> I have been fighting against having to salvage that sucker, mostly for the aesthetic reasons denoted earlier. However, now that I am so close to 4.3, it's starting to look a little more tempting.
> 
> I put in an order for the mounting bracket, and I will let you know what I do.
> 
> BTW, what temperature do you get for your Cinebench? I am scoring a 1935 right now @ 4.25, but it's going up to around 83.



Now I am confused. I am hitting 70C - 73C in Cinebench (depending on how hot my wife has the house) and my processor downclocks about halfway through the run to 4.166Ghz, the start of my run I'm at 4.250Ghz. I can't maintain 4.250 though the entire run most times as it seems when I hit 70C it down clocks the processor to 4.166Ghz. Are you using PBO or a manual overclock? I'm running 10C cooler than you are but can't keep the processor from down clocking halfway though the run. If I chill the room to 60F then I can hit 1932 In Cinebench and maintain 4.250Ghz almost till the end but near the very end it downclocks to 4.166Ghz. I would love to get it to run the entire run at 4.250, and I still have thermal headroom but for some reason it downclocks at around 70, 71C.


----------



## umeng2002

I'm finding V droop is my friend (or lack of LLC). PBO works best by lowering the voltage as much as possible to still not crash at 4.35 GHz, then when you run something intense with AVX (like linpack/ intel burn test), you won't drop back all the way down to 3.7 GHz. For me, setting voltage to like 1.325 with LLC on setting one lets me boost to 4.35 GHz under light loads, 4.2 GHz all core boost in gaming, 4.1 GHz in P95 small FFT and Cinebench, and 4.0 all core boost in Linpack AVX.

What I was doing before was using LLC too much thinking 1.25 volts was too low under full load at 4 or so GHz, it isn't. And that low, PBO keeps the speeds up to 4 GHz. Even with offset voltage or high LLC, any voltage 1.3 or over would suck too much power with AVX and the speeds would tank to 3.7.

Less is more (as long as you don't crash when turboing up to 4.35 GHz). You hit 165 Watts reading and PBO just shuts off and you're back to 3.7 GHz.


----------



## Mike-EEE

cowboy44mag said:


> Now I am confused. I am hitting 70C - 73C in Cinebench (depending on how hot my wife has the house) and my processor downclocks about halfway through the run to 4.166Ghz, the start of my run I'm at 4.250Ghz. I can't maintain 4.250 though the entire run most times as it seems when I hit 70C it down clocks the processor to 4.166Ghz. Are you using PBO or a manual overclock? I'm running 10C cooler than you are but can't keep the processor from down clocking halfway though the run. If I chill the room to 60F then I can hit 1932 In Cinebench and maintain 4.250Ghz almost till the end but near the very end it downclocks to 4.166Ghz. I would love to get it to run the entire run at 4.250, and I still have thermal headroom but for some reason it downclocks at around 70, 71C.


Ah! That explains it. Yes, I am manual overclocking the whole way, living dangerously AF... or at least while I can still return for a new one under Amazon's policy of awesome, LOL.  Of course, I am under the impression that there are controls/safeties in place that when certain dangerous conditions are met, the chip simply shuts off and the machine just freezes in place. At least, that is what I have experienced so far.

I was probably stupid yesterday cooking the chip to 90 degrees under Cinebench, but it was only temporary and my impression that the danger starts when it's a long-term thing.

I am starting to think I should get a new chip in any case now that I have an idea of what I am actually doing.


----------



## Mike-EEE

Hmmm... now I am really confused. I have now (found  and) set PBO to Enabled, and have put everything else to auto, clock to 42, and I am still able to push the temp to 90 with Cinebench with multiple consecutive executions. Starting to get worried something fundamentally wrong here. :/


----------



## cowboy44mag

Mike-EEE said:


> Hmmm... now I am really confused. I have now (found  and) set PBO to Enabled, and have put everything else to auto, clock to 42, and I am still able to push the temp to 90 with Cinebench with multiple consecutive executions. Starting to get worried something fundamentally wrong here. :/



I have not and will not be manual overclocking on Ryzen. I know that with extreme cooling you can get manual overclocks 4.4 and I've even seen 4.5Ghz, but I'm not doing a custom loop and if I need more rendering power then in 6 months or so I'll sell my current processor and pick up a Ryzen 3000. I also know that I have seen posts online with people claiming to have PBO boost clocks of 4.250Ghz all core and 85C. I now believe that those people are in fact manual overclocking as I don't believe PBO would allow the boost to remain so high pushing those temperatures. I have taken note that on my system with true PBO boost clocks I stat to "throttle" at 70, 71C and will drop from 4.250Ghz to 4.166Ghz, and I believe that is how the PBO algorithm works.


With that said, when doing PBO overclocking the first most important thing I have found is to set a negative offset on the Vcore and set the Soc Voltage to manual and start at 1.1V and work your way down to find the lowest voltage you need for your processor. Under AUTO the Vcore and Soc is overvolted way too much on these processors. I was seeing auto Vcore as high as 1.55V and Soc pushing 1.145V, which I believe is max for both. With my negative offset I'm seeing 1.36V on average on the Vcore and I have my Soc voltage set at 1.05V but could probably go a little lower. Setting the negative offset on the Vcore results in a large drop in temperatures. I also have a very good case for airflow and am running 6 140mm performance case fans. I am on stock Prism cooling, however with all the air flow in my case it helps drop overall temps a bit too. You should also set the AI overclocker to D.O.C.P. which should detect your RAM and set it to proper timings and speed. You can always go back and tweak timings later. There are a few other "optimizations" I have found but those are the major ones and should allow PBO to do its job well.


----------



## Mike-EEE

cowboy44mag said:


> I have not and will not be manual overclocking on Ryzen. I know that with extreme cooling you can get manual overclocks 4.4 and I've even seen 4.5Ghz, but I'm not doing a custom loop and if I need more rendering power then in 6 months or so I'll sell my current processor and pick up a Ryzen 3000. I also know that I have seen posts online with people claiming to have PBO boost clocks of 4.250Ghz all core and 85C. I now believe that those people are in fact manual overclocking as I don't believe PBO would allow the boost to remain so high pushing those temperatures. I have taken note that on my system with true PBO boost clocks I stat to "throttle" at 70, 71C and will drop from 4.250Ghz to 4.166Ghz, and I believe that is how the PBO algorithm works.
> 
> 
> With that said, when doing PBO overclocking the first most important thing I have found is to set a negative offset on the Vcore and set the Soc Voltage to manual and start at 1.1V and work your way down to find the lowest voltage you need for your processor. Under AUTO the Vcore and Soc is overvolted way too much on these processors. I was seeing auto Vcore as high as 1.55V and Soc pushing 1.145V, which I believe is max for both. With my negative offset I'm seeing 1.36V on average on the Vcore and I have my Soc voltage set at 1.05V but could probably go a little lower. Setting the negative offset on the Vcore results in a large drop in temperatures. I also have a very good case for airflow and am running 6 140mm performance case fans. I am on stock Prism cooling, however with all the air flow in my case it helps drop overall temps a bit too. You should also set the AI overclocker to D.O.C.P. which should detect your RAM and set it to proper timings and speed. You can always go back and tweak timings later. There are a few other "optimizations" I have found but those are the major ones and should allow PBO to do its job well.


All good information, thank you for providing that. Unfortunately after a 1week and a half at this we are reaching limits of my interest and motivation, LOL. I will see if I can poke and prod around with this. The driving factor right now is reducing memory errors with MemTest at this configuration. Tests can run a few hours and I am getting 1 per 100% at best. Each new change introduces variability, of course.

I did set PBO enabled, clock to 4.3 and everything else set to Auto. Indeed the vCore is set to 1.44 and vSoC to 1.14. Cinebench's first run is 82. If I run it again immediately it freezes, but if I wait 10 seconds it completes at 86.

So, good enough for now? *shrug* MemTest is 0 errors right now but only at 7%, temps @ 65.

Also, this all idles ~30c so I am OK with 4.3. If I end up w/ 0 errors I will then try to dial back those voltages and see if I can find those offsets.


----------



## Mike-EEE

umeng2002 said:


> I'm finding V droop is my friend (or lack of LLC). PBO works best by lowering the voltage as much as possible to still not crash at 4.35 GHz, then when you run something intense with AVX (like linpack/ intel burn test), you won't drop back all the way down to 3.7 GHz. For me, setting voltage to like 1.325 with LLC on setting one lets me boost to 4.35 GHz under light loads, 4.2 GHz all core boost in gaming, 4.1 GHz in P95 small FFT and Cinebench, and 4.0 all core boost in Linpack AVX.


Ah I didn't even think about using LCC @ level 1! SO MANY OPTIONS. I'll see if I can tweak with this as well.


----------



## cowboy44mag

Mike-EEE said:


> All good information, thank you for providing that. Unfortunately after a 1week and a half at this we are reaching limits of my interest and motivation, LOL. I will see if I can poke and prod around with this. The driving factor right now is reducing memory errors with MemTest at this configuration. Tests can run a few hours and I am getting 1 per 100% at best. Each new change introduces variability, of course.
> 
> I did set PBO enabled, clock to 4.3 and everything else set to Auto. Indeed the vCore is set to 1.44 and vSoC to 1.14. Cinebench's first run is 82. If I run it again immediately it freezes, but if I wait 10 seconds it completes at 86.
> 
> So, good enough for now? *shrug* MemTest is 0 errors right now but only at 7%, temps @ 65.
> 
> Also, this all idles ~30c so I am OK with 4.3. If I end up w/ 0 errors I will then try to dial back those voltages and see if I can find those offsets.



You said you set your clock to 4.3 and enabled PBO. I believe what you are saying is that you set the multiplier to 4.3Ghz? If so then you have disabled XMP2, Precision Boost, and Precision Boost Overdrive. As far as I understand it as soon as you increase the multiplier you are manually overclocking and it disables all of Ryzen's auto boosting capabilities. I may be wrong, but I thought for XMP2, Precision Boost 2, and PBO to work you had to have the CPU core ratio set to AUTO. Unless I'm wrong, and if I am someone please tell me, when you set a custom multiplier you disable XMP, PB, and PBO.


----------



## Mike-EEE

cowboy44mag said:


> You said you set your clock to 4.3 and enabled PBO. I believe what you are saying is that you set the multiplier to 4.3Ghz? If so then you have disabled XMP2, Precision Boost, and Precision Boost Overdrive. As far as I understand it as soon as you increase the multiplier you are manually overclocking and it disables all of Ryzen's auto boosting capabilities. I may be wrong, but I thought for XMP2, Precision Boost 2, and PBO to work you had to have the CPU core ratio set to AUTO. Unless I'm wrong, and if I am someone please tell me, when you set a custom multiplier you disable XMP, PB, and PBO.


AH! That would explain why it didn't really seem to impact anything LOL. Yeah I am not using XMP and my timings are all specified via the Ryzen Calculator. I do see PBO but not Precision Boost. I do see "Game Boost" ... maybe the same thing?

I did encounter just now some weird behavior with the clock set at 4.3. With vCore and vSoC set to auto, their values would dynamically change based on the load, which was really awesome. So even though the vCore states it's 1.46 (or whatever), at runtime it would actually list as it was pulling as needed, e.g. get as low as .8!

This was great until I couldn't get stable performance with Cinebench scores (too high temperature or locks on the 2nd try) and reverted back to 4.275. Here the Auto keeps the voltage at a constant number. So 1.46 is 1.46.

So it would seem there is some wonkiness still in the board and/or BIOS.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Mike-EEE said:


> AH! That would explain why it didn't really seem to impact anything LOL. Yeah I am not using XMP and my timings are all specified via the Ryzen Calculator. I do see PBO but not Precision Boost. I do see "Game Boost" ... maybe the same thing?
> 
> I did encounter just now some weird behavior with the clock set at 4.3. With vCore and vSoC set to auto, their values would dynamically change based on the load, which was really awesome. So even though the vCore states it's 1.46 (or whatever), at runtime it would actually list as it was pulling as needed, e.g. get as low as .8!
> 
> This was great until I couldn't get stable performance with Cinebench scores (too high temperature or locks on the 2nd try) and reverted back to 4.275. Here the Auto keeps the voltage at a constant number. So 1.46 is 1.46.
> 
> So it would seem there is some wonkiness still in the board and/or BIOS.


So, when you want to use PBO/XFR set multiplier to 37 and bclk too 100, SMT to Auto, Core Perf Boost to Enabled, C States to Enabled, Performance Enhancer to whatever you want to use then set CPU voltage using an offset while SoC should be locked with a manual setting so it doesnt change dynamically. There are other settings throughout the bios that help out quite a bit with performance and stability as well but these are the main ones that I can think of. I try to keep as little as possible set to Auto as I dont want the board changing something from boot to boot possibly.


----------



## Mike-EEE

CJMitsuki said:


> So, when you want to use PBO/XFR set multiplier to 37 and bclk too 100, SMT to Auto, Core Perf Boost to Enabled, C States to Enabled, Performance Enhancer to whatever you want to use then set CPU voltage using an offset while SoC should be locked with a manual setting so it doesnt change dynamically. There are other settings throughout the bios that help out quite a bit with performance and stability as well but these are the main ones that I can think of. I try to keep as little as possible set to Auto as I dont want the board changing something from boot to boot possibly.


Yeah I am warming up to this idea. Thank you for the information. Unfortunately I do not see half of these settings. The only ones I see are clock (multiplier), BCLK, C-States, and Precision Boost Overdrive.

The voltages do not have an offset, either.

So, I am thinking this is a motherboard issue? I am on the MSI Gaming Pro x470 FWIW. If you have a video/resource that dives into this I can take a further look. Otherwise I will start prodding around.


----------



## gupsterg

CJMitsuki said:


> So, when you want to use PBO/XFR set multiplier to 37 and bclk too 100, SMT to Auto, Core Perf Boost to Enabled, C States to Enabled, Performance Enhancer to whatever you want to use then set CPU voltage using an offset while SoC should be locked with a manual setting so it doesnt change dynamically. There are other settings throughout the bios that help out quite a bit with performance and stability as well but these are the main ones that I can think of. I try to keep as little as possible set to Auto as I dont want the board changing something from boot to boot possibly.
> 
> 
> 
> Mike-EEE said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah I am warming up to this idea. Thank you for the information. Unfortunately I do not see half of these settings. The only ones I see are clock (multiplier), BCLK, C-States, and Precision Boost Overdrive.
> 
> The voltages do not have an offset, either.
> 
> So, I am thinking this is a motherboard issue? I am on the MSI Gaming Pro x470 FWIW. If you have a video/resource that dives into this I can take a further look. Otherwise I will start prodding around.
Click to expand...

CJMitsuki has a C7H, MSI boards (and even others) term certain settings differently (from what I have seen in the past) and may lack some. They also can behave differently to ASUS or even say Gigabyte when you enable/disable x, y or z or set something in a manner as another board. So I'd seek out a MSI owner TBH.

This thread has a MSI owner sharing his PBO tweaking.


----------



## umeng2002

I'm finding manual voltage is better than voltage offset on my Asus mobo. I can put a -.1v offset, but the CPU starts using too much power and the clocks suffer a bit. If I increase the offset to like -.13v or more, there isn't enough voltage at idle and the CPU won't boot or it'll freeze at idle.

However, if I run a manual bios voltage setting of like 1.325 and low LLC, V droop will "suck" down the voltage under load and the clocks are better for intense tasks. And since the idle voltage is up high enough, the CPU will boost up to 4.35 under light loads.

AMD really needs to reconfigure the voltage curves, the chips really isn't linear and needs a non-linear voltage offset option. Like I said, I'm using V droop as a non-linear voltage offset instead of the linear voltage offset option in the BIOS.

With PBO, you have to keep the "CPU Package Power" in HWiNFO64 under 165 Watts or PBO will neuter the clocks to 3.7 GHz. 

When I'm at 164 Watts, I'm at 4 GHz sustained with AVX Intel Burn Test

If I increase the voltage a tad, and just go over 165 Watts, PBO pulls everything down to 3.7 GHz.


----------



## gupsterg

If you use a negative offset yes it can create issues at POST/OS.

If you use a negative offset your CPU may gain MHz as SMU sees headroom to boost. This may also destabilise CPU.

I believe core to core difference makes a difference not, just on "quality" for MHz, but what voltage it needs, as to how the CPU as whole reacts to changes. The Stilt in the C7H thread shared CPO_Test, this allows you to see best to worst core VCORE usage. I have a CPU that has ~200mV gap, another had ~10mV and another ~1mV.


----------



## MishelLngelo

umeng2002 said:


> I'm finding manual voltage is better than voltage offset on my Asus mobo. I can put a -.1v offset, but the CPU starts using too much power and the clocks suffer a bit. If I increase the offset to like -.13v or more, there isn't enough voltage at idle and the CPU won't boot or it'll freeze at idle.
> 
> However, if I run a manual bios voltage setting of like 1.325 and low LLC, V droop will "suck" down the voltage under load and the clocks are better for intense tasks. And since the idle voltage is up high enough, the CPU will boost up to 4.35 under light loads.
> 
> AMD really needs to reconfigure the voltage curves, the chips really isn't linear and needs a non-linear voltage offset option. Like I said, I'm using V droop as a non-linear voltage offset instead of the linear voltage offset option in the BIOS.
> 
> With PBO, you have to keep the "CPU Package Power" in HWiNFO64 under 165 Watts or PBO will neuter the clocks to 3.7 GHz.
> 
> When I'm at 164 Watts, I'm at 4 GHz sustained with AVX Intel Burn Test
> 
> If I increase the voltage a tad, and just go over 165 Watts, PBO pulls everything down to 3.7 GHz.


Those are my findings too. Offset may lower the voltage but power goes up under heavy load putting more strain to VRM. At full, sustainable OC (4.3 in my case) I set voltage tad under 1.4 and let LLC2 take care of the rest which never goes over 1.416v. Auto voltage at same settings can hit over 1.5v which is not very good thing despite good cooling.


----------



## cowboy44mag

umeng2002 said:


> I'm finding manual voltage is better than voltage offset on my Asus mobo. I can put a -.1v offset, but the CPU starts using too much power and the clocks suffer a bit. If I increase the offset to like -.13v or more, there isn't enough voltage at idle and the CPU won't boot or it'll freeze at idle.
> 
> However, if I run a manual bios voltage setting of like 1.325 and low LLC, V droop will "suck" down the voltage under load and the clocks are better for intense tasks. And since the idle voltage is up high enough, the CPU will boost up to 4.35 under light loads.
> 
> AMD really needs to reconfigure the voltage curves, the chips really isn't linear and needs a non-linear voltage offset option. Like I said, I'm using V droop as a non-linear voltage offset instead of the linear voltage offset option in the BIOS.
> 
> With PBO, you have to keep the "CPU Package Power" in HWiNFO64 under 165 Watts or PBO will neuter the clocks to 3.7 GHz.
> 
> When I'm at 164 Watts, I'm at 4 GHz sustained with AVX Intel Burn Test
> 
> If I increase the voltage a tad, and just go over 165 Watts, PBO pulls everything down to 3.7 GHz.





MishelLngelo said:


> Those are my findings too. Offset may lower the voltage but power goes up under heavy load putting more strain to VRM. At full, sustainable OC (4.3 in my case) I set voltage tad under 1.4 and let LLC2 take care of the rest which never goes over 1.416v. Auto voltage at same settings can hit over 1.5v which is not very good thing despite good cooling.





Are you guys talking about all core boost of 4.35Ghz - 4.3Ghz or single/ quad core boost of 4.35 - 4.3Ghz? I have no issues with getting 4.35Ghz single and quad core boosts for "light" applications and the boost will hold for the entire time I am monitoring the application. My issue is when doing a "heavy load" such as rendering which leverages all cores. I start off at 4.250Ghz all core, but within about 4 minutes I will see it dropping to 4.166Ghz. I have seen the drop happen every time as my temperature surpasses 70C. I know that PBO will only boost while it believes temp and voltages are all within lets call it the "Goldilocks zone" (ie just right for everything to boost properly). I have been thinking that my issue is thermal as I am still on the stock cooler, however my temperatures never exceed 73C and I've been thinking I still have thermal headroom and have performance "on the table" that isn't being used.


Do you guys think that my issue is thermal related or is it voltage related? I would love to see sustained all core boosts of 4.250 - 4.3Ghz and at under 73C I may have thermal headroom. I guess my question is 1. do you think my issue may be voltage related and not thermal and 2. Do you have to be under 70C to have PBO boosting headroom (on my processor it seems as soon as I pass 70C it begins to "throttle" itself)?


----------



## gupsterg

2700X (1835 PGS)
C7H WiFi (UEFI 1103 AGESA 1.0.0.6)
F4-3200C14D-16GVK

PE: Default PBO: Enabled (So PPT: 1000W, TDC: 114A, EDC: 168A, ie AMD guideline, see post here).

Kahru RAM Test, all cores boost average ~4.14-4.17GHz reasonable room ambient, say 24C, does not matter if I use ThermalRight Archon SB-E X2 or EK Supremacy EVO + EK DDC + 360mm slim rad. Only if I keep CPU under average tDIE ~43C then I will see averaged boosts ~4.17GHz+ averaged all cores boost for same CPU load.

P95 v29.4b8 (ie "ZEN optimised") all cores boost average ~4.11GHz reasonable room ambient, say 24C, does not matter if I use ThermalRight Archon SB-E X2 or EK Supremacy EVO + EK DDC + 360mm slim rad.

P95 v28.10b1 all cores boost average ~4.1GHz reasonable room ambient, say 24C, does not matter if I use ThermalRight Archon SB-E X2 or EK Supremacy EVO + EK DDC + 360mm slim rad.

RealBench all cores boost average ~4.05GHz reasonable room ambient, say 24C, does not matter if I use ThermalRight Archon SB-E X2 or EK Supremacy EVO + EK DDC + 360mm slim rad.

The WC setup affords me upto ~12C averaged lower tDIE vs air cooler depending on load test. The CPU sample I tested needs vast drops in temps for PB/XFR2 under PBO to gain more than stated clocks.

If I throw BCLK OC in the mix then I can gain some loads ~4.2GHz all cores boost.



Spoiler


----------



## cowboy44mag

gupsterg said:


> 2700X (1835 PGS)
> C7H WiFi (UEFI 1103 AGESA 1.0.0.6)
> F4-3200C14D-16GVK
> 
> PE: Default PBO: Enabled (So PPT: 1000W, TDC: 114A, EDC: 168A, ie AMD guideline, see post here).
> 
> Kahru RAM Test, all cores boost average ~4.14-4.17GHz reasonable room ambient, say 24C, does not matter if I use ThermalRight Archon SB-E X2 or EK Supremacy EVO + EK DDC + 360mm slim rad. Only if I keep CPU under average tDIE ~43C then I will see averaged boosts ~4.17GHz+ averaged all cores boost for same CPU load.
> 
> P95 v29.4b8 (ie "ZEN optimised") all cores boost average ~4.11GHz reasonable room ambient, say 24C, does not matter if I use ThermalRight Archon SB-E X2 or EK Supremacy EVO + EK DDC + 360mm slim rad.
> 
> P95 v28.10b1 all cores boost average ~4.1GHz reasonable room ambient, say 24C, does not matter if I use ThermalRight Archon SB-E X2 or EK Supremacy EVO + EK DDC + 360mm slim rad.
> 
> RealBench all cores boost average ~4.05GHz reasonable room ambient, say 24C, does not matter if I use ThermalRight Archon SB-E X2 or EK Supremacy EVO + EK DDC + 360mm slim rad.
> 
> The WC setup affords me upto ~12C averaged lower tDIE vs air cooler depending on load test. The CPU sample I tested needs vast drops in temps for PB/XFR2 under PBO to gain more than stated clocks.
> 
> If I throw BCLK OC in the mix then I can gain some loads ~4.2GHz all cores boost.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 245868
> 
> 
> View attachment 245870
> 
> 
> View attachment 245872
> 
> 
> View attachment 245874
> 
> 
> View attachment 245876



So then I am thermal limited. I am seeing clock speed that very rarely goes below 4.166Ghz no matter what benchmark, stress test or rendering project I run, however I can't maintain 4.250Ghz which is my goal (of course I wouldn't complain if I got 4.3Ghz). I have plenty of case cooling which is helping to keep a slightly better boost, however to get that extra 84Mhz+ boost all core I'll have to get better cooling as I am hitting the "wall" with the stock Prism cooler (which has actually performed much better than I thought it would). Really 84Mhz isn't that much, but my OCD may just force me to put better cooling on it and see how far I can boost then.


----------



## Saiger0

gupsterg said:


> 2700X (1835 PGS)
> C7H WiFi (UEFI 1103 AGESA 1.0.0.6)
> F4-3200C14D-16GVK
> 
> PE: Default PBO: Enabled (So PPT: 1000W, TDC: 114A, EDC: 168A, ie AMD guideline, see post here).
> 
> Kahru RAM Test, all cores boost average ~4.14-4.17GHz reasonable room ambient, say 24C, does not matter if I use ThermalRight Archon SB-E X2 or EK Supremacy EVO + EK DDC + 360mm slim rad. Only if I keep CPU under average tDIE ~43C then I will see averaged boosts ~4.17GHz+ averaged all cores boost for same CPU load.
> 
> P95 v29.4b8 (ie "ZEN optimised") all cores boost average ~4.11GHz reasonable room ambient, say 24C, does not matter if I use ThermalRight Archon SB-E X2 or EK Supremacy EVO + EK DDC + 360mm slim rad.
> 
> P95 v28.10b1 all cores boost average ~4.1GHz reasonable room ambient, say 24C, does not matter if I use ThermalRight Archon SB-E X2 or EK Supremacy EVO + EK DDC + 360mm slim rad.
> 
> RealBench all cores boost average ~4.05GHz reasonable room ambient, say 24C, does not matter if I use ThermalRight Archon SB-E X2 or EK Supremacy EVO + EK DDC + 360mm slim rad.
> 
> The WC setup affords me upto ~12C averaged lower tDIE vs air cooler depending on load test. The CPU sample I tested needs vast drops in temps for PB/XFR2 under PBO to gain more than stated clocks.
> 
> If I throw BCLK OC in the mix then I can gain some loads ~4.2GHz all cores boost.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 245868
> 
> 
> View attachment 245870
> 
> 
> View attachment 245872
> 
> 
> View attachment 245874
> 
> 
> View attachment 245876


pretty much same story for me. I personally dont see any reason to use pbo instead of a traditional overclock.


----------



## gupsterg

cowboy44mag said:


> So then I am thermal limited. I am seeing clock speed that very rarely goes below 4.166Ghz no matter what benchmark, stress test or rendering project I run, however I can't maintain 4.250Ghz which is my goal (of course I wouldn't complain if I got 4.3Ghz). I have plenty of case cooling which is helping to keep a slightly better boost, however to get that extra 84Mhz+ boost all core I'll have to get better cooling as I am hitting the "wall" with the stock Prism cooler (which has actually performed much better than I thought it would). Really 84Mhz isn't that much, but my OCD may just force me to put better cooling on it and see how far I can boost then.


Throttling in the general sense begins at 85C.

What I think you're seeing is normal how PB/XFR2 and or PBO works.

Room 13C in testing below, WC setup.



Spoiler






































































You will need extreme cooling to see vast boost gains vs normal ambient cooling on air/water. No way am I gonna sit in a 13C room for normal usage  .



Saiger0 said:


> pretty much same story for me. I personally dont see any reason to use pbo instead of a traditional overclock.


Depends IMO.

This is 1825 SUS, BCLK OC, air cooler, RT ~4.25GHz at lower VCORE than 1835 PGS.



Spoiler


----------



## cowboy44mag

gupsterg said:


> Throttling in the general sense begins at 85C.
> 
> What I think you're seeing is normal how PB/XFR2 and or PBO works.
> 
> Room 13C in testing below, WC setup.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 245880
> 
> 
> View attachment 245882
> 
> 
> View attachment 245884
> 
> 
> View attachment 245886
> 
> 
> View attachment 245888
> 
> 
> View attachment 245890
> 
> 
> View attachment 245892
> 
> 
> View attachment 245894
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You will need extreme cooling to see vast boost gains vs normal ambient cooling on air/water. No way am I gonna sit in a 13C room for normal usage  .
> 
> 
> 
> Depends IMO.
> 
> This is 1825 SUS, BCLK OC, air cooler, RT ~4.25GHz at lower VCORE than 1835 PGS.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 245896



I wish my motherboard supported BCLK overclcoking. I have the Asus Strix X470-F mohterboard and it has an option for APU Frequency, which by default shows 100 which you would assume is the base clock, but doesn't act properly at all when increasing even to just 101 as it will destabilize the entire system.


----------



## Saiger0

gupsterg said:


> Depends IMO.
> 
> This is 1825 SUS, BCLK OC, air cooler, RT ~4.25GHz at lower VCORE than 1835 PGS.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 245896


yea but then my ram overclock becomes unstable :/


----------



## cowboy44mag

gupsterg said:


> Throttling in the general sense begins at 85C.
> 
> What I think you're seeing is normal how PB/XFR2 and or PBO works.
> 
> Room 13C in testing below, WC setup.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 245880
> 
> 
> View attachment 245882
> 
> 
> View attachment 245884
> 
> 
> View attachment 245886
> 
> 
> View attachment 245888
> 
> 
> View attachment 245890
> 
> 
> View attachment 245892
> 
> 
> View attachment 245894
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You will need extreme cooling to see vast boost gains vs normal ambient cooling on air/water. No way am I gonna sit in a 13C room for normal usage  .
> 
> 
> 
> Depends IMO.
> 
> This is 1825 SUS, BCLK OC, air cooler, RT ~4.25GHz at lower VCORE than 1835 PGS.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 245896



I wish my motherboard supported BCLK overclcoking. I have the Asus Strix X470-F mohterboard and it has an option for APU Frequency, which by default shows 100 which you would assume is the base clock, but doesn't act properly at all when increasing even to just 101 as it will destabilize the entire system.


I do have the option to set "Performance Enhancer" on this motherboad. Currently I have it set to Level 2 which uses all AMD recommended high settings and will set the scalar at 10X. There are two additional "overclocking" settings of Level 3 and Level 4 which utilize custom settings from the stilt. I haven't tried either of those yet, but may give them a go...


By extreme cooling your probably talking custom loop, ect... I still may upgrade my cooling, been looking at a few different options, don't think I'll risk the kraken x62, but maybe the Dark Rock 4 but mount a couple 140mm Corsair or TT high output RGB fans on it. May help if I decide to use the "Performance Enhancer" Level 4 for my motherboard. I haven't tried it, but some threads says you need really good cooling to utilize the setting.


----------



## umeng2002

Yeah, I have the soft-lock low power state bug with my system. I switched the Power Supply Idle Current to typical instead of low or Auto. Hopefully that'll work.

My system is passing every single stress test, yet will freeze randomly at idle, typically a few minutes after a stress test or just moving the mouse cursor when browsing the internet.

We shall see...


----------



## gupsterg

Saiger0 said:


> yea but then my ram overclock becomes unstable :/


Drop a divider and then raise slowly. You may need to tweak some settings related to RAM OC, if targetting the same RAM MHz with BCLK tweak vs not.

For example say CPU does 3466MHZ with 100MHz BCLK, drop to 3333MHz divider, up slowly BCLK and see where you get without needing to change profile. Then retweak profile.

Here is 1835 PGS at same BCLK as 1825 SUS show before, but more RAM MHz, as using lower density used MHz differs as well as how coverage % in RT will be. PE: Default, PBO: Enabled, room temp ~20C. See how it uses ~50mV more VCORE on average, has ~20MHz or so lower average CPU MHz and is on WC vs air cooler.



Spoiler
















cowboy44mag said:


> I wish my motherboard supported BCLK overclcoking. I have the Asus Strix X470-F mohterboard and it has an option for APU Frequency, which by default shows 100 which you would assume is the base clock, but doesn't act properly at all when increasing even to just 101 as it will destabilize the entire system.
> 
> 
> I do have the option to set "Performance Enhancer" on this motherboad. Currently I have it set to Level 2 which uses all AMD recommended high settings and will set the scalar at 10X. There are two additional "overclocking" settings of Level 3 and Level 4 which utilize custom settings from the stilt. I haven't tried either of those yet, but may give them a go...
> 
> 
> By extreme cooling your probably talking custom loop, ect... I still may upgrade my cooling, been looking at a few different options, don't think I'll risk the kraken x62, but maybe the Dark Rock 4 but mount a couple 140mm Corsair or TT high output RGB fans on it. May help if I decide to use the "Performance Enhancer" Level 4 for my motherboard. I haven't tried it, but some threads says you need really good cooling to utilize the setting.


All Ryzen actually support BCLK tweak without an external gen chip, there is a post by The Stilt in his thread on Anandtech. Some MSI boards (even X370) gained BCLK tweak on AGESA 1.0.0.6, dunno why not working on Strix.

PE LVL2 is not using AMD recommended settings, more saw each limiter is relaxed to the max. See OP here for links to PE LVLs info, read The Stilt's Anandtech thread and you will find PE: Default PBO: Enabled is following AMD guideline.

By extreme I mean very large loop, perhaps even chilled water. As stated a room with low ambient as well, previous post stated I was using room temp of 13C.


----------



## lightsout

Saiger0 said:


> pretty much same story for me. I personally dont see any reason to use pbo instead of a traditional overclock.


Can you get the voltage or clocks to drop? Mine idles warm with a static clock because the voltage sits at 1.375v 24/7.


----------



## Ipak

I also use static OC, just set minimum power state in windows power setting to 10%. Voltage shows that it isnt dropping, but core power is very low.


----------



## Saiger0

lightsout said:


> Can you get the voltage or clocks to drop? Mine idles warm with a static clock because the voltage sits at 1.375v 24/7.


When using PBO yes my voltage drops in idle. 

For static oc ([email protected] 1.35V) I have force enabled AMD Cool n´Quiet and C-States. But I never had problems with idle temps or power. This is a screenshot when im browsing/idle.


----------



## man from atlantis

New MSI bios support vcore and vsoc offset now. My X470 Gaming Plus is paying off greatly.


----------



## Saiger0

man from atlantis said:


> New MSI bios support vcore and vsoc offset now. My X470 Gaming Plus is paying off greatly.


What clock do you achieve with offset? For me a static oc is still superior to pbo.


----------



## cowboy44mag

man from atlantis said:


> New MSI bios support vcore and vsoc offset now. My X470 Gaming Plus is paying off greatly.



I have the option of Soc offset, right now I have it set to 1.05V although I could probably run stable with it a little lower, it is one thing that I haven't spent a lot of time tweaking to its lowest required level while maintaining stability. Is there an advantage to using an Soc offset?


----------



## umeng2002

cowboy44mag said:


> I have the option of Soc offset, right now I have it set to 1.05V although I could probably run stable with it a little lower, it is one thing that I haven't spent a lot of time tweaking to its lowest required level while maintaining stability. Is there an advantage to using an Soc offset?


I don't think so. Ryzen 2000 needs less SoC voltage than first gen and in any case, a few bumps if anything is all that's needed. No need for massive voltage swings in the SoC.


----------



## kcuestag

Anyone with a Gigabyte X470 Gaming Ultra knows how to lower the SoC Voltage? All I see in BIOS for SOC is: AUTO, Normal, and positive Offset, I don't see a way of actually dropping it...


----------



## umeng2002

Is there a "manual" option?


----------



## umeng2002

OK, after trying to diagnose my idle freezing issue; I think I narrowed it down to my RAM sub timings or Termination values. At some point, Ryzen Timing checker stopped reporting ProcODT (it was blank) and reported the Termination Block resistance values at 120 ohms. In the BIOS, I put in what the DRAM Calc advised: 53.3 ohm for ProcODT and 20 ohms for the Termination Block values... but again Ryzen Timing checker reported no ProcODT and 120 Ohms in the Termination Block.

So... I cleared my CMOS and reseated my RAM sticks.

Now with Auto settings, Ryzen Timing Checker reports ProcODT as 53.3 and the Termination Block resistances as 24 ohms.

So I reentered the Fast subtimings EXCEPT for tWRRD. The Fast preset advises 3, and that was what I initially put in. HOWEVER, I noticed when in Auto, the A channel had a value of 3 and the B channel had a value of 4... So now I just left it in Auto and manually entered the rest of the sub-timings.

So I don't know if there was a bug in the BIOS or that particular sub timing value or the initial 20 ohm termination block value screwed something up or my RAM wasn't seated properly or what...


----------



## rdr09

umeng2002 said:


> OK, after trying to diagnose my idle freezing issue; I think I narrowed it down to my RAM sub timings or Termination values. At some point, Ryzen Timing checker stopped reporting ProcODT (it was blank) and reported the Termination Block resistance values at 120 ohms. In the BIOS, I put in what the DRAM Calc advised: 53.3 ohm for ProcODT and 20 ohms for the Termination Block values... but again Ryzen Timing checker reported no ProcODT and 120 Ohms in the Termination Block.
> 
> So... I cleared my CMOS and reseated my RAM sticks.
> 
> Now with Auto settings, Ryzen Timing Checker reports ProcODT as 53.3 and the Termination Block resistances as 24 ohms.
> 
> So I reentered the Fast subtimings EXCEPT for tWRRD. The Fast preset advises 3, and that was what I initially put in. HOWEVER, I noticed when in Auto, the A channel had a value of 3 and the B channel had a value of 4... So now I just left it in Auto and manually entered the rest of the sub-timings.
> 
> So I don't know if there was a bug in the BIOS or that particular sub timing value or the initial 20 ohm termination block value screwed something up or my RAM wasn't seated properly or what...


At what speed are your sticks set at? If it's just 3200 MHz, have you tried DOCP? With the latest Agesa (not latest BIOS), DOCP works quite well with 3200. Now, for anything higher i use the DRAM Calc. I set DOCP 3200 and that's it.


----------



## gupsterg

umeng2002 said:


> So I reentered the Fast subtimings EXCEPT for tWRRD. The Fast preset advises 3, and that was what I initially put in. HOWEVER, I noticed when in Auto, the A channel had a value of 3 and the B channel had a value of 4... So now I just left it in Auto and manually entered the rest of the sub-timings.


No bug, it's just how Ryzen\Threadripper IMC trains up is when that timing is [Auto]. On C6H/C7H The Stilt's timings profiles do not set TRDWR, on Threadripper he recommends to leave TRDWR & TWRDD [Auto].



Spoiler


----------



## Mike-EEE

gupsterg said:


> CJMitsuki has a C7H, MSI boards (and even others) term certain settings differently (from what I have seen in the past) and may lack some. They also can behave differently to ASUS or even say Gigabyte when you enable/disable x, y or z or set something in a manner as another board. So I'd seek out a MSI owner TBH.
> 
> This thread has a MSI owner sharing his PBO tweaking.


WOW! Thank you so much for that link @gupsterg, and for everyone's assistance/pointers/information here. This led me into a rabbit hole this weekend that I am now climbing out of, with some success.

TLDR, I managed to get a 1961 Cinebench score out of PBO.  



man from atlantis said:


> New MSI bios support vcore and vsoc offset now. My X470 Gaming Plus is paying off greatly.


I can confirm this as part of my adventure had me getting the new BIOS, and while the release "notes" make no mention of this, offsets are in there now and I feel like more of this is making sense. However, the SoC offset is doing weird things as when I add a negative value the overall actual value increases. Not sure if this is a bug or if I have something misunderstood. Also, I can negative offset my CPU down to 1.28 (!) but the Cinebench score only hits 192x. I can only hit 196x with manual override settings.

Also of note is that the default SoC value went from 1.1x to .8x. The 1.1 is something others have noticed as being an issue and it looks like MSI listened.

The primary issue for me is now is that I am getting memory errors when I clock @ 3200. I am trying to hash this out now.

BTW @cowboy44mag I got the AM4 mounting bracket yesterday and the U-14S fits in like a champ. I also ditched my Corsair RGB as (3200 @ 16) I realized that my Hyper-X have faster timings (3200 @ 14). So now I am no longer flashy and dashy but drab and FASTAF. LOL. Interesting note, however: the drab brown actually works with the ambient red from my case lights and looks better than I expected (still not as good as ravy RGB but I will take it).

I still have not gotten the Kryptonaut (arrives tomorrow) but my idle CPU temps are @ 25-28 now (down from 32-36) using the existing baked-on paste.


----------



## Saiger0

Mike-EEE said:


> TLDR, I managed to get a 1961 Cinebench score out of PBO.


What settings and frequencies are you running at?


----------



## cowboy44mag

Just thought I would post an update on my system. I have been wondering if I have something set wrong or if I am thermal limited with my setup. I have found today that I am definitely thermal limited. I set up my rig on my porch and ran several benchmarks. The ambient temperature was 20F so about -6.67C (may have been a little cooler as with windchill taken into consideration the temp is 13F but I was in an inclosed porch). Under these conditions the highest Cinebench score I got was 1978 with an average of 1966. I probably could have gotten higher but didn't want to sit out in the cold that long and the experiment had already shown me that I have more potential with my PBO boost "overclock" that I can't take advantage of on stock cooling. 



Obviously I'm not going to sit outside to run my PC, but I would like to get close to this performance with a proper after market cooler. I wish I would have been paying closer attention to the CPU temperatures I was getting, but I think under full load I was getting around 55C on average. With the stock cooler and normal ambient room temperatures I get an top thermals of 73C. Can anyone recommend what CPU cooler I would require to achieve this level of cooling. Would a Nh-U14S be able to achieve this level of cooling or am I going to have to be looking exclusively at all in one closed loop coolers? I want to upgrade the cooling, but want to make sure I'm getting the right solution.


Any feedback from people who have been in a similar circumstance and found the right solution would be much appreciated.


----------



## constructorx

cowboy44mag said:


> Can anyone recommend what CPU cooler I would require to achieve this level of cooling. Would a Nh-U14S be able to achieve this level of cooling or am I going to have to be looking exclusively at all in one closed loop coolers? I want to upgrade the cooling, but want to make sure I'm getting the right solution.


I use an NH-D15 SE-AM4 which gets my 2700x to between 1965-1972 on Cinebench with PBO and undervolt.


----------



## cowboy44mag

constructorx said:


> I use an NH-D15 SE-AM4 which gets my 2700x to between 1965-1972 on Cinebench with PBO and undervolt.



I'm thinking if I can get my temps down into the low 60C range that would be enough to boost to 1960-1970s... I nearly jumped out of my chair when I hit 1978 early this morning, but am not sure if I need the ~55C temp I saw with the ambient temp at 20F or if it will boost the same as long as temps stay in the low 60C range. I have a NH-D15S on another build right now, but I'm thinking for my Ryzen build I am going to try the NH-U14S with two high output RBG fans. I'll have to look up reviews pitting the NH-D15 against the NH-U14S, hopefully they are very close to equal and that will be enough to keep the temps in check (hopefully they fully support my motherboard without interfering with the PCIe slots). I doubt I'll see any real difference in games, but I should see a nice bump in performance when rendering video, hopefully shave a few minutes off projects.


----------



## constructorx

cowboy44mag said:


> I'll have to look up reviews pitting the NH-D15 against the NH-U14S, hopefully they are very close to equal and that will be enough to keep the temps in check...


The model of NH-D15-SE-AM4 I linked to is a Ryzen specific variant of the NH-D15. It is considered the best air cooler by a great many.


----------



## cowboy44mag

constructorx said:


> The model of NH-D15-SE-AM4 I linked to is a Ryzen specific variant of the NH-D15. It is considered the best air cooler by a great many.



I've already looked into that cooler, however if I were to go with that I would probably just mount the NH-D15S I have as it looks like its identical except for the mounting. The problem I have with that that cooler is I ran into an issue with weight on my old Sabertooth motherboard (I noticed that I had some small cracks in my motherboard) Don't know if it was something that happened over time as I had the cooler on the sabertooth from day one or if it happened when I was cleaning and bumped the heat sink. It was probably just dumb luck or a fluke, but this time I don't want anything larger or heavier than a single tower. It is good to know that you had such good success with the Noctua cooler, as I think that the NH-U14S and NH-D15 have almost the same cooling capabilities (should be within 1C).


----------



## ShrimpBrime

*2700X*

Specs:
AMD 2700X 3.7Ghz
Stock Cooler
Asus B450M-A AM4
Corsair Vengence @ 2666Mhz C14
Nvidia GTX 770
Antec 850W CP series PSU

4300Mhz 8/16 Cinebench R15. Score needs some work, but here is about maxed out for the clocks with SMT enabled unfortunately.


----------



## umeng2002

ShrimpBrime said:


> Specs:
> AMD 2700X 3.7Ghz
> Stock Cooler
> Asus B450M-A AM4
> Corsair Vengence @ 2666Mhz C14
> Nvidia GTX 770
> Antec 850W CP series PSU
> 
> 4300Mhz 8/16 Cinebench R15. Score needs some work, but here is about maxed out for the clocks with SMT enabled unfortunately.


You can almost get that by OC'ing the RAM. No need to beat the piss out of it with Vcore. Memory timing and sub-timings do a lot. With tight CL & sub-timings at 3200 MT/s and Precision Boost Overdrive, I can get about 1915 in C15.


----------



## zila

My baby taking a stroll thru Cinebench:

Passmark is at stock settings(Auto)in bios with ram at 3200MHz tight Windows Balanced Mode.

These are nice chips. I'm glad I bought it, no regrets here.


----------



## Mike-EEE

Saiger0 said:


> What settings and frequencies are you running at?


OK this took a bit longer to iron out. And technically I am still ironing as I have yet to have a passing memory test with 0 errors. This has led to crashing instances, the complexity emerges that I do not know if the crash is due to memory errors or due to lack of voltage (or both?).

Also keep in mind that I am dealing with a 4x16 kit which has made this whole process incredibly complicated, especially trying to reach 3200. It helps that the kit that I am using now is rated for 3333, seen here FWIW:
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B07GNFCX45/

(I jumped on a Used unit via Amazon Warehouse, no regrets)

ALL THAT SAID,

I was able to use prescribed voltages from the Ryzen Calculator:
SoC: .9875 (1.0 in BIOS)
DRAM: 1.35 (1.36 in BIOS)

And CPU as 1.375 (1.384 in BIOS). I also have LCC Mode 1 applied to both CPU and SoC.

From what I read and understand thus far, these voltages seem a little high. However, any deviation from them results in lower scores. So, your guess is as good as mine. Right now I am clocking between 1950-1960 with these settings. 

I was getting faster timings but they were with lower voltages that resulted in memory errors. I will poke and prod a little more but I think this is probably as good as I will get, considering the number of modules I am working with, and the fact that I have spent WAYYYYY too much time on this.

Also, I am not using this for games but for a Hyper-V server for my work and different environments. So. Good enough.


----------



## umeng2002

Are you running PBO or static OC? I'm narrowing down my idle freezing issue. I thought it was the ram, but I think it was my static CPU voltage was too low (1.35 set in BIOS). So now I'm back to running voltage offset of -.1 volts. I can pass every single stress test, but every few hours while doing light desktop workloads, by system freezes with no windows error logs.

I think even with 1.35v, that isn't enough when my cpu wants to quickly boost to 4.35 GHz from a low power state.

My system won't even post at 4.3 GHz manual clock with 1.4v static voltage... so I'm thinking my low static voltage before was simply too low to reliably boost past 4.2/ 4.25 GHz.


----------



## TrueForm

umeng2002 said:


> Are you running PBO or static OC? I'm narrowing down my idle freezing issue. I thought it was the ram, but I think it was my static CPU voltage was too low (1.35 set in BIOS). So now I'm back to running voltage offset of -.1 volts. I can pass every single stress test, but every few hours while doing light desktop workloads, by system freezes with no windows error logs.
> 
> I think even with 1.35v, that isn't enough when my cpu wants to quickly boost to 4.35 GHz from a low power state.
> 
> My system won't even post at 4.3 GHz manual clock with 1.4v static voltage... so I'm thinking my low static voltage before was simply too low to reliably boost past 4.2/ 4.25 GHz.


I have my 2700X at 4.3GHZ at 1.4V static voltage with manual OC but with SMT off. Isn't stable if I turn on SMT as it draws more power.


----------



## umeng2002

TrueForm said:


> I have my 2700X at 4.3GHZ at 1.4V static voltage with manual OC but with SMT off. Isn't stable if I turn on SMT as it draws more power.


Good to know.

Speaking of which, has anyone disabled two cores to see if they can it clock higher?


----------



## MishelLngelo

umeng2002 said:


> Good to know.
> 
> Speaking of which, has anyone disabled two cores to see if they can it clock higher?


I tried with 2 and 4 cores disabled, didn't help any.


----------



## Saiger0

Mike-EEE said:


> OK this took a bit longer to iron out. And technically I am still ironing as I have yet to have a passing memory test with 0 errors. This has led to crashing instances, the complexity emerges that I do not know if the crash is due to memory errors or due to lack of voltage (or both?).
> 
> Also keep in mind that I am dealing with a 4x16 kit which has made this whole process incredibly complicated, especially trying to reach 3200. It helps that the kit that I am using now is rated for 3333, seen here FWIW:
> https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B07GNFCX45/
> 
> (I jumped on a Used unit via Amazon Warehouse, no regrets)
> 
> ALL THAT SAID,
> 
> I was able to use prescribed voltages from the Ryzen Calculator:
> SoC: .9875 (1.0 in BIOS)
> DRAM: 1.35 (1.36 in BIOS)
> 
> And CPU as 1.375 (1.384 in BIOS). I also have LCC Mode 1 applied to both CPU and SoC.
> 
> From what I read and understand thus far, these voltages seem a little high. However, any deviation from them results in lower scores. So, your guess is as good as mine. Right now I am clocking between 1950-1960 with these settings.
> 
> I was getting faster timings but they were with lower voltages that resulted in memory errors. I will poke and prod a little more but I think this is probably as good as I will get, considering the number of modules I am working with, and the fact that I have spent WAYYYYY too much time on this.
> 
> Also, I am not using this for games but for a Hyper-V server for my work and different environments. So. Good enough.


What do you mean with" 1.384V in BIOS"? I cant set voltages between 1.375 and 1.4V.
Be careful when using LLC mode 1. Its the highest in the msi bios and might cause voltage spikes.

But im not 100% sure how it will behave since msi removed the high llc options which will add more volts than you would set in the bios under load. The new one is almost 1 to 1 under load.

I´m temped to use the new llc mode 1 but it may as well degrade the cpu slowly.


----------



## cowboy44mag

I've been tweaking settings and trying different things and just thought I'd post something I found to be a little odd and see what you guys make of it. I have been using Windows Balanced power plan all along as I read several posts stating it was the best option for PBO and Ryzen Plus. I saw a YouTube video yesterday where someone tested Balanced vs Ryzen Balanced vs High Performance while testing level 1 - 4 of Performance Enhancer with the R7 2700X. They found that with Levels 1 and 2 Ryzen Balanced power plan offered better performance and for 3 and 4 Windows balanced had the best performance. I have been running level 2 so I switched to Ryzen Balanced Power Plan and have seen a surprising boost in performance. On average I'm getting anywhere from 8 to 12 points higher in Cinebench and am also getting higher benchmarks in Heaven and Superposition. I was just shocked to see this kind of performance boost with Ryzen Balanced Power Plan and the R7 2700X and thought I'd get some of the forum's thoughts and see if anyone else using level 1 or 2 is seeing the same boost.


----------



## ShrimpBrime

umeng2002 said:


> You can almost get that by OC'ing the RAM. No need to beat the piss out of it with Vcore. Memory timing and sub-timings do a lot. With tight CL & sub-timings at 3200 MT/s and Precision Boost Overdrive, I can get about 1915 in C15.


Memory won't go over 2666 stable at all. I'm waiting on a bios update for better memory support. 

When I started with the Rig from the box, I was in the low 1700 cb points range. So that screen shot is a vast improvement. 

However 1.46v isn't really beating the piss out of the chip while I've watched it boost it's own v-core that high doing it's little XFR boost thing it does.

___________________________________________________

Yes SMT disabled. Done that a couple of times. You guys should be able to do fairly decent with clocks turning it off.


----------



## ShrimpBrime

umeng2002 said:


> Good to know.
> 
> Speaking of which, has anyone disabled two cores to see if they can it clock higher?


Well I disable 4 cores and SMT and bench all the way up to 4.5ghz on the stock air cooler. Yes will clock higher. let me know if you need a screen shot.


----------



## umeng2002

Edit...

Haven't crashed at idle since moving back to voltage offset.


----------



## cowboy44mag

Just wanted to post an update to my Ryzen Balanced testing. I've been playing with the power plans and Ryzen Balanced Power Plan with Level 2 Performance Enhancer definitely gives a good boost to performance over Windows Balanced Power Plan. After digging into it a little I found that the most likely reason is the minimum processor state in Windows Balanced is 5% and the minimum processor state in Ryzen Balanced is 90%. Other than that I don't really see any difference. I have found that under Ryzen Balanced I have been experiencing random BSOD with the message driver_irql_not_less_or_equal. I never had this message after running on Windows Balanced for months and must be related to the minimum processor states. While Ryzen Balanced seems to give a boost in certain benchmarks I believe that Windows Balanced works much better for overall stability with Ryzen Plus.


----------



## cowboy44mag

ShrimpBrime said:


> Memory won't go over 2666 stable at all. I'm waiting on a bios update for better memory support.
> 
> When I started with the Rig from the box, I was in the low 1700 cb points range. So that screen shot is a vast improvement.
> 
> However 1.46v isn't really beating the piss out of the chip while I've watched it boost it's own v-core that high doing it's little XFR boost thing it does.
> 
> ___________________________________________________
> 
> Yes SMT disabled. Done that a couple of times. You guys should be able to do fairly decent with clocks turning it off.



I can definitely see where turning SMT off would produce higher clock speeds. After all you are going from 2 logical cores per physical core to 1 logical core per single core. In essence your turning your Ryzen 7 2700X from an 8 core 16 thread processor to a 8 core 8 thread processor. In lightly threaded applications this would more than likely have some advantages, however in heavily threaded applications or rendering, ect. disabling SMT would cripple your system and greatly reduce overall performance. I may be wrong but the net clock frequency gains won't be able to make up for the loss of 8 threads. If your going for overall system performance gains wouldn't it be better to leave SMT enabled? I'm always trying to find tweaks or optimizations that can give a little more performance, even if its only a couple percentage points, so I'm just asking is there any advantage in performance to disabling SMT?


----------



## cowboy44mag

umeng2002 said:


> Edit...
> 
> Haven't crashed at idle since moving back to voltage offset.



With almost every processor I've ever had using a voltage offset always ended up more stable than using a fixed set voltage. I know its not scientific but as a rule of thumb I've found voltage offsets to be much more stable and reliable.


----------



## The Sandman

cowboy44mag said:


> Just wanted to post an update to my Ryzen Balanced testing. I've been playing with the power plans and Ryzen Balanced Power Plan with Level 2 Performance Enhancer definitely gives a good boost to performance over Windows Balanced Power Plan. After digging into it a little I found that the most likely reason is the minimum processor state in Windows Balanced is 5% and the minimum processor state in Ryzen Balanced is 90%. Other than that I don't really see any difference. I have found that under Ryzen Balanced I have been experiencing random BSOD with the message driver_irql_not_less_or_equal. I never had this message after running on Windows Balanced for months and must be related to the minimum processor states. While Ryzen Balanced seems to give a boost in certain benchmarks I believe that Windows Balanced works much better for overall stability with Ryzen Plus.


 Have you tried High Performance mode with minimum processor state set to anything under 40%?
You'll gain another 3-5 in CB etc.


----------



## cowboy44mag

The Sandman said:


> Have you tried High Performance mode with minimum processor state set to anything under 40%?
> You'll gain another 3-5 in CB etc.



I was tempted to do just that, however haven't yet after experiencing several BSOD using Ryzen Balanced Power mode. Was actually thinking about running High Performance with a minimum state of 5%, 20%, and 30% and see what the results would be. I would think that High Performance with 5% should give a "Balanced" experience with slightly better performance. I just got a little "gun shy" after several BSOD.


----------



## Mike-EEE

Quick update here...

First, I finally figured out the memory errors and it was the simplest thing. Turns out you're supposed to enter in the primary timings first and see if that works, duh. Total newb mistake. I was putting in every value and the board was miscalculating somewhere. In my case I was able to put in the primary timings (3200 @ 14-16-14-17-22) and it just worked. Well, almost. Turns out I was still getting errors, but looking at the instructions further revealed a tip to increase the RCDRD by 1 to increase stability. So, final answer 14-17-14-16-22 which is wayyyy faster than anything that I have seen on an XMP, even at lower frequency.

The other note is that I have landed on a set of settings that I am happy with, yielding a result of 1950-1955:
CPU: 1.3875, LCC 2
SoC: .9875, LCC 2
DRAM: 1.35

Anything lower would yield faster scores (I got a 1961), but inconsistently result in lockups.

Also, I did get the Grizzly and it turned out to be a non-factor. While it did reduce my resting temp from ~24-25 to 22-23, all of that went out of the window when I realized that the testing I was doing was based with the case cover off. When I put the cover back on, the temps jumped to 26.8 minimum idle, which isn't so bad, but I am thinking with the MX-4 I would be sitting at 27 or 28. Worth the $10 and wait? Not so sure.

In any case, I now have a system that is running 3200 memory, at timings that are much faster than any rating that I have seen, and a board/chip combo that is magically overclocking to 4.35GHz and then cooling off to 3.7 when not in use, idling at temperatures between 26-32.

I'm OK with this? 

I would like to send a massive shout of respect to the community and members here! I very much appreciate the feedback and thoughts that have helped me through this ordeal. Pretty staggering to think that I have been at this in one form or another for about two weeks now. Glad it is done and that I am able to move onto the next fire. 

Much respect and happy new year (it's still January so I can still say that!).


----------



## umeng2002

Mmmm...

I'm at the Ryzen Calc's 3400 Fast preset and my C15 scores are just a tad over 1900.

Also, I have Windows in high performance mode and the minimum CPU state at 100%, but my clocks and voltages still throttle down.


----------



## cowboy44mag

Mike-EEE said:


> Quick update here...
> 
> First, I finally figured out the memory errors and it was the simplest thing. Turns out you're supposed to enter in the primary timings first and see if that works, duh. Total newb mistake. I was putting in every value and the board was miscalculating somewhere. In my case I was able to put in the primary timings (3200 @ 14-16-14-17-22) and it just worked. Well, almost. Turns out I was still getting errors, but looking at the instructions further revealed a tip to increase the RCDRD by 1 to increase stability. So, final answer 14-17-14-16-22 which is wayyyy faster than anything that I have seen on an XMP, even at lower frequency.
> 
> The other note is that I have landed on a set of settings that I am happy with, yielding a result of 1950-1955:
> CPU: 1.3875, LCC 2
> SoC: .9875, LCC 2
> DRAM: 1.35
> 
> Anything lower would yield faster scores (I got a 1961), but inconsistently result in lockups.
> 
> Also, I did get the Grizzly and it turned out to be a non-factor. While it did reduce my resting temp from ~24-25 to 22-23, all of that went out of the window when I realized that the testing I was doing was based with the case cover off. When I put the cover back on, the temps jumped to 26.8 minimum idle, which isn't so bad, but I am thinking with the MX-4 I would be sitting at 27 or 28. Worth the $10 and wait? Not so sure.
> 
> In any case, I now have a system that is running 3200 memory, at timings that are much faster than any rating that I have seen, and a board/chip combo that is magically overclocking to 4.35GHz and then cooling off to 3.7 when not in use, idling at temperatures between 26-32.
> 
> I'm OK with this?
> 
> I would like to send a massive shout of respect to the community and members here! I very much appreciate the feedback and thoughts that have helped me through this ordeal. Pretty staggering to think that I have been at this in one form or another for about two weeks now. Glad it is done and that I am able to move onto the next fire.
> 
> Much respect and happy new year (it's still January so I can still say that!).



Those are great timings:thumb: I'm jealous... I had to go a different route with my RAM as using the RAM calculator for fast I just couldn't get anything to post and if I played around with the timings I would have random freezes and crashes. I finally settled on my RAM (3200Mhz Trident Z) for whatever reason liked speed over tight timings and have been running very stable at 3600Mhz 16-17-17-17-32 1T @ 1.38V (can probably run lower but set it at 1.38V for stability and haven't taken the time to find the lowest voltage needed). Everything is set for PBO so no manual overclocking per say. My other settings:


CPU 1.36V (under full load- will sometimes spike to 1.4V), LLC AUTO
SoC 1.04375V, LLC AUTO


I just set up a High Performance power plan with minimum set at 30% (thank you very much Sandman:thumb and with these settings I am getting Cinebench scores of 1922-1930 on the stock Prism cooler and ambient room temperature of 75F. Don't really feel like taking the rig on the porch for cooler temps, but doing some calculations with premium aftermarket cooling (I'll be ordering this coming Monday... workman's comp is a total ***** can't wait for **** back to heal and get back to work) at any rate, doing some simple math taking into consideration ambient room temp is usually 68F with premium cooling conservatively I should be looking at mid 1950s to 1960s. I Will continue to work on voltages (still have to iron out SoC and DRAM and find the lowest voltages I need) and will have to update once I get new cooling solution installed.


This forum is awesome, many thanks to everyone who helped me and to everyone who posted their system specs settings and results. Without all the help, useful feedback and posts I would still have an un-optimized system with lower benchmarks. Even more important with these better settings I can shave a good amount of time off large rendering projects


----------



## ShrimpBrime

cowboy44mag said:


> I can definitely see where turning SMT off would produce higher clock speeds. After all you are going from 2 logical cores per physical core to 1 logical core per single core. In essence your turning your Ryzen 7 2700X from an 8 core 16 thread processor to a 8 core 8 thread processor. In lightly threaded applications this would more than likely have some advantages, however in heavily threaded applications or rendering, ect. disabling SMT would cripple your system and greatly reduce overall performance. I may be wrong but the net clock frequency gains won't be able to make up for the loss of 8 threads. If your going for overall system performance gains wouldn't it be better to leave SMT enabled? I'm always trying to find tweaks or optimizations that can give a little more performance, even if its only a couple percentage points, so I'm just asking is there any advantage in performance to disabling SMT?


Well yes there are good gains particularly in gaming. So 99.8% of all games won't scale to 16 threads at 4.1Ghz. So you could run 200 to 300Mhz higher clocks, and probably boost the FPS a bit. 

So really it depends on what you need your system for. 

So with Cinebench, you gain roughly 500 points with SMT enabled. With only 8 cores/threads you guys should score around 1400cb with SMT off and with it on be in the 1900cb range like you guys are.

For single threaded apps like spimod 32m as displayed here, the gains would be significant as PiMod is pretty cpu speed dependent. Not sure if this is a good frequency and 32m Pimod time.... but I'm able to do this on the stock cooler.


----------



## cowboy44mag

ShrimpBrime said:


> Well yes there are good gains particularly in gaming. So 99.8% of all games won't scale to 16 threads at 4.1Ghz. So you could run 200 to 300Mhz higher clocks, and probably boost the FPS a bit.
> 
> So really it depends on what you need your system for.
> 
> So with Cinebench, you gain roughly 500 points with SMT enabled. With only 8 cores/threads you guys should score around 1400cb with SMT off and with it on be in the 1900cb range like you guys are.
> 
> For single threaded apps like spimod 32m as displayed here, the gains would be significant as PiMod is pretty cpu speed dependent. Not sure if this is a good frequency and 32m Pimod time.... but I'm able to do this on the stock cooler.





I got where your coming from now. I tend to do more rendering and video editing on my rig than overall gaming, however with my injury right now I have to admit I've been gaming more than I ever use to. I don't really see any performance issues while gaming with my R7 2700X with its current settings and my RTX 2070. Of course I just upgraded a few months ago from a FX 8370 and R9 290 so to me my current performance is mind blowing, at least to me. I'm sure someone coming from an i9 9900K and RTX 2080Ti would find performance issues I just can't see... I think a lot of "gaming performance" is perspective. I use to love when a console gamer would see me playing the same title even on my FX 8370, they would be blown away and there were much better gaming rigs than that. I've always built systems for rendering and editing first, gaming second. 



I do however see where disabling SMT and achieving higher overclock performance would help in Adobe editing, so next time I'm going to be doing projects in Adobe that might be a good thing to try and just switch profiles depending on the work I'm going to be doing. Disabling SMT while using programs like Adobe could be very useful, shaving a few minutes off of a project might not seem like much, but it adds up.


----------



## ShrimpBrime

A time will come when a i9 9900K will be childs play. The current Gen processors are yesterdays news already. 

Ryzen 9 3850X 16/32T 4.3Ghz/5.1Ghz (boost) 135w 499$ MSRP release date May. 

What? A bios update and that slaps into my current board? __ what was that about an i9 again?


----------



## cowboy44mag

ShrimpBrime said:


> A time will come when a i9 9900K will be childs play. The current Gen processors are yesterdays news already.
> 
> Ryzen 9 3850X 16/32T 4.3Ghz/5.1Ghz (boost) 135w 499$ MSRP release date May.
> 
> What? A bios update and that slaps into my current board? __ what was that about an i9 again?





Oh, don't get me wrong the i9 9900K has always been irrelevant ever since its release date. Gaming performance isn't that much better than the R7 2700X and the 2700X test rigs that were tested were not as optimized as the processors that people are running on this site. Given that the performance is only marginally better, it only achieves its "edge" by massive clock speed and is much hotter to run, and is literally twice the price of the 2700X it was never a processor that was relevant. The only reason I quoted that processor is because if it does have a "niche" its with competitive gamers who need every single FPS possible. Someone like that would say they can see the difference between their system and mine, however most users and gamers unless they could see the hardware wouldn't be able to tell the difference.


----------



## ShrimpBrime

Yep I agree. 
Love this little 2700X. It does very well. Zila loves his. https://www.overclock.net/forum/10-...-2700-2700x-owners-club-128.html#post27806902 Has a bit of trouble with heat and uses after market cooling. Says I'm lucky I can run this chip on the stock cooler like I do lol. 

How hot do you guys get during stress testing and what point to you stop at?? I've let mine ride out loaded into the 70+ c range. Seems ok and passes benchmarks and stress testing.


----------



## cowboy44mag

ShrimpBrime said:


> Yep I agree.
> Love this little 2700X. It does very well. Zila loves his. https://www.overclock.net/forum/10-...-2700-2700x-owners-club-128.html#post27806902 Has a bit of trouble with heat and uses after market cooling. Says I'm lucky I can run this chip on the stock cooler like I do lol.
> 
> How hot do you guys get during stress testing and what point to you stop at?? I've let mine ride out loaded into the 70+ c range. Seems ok and passes benchmarks and stress testing.



I don't do manual overclocking, no bclk or multiplier. I only "overclock" by overclocking the RAM, getting the lowest voltages possible on the processor and RAM, and enabling PBO and letting the processor boost itself. With using PBO the processor should never overheat (in theory anyway) because as you increase temperatures PBO automatically decreases clock speed to keep within its set thermal zone. With that said on stock cooling at the start of a Cinebench run my processor is running at 4.250Ghz all core but about 3/4 of the way though I'll hit 70C and the processor automatically downclocks to 4.166Ghz. If I'm running Prime 95 the same thing is true at the beginning its hitting 4.250Ghz all core but then after a minute or so it downclocks to 4.166Ghz as my processor passes 70C. On Prime 95 I'll hold 4.166Ghz the entire time and my temps max out at 73C under full Prime 95 torture testing. I have good thermals, especially for being on stock cooling, however I also have excellent case air flow (positive pressure).


While my temps are well within TJmax for this processor I am thermal limited on stock cooling as I can't maintain 4.250Ghz all core and have never boosted above this frequency (all core - single core I can maintain 4.350Ghz the entire time I'm running benchmarks). With premium aftermarket cooling I expect to be able to maintain 4.250Ghz all core for the entire benchmark and hope to be able to maintain that clock speed while running a full Prime 95 torture test (I usually call it good after 2-3 hours).


----------



## constructorx

cowboy44mag said:


> I don't do manual overclocking, no bclk or multiplier. I only "overclock" by overclocking the RAM, getting the lowest voltages possible on the processor and RAM, and enabling PBO and letting the processor boost itself. With using PBO the processor should never overheat (in theory anyway) because as you increase temperatures PBO automatically decreases clock speed to keep within its set thermal zone.


This is almost exactly what I do. I OC my memory with RMC to fast, reduce voltages (1.3V in MSI M7 AC bios) and enable PBO. Nothing else. I get 1972 for Cinebench on my 24/7 settings. I do not see why I should push voltage for no reason. During Assassin's Creed Odyssey I clock a constant 4.35Ghz on all cores, around 60-65 degrees.


----------



## ShrimpBrime

Ohhh ok. That does explain a bit but I also understand why. 
These chips are optimized pretty well from the box. Depending on temps and everything on auto, they can clock up and hold 4150mhz all by themselves. Its pretty neat. And the single core OC to 4350mhz is decent for single threaded apps. Really cant ask for better from a self OC system.

You guys call it PBO? Is the in reference to XFR like it states in my bios?


----------



## constructorx

ShrimpBrime said:


> Ohhh ok. That does explain a bit but I also understand why.
> These chips are optimized pretty well from the box. Depending on temps and everything on auto, they can clock up and hold 4150mhz all by themselves. Its pretty neat. And the single core OC to 4350mhz is decent for single threaded apps. Really cant ask for better from a self OC system.
> 
> You guys call it PBO? Is the in reference to XFR like it states in my bios?


PBO: Precision Boost Overdrive.

Understanding Precision Boost Overdrive in Three Easy Steps : https://community.amd.com/community...precision-boost-overdrive-in-three-easy-steps


----------



## cowboy44mag

constructorx said:


> This is almost exactly what I do. I OC my memory with RMC to fast, reduce voltages (1.3V in MSI M7 AC bios) and enable PBO. Nothing else. I get 1972 for Cinebench on my 24/7 settings. I do not see why I should push voltage for no reason. During Assassin's Creed Odyssey I clock a constant 4.35Ghz on all cores, around 60-65 degrees.



That is exactly the performance I expect to see with better cooling. Right now I'm hitting 73C on stock cooling which limits my PBO boost to 4.166Ghz. With premium after market cooling I fully expect to keep the processor in the mid 60s for temperature which will allow for a boost of 4.25Ghz all core, hopefully even the 4.35Ghz all core that you are seeing. My only limiting factor I can see right now is cooling. If I can hit 4.25Ghz all core I expect Cinebench scores of 1950 - 1960s range, if I can hit 4.35Ghz that would place it more in the 1970 - 1980s range.


These processors are truly amazing. I remember when "auto overclocking" software first came out it was really a joke as you could hit higher speeds with less voltage by manually overclocking, however the new technologies in PBO really do an outstanding job making manual overclocking all but pointless on systems with anything less than a full custom loop (user trying to hit that ever sought after 4.4-4.5Ghz range). I was also surprised by the new auto overclocking in MSI Afterburner for my RTX 2070 card. I was unable to hit as high of an overclock manually as it was able to obtain through software. Auto overclocking has really matured and works incredibly well.


----------



## zila

Personally, I think PBO is stupid. Just my own personal opinion of course. But I love my 2700X. As long as it's kept cool it does amazing things. Mine runs hot, as does everyone's that I've spoken to. Shrimp being the exception. He's got an amazingly cool chip on stock cooler from what I've seen. Mine can't run like his. Not even close. Mine on stock cooler goes to 90*C under an AVX load such Prime95, IBT AVX. Aida64 puts the heat on it as well. I had to dump the stock cooler. I am going to go with water cooling next. I'm preparing for summer time high ambient temps. This is one serious chip.


----------



## constructorx

cowboy44mag said:


> That is exactly the performance I expect to see with better cooling. Right now I'm hitting 73C on stock cooling which limits my PBO boost to 4.166Ghz. With premium after market cooling I fully expect to keep the processor in the mid 60s for temperature which will allow for a boost of 4.25Ghz all core, hopefully even the 4.35Ghz all core that you are seeing. My only limiting factor I can see right now is cooling. If I can hit 4.25Ghz all core I expect Cinebench scores of 1950 - 1960s range, if I can hit 4.35Ghz that would place it more in the 1970 - 1980s range.
> 
> These processors are truly amazing. I remember when "auto overclocking" software first came out it was really a joke as you could hit higher speeds with less voltage by manually overclocking, however the new technologies in PBO really do an outstanding job making manual overclocking all but pointless on systems with anything less than a full custom loop (user trying to hit that ever sought after 4.4-4.5Ghz range). I was also surprised by the new auto overclocking in MSI Afterburner for my RTX 2070 card. I was unable to hit as high of an overclock manually as it was able to obtain through software. Auto overclocking has really matured and works incredibly well.


I agree, these processors really are great. I may have been fortunate in the so called 'silicon lottery' or it may just be that excellent, clean power supply, a board with great VRMs and fast memory allow the system to really stretch its legs. Either way, I am more than happy and with the performance I am getting, especially without the need to push lots of voltage and noise.

If you are getting good performance with PBO now I think that you would get even more with better cooling (as you have already stated).


----------



## constructorx

zila said:


> Personally, I think PBO is stupid. Just my own personal opinion of course. But I love my 2700X. As long as it's kept cool it does amazing things. Mine runs hot, as does everyone's that I've spoken to. Shrimp being the exception. He's got an amazingly cool chip on stock cooler from what I've seen. Mine can't run like his. Not even close. Mine on stock cooler goes to 90*C under an AVX load such Prime95, IBT AVX. Aida64 puts the heat on it as well. I had to dump the stock cooler. I am going to go with water cooling next. I'm preparing for summer time high ambient temps. This is one serious chip.
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t1DnvthxpnY


Why do you think it is stupid? It is a very good feature. It may not best on every system but there are so many different components that can lead to lower performance (power supply, VRMs, memory, the CPU itself). This does not make the feature itself a bad feature, though it can make the experience of some people very different to others (as you said, it is a personal opinion).

I would guess that a motherboard with quality, solid power delivery and decent cooling would in the vast majority of cases lead to great performance.

With static OC I have got to 4.43GHz and 1.44V (using the MSI M7 AC Game Boost set to 11). I did this for benchmarking only. I get 98.2% of that performance with PBO, an undervolt and memory timings tightened and my system is only pushing 1.334V under full load. That is a great feature.


----------



## umeng2002

constructorx said:


> Why do you think it is stupid? It is a very good feature. It may not best on every system but there are so many different components that can lead to lower performance (power supply, VRMs, memory, the CPU itself). This does not make the feature itself a bad feature, though it can make the experience of some people very different to others (as you said, it is a personal opinion).
> 
> I would guess that a motherboard with quality, solid power delivery and decent cooling would in the vast majority of cases lead to great performance.
> 
> With static OC I have got to 4.43GHz and 1.44V (using the MSI M7 AC Game Boost set to 11). I did this for benchmarking only. I get 98.2% of that performance with PBO, an undervolt and memory timings tightened and my system is only pushing 1.334V under full load. That is a great feature.


Yeah, PBO does quick spikes to 4.35 GHz with a negative voltage offset.

My system won't even post at a static 4.3 GHz at 1.4 Volts.


----------



## cowboy44mag

zila said:


> Personally, I think PBO is stupid. Just my own personal opinion of course. But I love my 2700X. As long as it's kept cool it does amazing things. Mine runs hot, as does everyone's that I've spoken to. Shrimp being the exception. He's got an amazingly cool chip on stock cooler from what I've seen. Mine can't run like his. Not even close. Mine on stock cooler goes to 90*C under an AVX load such Prime95, IBT AVX. Aida64 puts the heat on it as well. I had to dump the stock cooler. I am going to go with water cooling next. I'm preparing for summer time high ambient temps. This is one serious chip.
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t1DnvthxpnY



I have a feeling, like has been said, the vast differences people are seeing in performance and thermals are due to system set up and supporting hardware. When I built my current rig I didn't reuse anything from my previous build, it is all new hardware. I actually cleaned up my old rig, put a new power supply in it and gave it to my mom and now the most taxing thing my old rendering/ gaming rig does is play YouTube and surf the internet. 



Having everything new and building with quality parts I have had great success and my processor runs cool under most situations. I can run Prime 95 for hours and the highest spike I see is 73C on the stock cooler with an average of 70C, and I think those temperatures are really good for Prime 95 and an 8 core 16 thread processor averaging 4.166Ghz. Everyone's build of course is different, and one big limiting factor could be the actual case that is used. My case was built more for air flow than for eye candy. I've seen some of the newer cases coming out and they are tempered glass on the side panel, front panel, sometimes even the top panel. Although they look really cool you don't get airflow through glass and the small amount of airflow you can get through a small recess in in the sides where the glass meets isn't sufficient. My case is totally mesh in the front, top and most of the back (the only restriction to air flow are the filters) and I have four intake 140mm fans and 2 exhaust 140mm fans moving air constantly through my case and creating positive pressure. A high air flow rig will simply run better than a low air flow rig. 



The silicon lottery has and will always be a factor, but a total build setup is also very important. When people quote or complain about a really hot running Ryzen 2700X I always wonder what cooling support (ie case cooling and case airflow) they have. Overall I'm very happy with my rig, but if I had to do it over again I would have opted for the Crosshair Hero VII or an MSI board over the ROG Strix X470-F because I would love to have the option of adding a bclk overclock. With that said, the Strix is a quality board and I can't complain about the performance, I know if I take it outside I'm boosting all core to 4.350Ghz so its just a thermal limitation and you can't ask for much more than that. Really lucky people who have won the silicon lottery can overclock to 4.5Ghz but up to 4.35Ghz using just PBO and RAM overclocking is just impressive and you have to give AMD a lot of credit as PBO just works plain and simple.


----------



## gupsterg

zila said:


> Personally, I think PBO is stupid. Just my own personal opinion of course. But I love my 2700X. As long as it's kept cool it does amazing things. Mine runs hot, as does everyone's that I've spoken to. Shrimp being the exception. He's got an amazingly cool chip on stock cooler from what I've seen. Mine can't run like his. Not even close. Mine on stock cooler goes to 90*C under an AVX load such Prime95, IBT AVX. Aida64 puts the heat on it as well. I had to dump the stock cooler. I am going to go with water cooling next. I'm preparing for summer time high ambient temps. This is one serious chip.


Under PBO or PBO+BCLK I gain a better OC on 2 of the 3 2700X I've had, than straight up core ratio/custom PState 0.

From the experience of using all 3 I reckon CPUs with big core to core VCORE variance are easier to cool. Below spoiler has CPO_Test for each.



Spoiler




View attachment 1805 SUS 1825 SUS 1835 PGS Full.jpg




The tightest best to worst core VCORE variance CPU is my best clocker on CPU MHz and RAM MHz.


----------



## zila

My hardware is more than enough to run this puppy. My neighbor has a 470 pro and is experiencing much of the same issues I am with the X370 Pro. A Crosshair VII would probably make a big difference(maybe yes, maybe no)and is something I am looking into. So far myself and 5 other folks with 2700Xs with motherboards with strong vrms with stock coolers are seing very high temps. I am using a dual tower cooler that would cool a 9590 with ease but can't deal with the 2700X as well. Although tons better than the stock cooler. 

PBO puts out way more voltage than is necessary just to bring a chip to 4300 or so. For that kind of voltage we should be seeing a 5 gig chip. Not necessary. It should be more intelligent. It sees good resources at hand and just throws everything at the chip brute force to achieve it's overclock. That is why I think it is stupid. But like I said, it's just my own personal opinion. Just not necessary. The chip just needs real good cooling. That die holds the heat in. That being said, again, I love my chip. The power from it is incredible. I would not give her up for anything.


----------



## ShrimpBrime

Got it figured out now. PBO is max precision boost clocks and XFR Boost allows the cpu to reach speeds beyond it's factory boost states and generally only a single thread. 

Not really sure it's worth dealing with automatic overclocking. If you get a little warm the Cpu throttles? What good is that? If it throttles, you aren't cooling it well enough then. No way around that unless you fellas manually overclock, the cpu should run exactly where you want it set. If you want power savings enabled, just take windows off of performance mode and the cpu should still idle down to 2150Mhz. 

Zila, I like that kid. He states it simply @ 20:40 manually overclock to keep things consistent for his testing. smart lad.


----------



## ShrimpBrime

I really should slap this rig on the Geothermal loop and see what it does. On the air cooler, no matter the core count, it's stops any kind of stability at 4.525Ghz. Will not load windows. Can run simple non demanding games and benchmarks all evening at 4.500Ghz. I find it extremely baffling that even a v-core jump to as high as 1.6v still produces a no load issue.. Even if I use the same exact voltage at 4.5 as 4.525Ghz, it just won't load up windows. A solid wall. Can set VRM to normal high extreme, makes no difference however I get a little v-droop with anything under VRM extreme setting. Probably because it's an entry level board lol..... But still hitting the same clocks as every one else. Not sure having a better motherboard is really going to boost my particular chip in some kind of jaw dropping experience to make me spend a couple hundred bucks... my 2 cents there. 

Any one benching in the 4.5Ghz range with auto clocking on and SMT/cores disabled? 

How far have any of you guys really tested these chips?

Let's change it up a bit. Save a bit of power. At this speed it's probably still 10x faster than a Barton core thread vs thread lol.


----------



## zila

ShrimpBrime said:


> Got it figured out now. PBO is max precision boost clocks and XFR Boost allows the cpu to reach speeds beyond it's factory boost states and generally only a single thread.
> 
> Not really sure it's worth dealing with automatic overclocking. If you get a little warm the Cpu throttles? What good is that? If it throttles, you aren't cooling it well enough then. No way around that unless you fellas manually overclock, the cpu should run exactly where you want it set. If you want power savings enabled, just take windows off of performance mode and the cpu should still idle down to 2150Mhz.
> 
> Zila, I like that kid. He states it simply @ 20:40 manually overclock to keep things consistent for his testing. smart lad.


Yup, exactly. Get the slightest bit warm and down she goes. But with proper high end cooling, which is what she likes this baby will auto clock itself pretty damned well. Which is why I'm gonna up the game and go with water. This ain't no toy, this is a serious chip. Fun as all hell. I like that the chip is fighting me a bit. I like that. 

I agee. Buildzoid is on the ball.


----------



## ShrimpBrime

Zila, When I got into overclocking there where two things I used to get yelled at for. Auto overclocking and software overclocking. I liked using software for maximum overclocking, but with the Ryzen set up, I don't like the software or it doesn't like me cause I can never get it to work right. Ryzen Master will shut cores off on me. Not sure why, but always wind up with a dual core four threads. Which I wanted to turn back on and it wouldn't lol. I'd have to uninstall the app and reset cmos then install the Ryzen app again and start the OC over again. Really strange. I just wanted to run a quad core with SMT on......... any way, I ditched the software and auto overclocking idea. 

Instead I manually over clock to where I want my particular core/thread count for X clocks and set windows to Balanced mode (I'm using W7) and it throttles to save power as it should. Full load it goes to desired set X clocks all cores and threads no fluctuations and seems to help manage temps very well in this fashion. 

I can run 4.1ghz with all voltages on auto. I just set the multiplier. 4.2Ghz..... VRM to extreme cpu vcore on auto.....


----------



## constructorx

ShrimpBrime said:


> Zila, When I got into overclocking there where two things I used to get yelled at for. Auto overclocking and software overclocking.


I can get 4.45GHz with 1.44V no Problem, well over 2000 Cinebench.

I can get 4.35GHz all core boost with PBO and 1.3V 'CPU Core Voltage' (Vcore 1.334V at full load) at 61 degrees, giving a 1972 Cinebench. This is my 24/7 settings. I get solid 4.35GHz in Assasin's Creed Odyssey no matter how long I play.

PBO is not stupid, and it definitely uses a lot less voltage on my system, because I set it to use less voltage in the bios. 

It just depends on what your components can handle I suppose. The whole 'auto overclocking' thing is nonsense. Just use what is best for your kit and what gives you best results. I would put my auto settings up against most static overclocks.

4.4GHz at 1.356V:


Spoiler















CPU-Mark: 20544


Spoiler


----------



## zila

^^^^awesome, glad you're having a good experience with it^^^^^^^^^^^^^


----------



## cowboy44mag

zila said:


> My hardware is more than enough to run this puppy. My neighbor has a 470 pro and is experiencing much of the same issues I am with the X370 Pro. A Crosshair VII would probably make a big difference(maybe yes, maybe no)and is something I am looking into. So far myself and 5 other folks with 2700Xs with motherboards with strong vrms with stock coolers are seing very high temps. I am using a dual tower cooler that would cool a 9590 with ease but can't deal with the 2700X as well. Although tons better than the stock cooler.
> 
> PBO puts out way more voltage than is necessary just to bring a chip to 4300 or so. For that kind of voltage we should be seeing a 5 gig chip. Not necessary. It should be more intelligent. It sees good resources at hand and just throws everything at the chip brute force to achieve it's overclock. That is why I think it is stupid. But like I said, it's just my own personal opinion. Just not necessary. The chip just needs real good cooling. That die holds the heat in. That being said, again, I love my chip. The power from it is incredible. I would not give her up for anything.





That is the one failing I have found with PBO, on AUTO it over-volts the living snot out of the processor. First step to using PBO is to set a lower Vcore in bios. For some people having a set voltage has been rock solid and is the best approach, for others a negative offset on the Vcore has been the best way to do this and is rock solid. I think that this is largely based on what motherboard you are using. I have an Asus ROG Strix X470-F Gaming motherboard and for this board both a set value and negative offset will work, however I have had the best success with a negative offset. I have my negative offset at .11875 and with this motherboard that produces voltages that average 1.36V on full load with a few quick spikes that will hit 1.4V. That keeps the temps low and totally under control. Before I set the negative offset I was hitting 1.55V while doing Cinebench, let alone trying to run Prime 95. Now a Cinebench run usually has voltages of 1.34V and Prime 95 will have averages of 1.36V (with 1.4V spikes that only last a second or two). To effectively utilize PBO you have to either set a lower voltage or use a negative offset if you leave the Vcore on AUTO you will have one over-volted hot processor. I know I have a lot of air flow in my case, but with having Vcore maxing out at 1.36V my processor has never exceeded 73C on the stock cooler even running torture tests.


----------



## zila

cowboy44mag said:


> That is the one failing I have found with PBO, on AUTO it over-volts the living snot out of the processor. First step to using PBO is to set a lower Vcore in bios. For some people having a set voltage has been rock solid and is the best approach, for others a negative offset on the Vcore has been the best way to do this and is rock solid. I think that this is largely based on what motherboard you are using. I have an Asus ROG Strix X470-F Gaming motherboard and for this board both a set value and negative offset will work, however I have had the best success with a negative offset. I have my negative offset at .11875 and with this motherboard that produces voltages that average 1.36V on full load with a few quick spikes that will hit 1.4V. That keeps the temps low and totally under control. Before I set the negative offset I was hitting 1.55V while doing Cinebench, let alone trying to run Prime 95. Now a Cinebench run usually has voltages of 1.34V and Prime 95 will have averages of 1.36V (with 1.4V spikes that only last a second or two). To effectively utilize PBO you have to either set a lower voltage or use a negative offset if you leave the Vcore on AUTO you will have one over-volted hot processor. I know I have a lot of air flow in my case, but with having Vcore maxing out at 1.36V my processor has never exceeded 73C on the stock cooler even running torture tests.



Good info right there. Thanks for that.


----------



## ShrimpBrime

> I can get 4.45GHz with 1.44V no Problem, well over 2000 Cinebench.
> 
> I can get 4.35GHz all core boost with PBO and 1.3V 'CPU Core Voltage' (Vcore 1.334V at full load) at 61 degrees, giving a 1972 Cinebench. This is my 24/7 settings. I get solid 4.35GHz in Assasin's Creed Odyssey no matter how long I play.
> 
> PBO is not stupid, and it definitely uses a lot less voltage on my system, because I set it to use less voltage in the bios.
> 
> It just depends on what your components can handle I suppose. They whole 'auto overclocking' thing is nonsense. Just use what is best for your kit and what gives you best results. I would put my auto settings up against most static overclocks.


Oh that wasn't me that said it was stupid. I stated that I had bad luck with Ryzen Master software.... Haven't done much in the bios with PBO or XFR. I've had XFR on once or twice. Really wasn't anything impressive.

Anyways that 4450Mhz on the stock cooler is very impressive. I cannot even come close to running all the threads at that frequency and would need a significant amount more voltage.


----------



## zila

I said it was stupid. Live with it. ROFLMAO.


----------



## ShrimpBrime

When I leave things like C-states enabled with cpu v-core on auto, I also run DID 9 x 186 FID to achieve 4125Mhz, things like this happen. I watch the dang thing sit at just over half a volt for a minute and then it will jump to 1.33v and move around a lot some times 1.25v or as high as 1.406v. 

I'm not certain on the readings being legit or not yet. Seems very low to run 4100Mhz on half a volt even if the system is idle. 
However the target VDD reading is accurate and does go slightly over while I am use VRM extreme.


----------



## The Sandman

Just want to leave these here to show a PBO (PE3 +102 bclk) OC works as it should with never any lowering of freq while under load. (first 3 attachments)
On C6H you need to read CPU Core Voltage SV12.

My everyday PE3 OC is a constant 4200MHz all core under load with single/multi core to 4350MHz (lower 2 attach)
No big spikes, no crazy voltage.


Notice SV12 Vcore difference between the two OC's.
102 bclk requires a +0.03125 Offset where the straight PE3 is set to Offset, +, Auto for Vcore and LLC.


----------



## zila

@The Sandman: Custom cooling on that sucker. Even with all that heavy duty cooling you have on that thing I'm seeing temps in the 70's. 

Edit: Nice cooling solution. That kind of cooling is just what these things need. And that Crosshair VI Hero is nice board too. Nice setup indeed.


----------



## ShrimpBrime

Ok yea, The sandman has got some really nice temps. 

The only way I can run frequencies at similar speeds is by turning off SMT. Seems to be a nasty voltage hog while enabled.


----------



## zila

Yup, he's got a nice setup.


----------



## constructorx

ShrimpBrime said:


> Oh that wasn't me that said it was stupid.


Yeah I know. I was just making a general point. No problem.


----------



## constructorx

zila said:


> Yup, exactly. Get the slightest bit warm and down she goes. But with proper high end cooling, which is what she likes this baby will auto clock itself pretty damned well. Which is why I'm gonna up the game and go with water. This ain't no toy, this is a serious chip. Fun as all hell. I like that the chip is fighting me a bit. I like that.
> 
> I agee. Buildzoid is on the ball.


Generally speaking yes, of course. But it is possible to run 4.35Ghz solidly on all cores at around 55-60 degrees gaming and 70 after over an hour of Prime95 on air (NH-D15-SE-AM4). The question is if it is luck or choice of wider system components, settings or a mix of all? What is the major factor? My 24/7 settings.


----------



## ShrimpBrime

It looks like the difference is the cooling method and mother board choice.

I dony even have a PBO selection in the bios.... And Im ok with that. It wont booost past 4.2ghz while using the stock cooler.....


----------



## cowboy44mag

constructorx said:


> Generally speaking yes, of course. But it is possible to run 4.35Ghz solidly on all cores at around 55-60 degrees gaming and 70 after over an hour of Prime95 on air (NH-D15-SE-AM4). The question is if it is luck or choice of wider system components, settings or a mix of all? What is the major factor? My 24/7 settings.



Lets not forget that Noctua coolers are in a different league than normal air coolers. The NH-D15 was well known to actually be able to outperform several high end AIO water cooling solutions. Those it can't outperform it comes within a few degrees of. The biggest limiting factor for the big Noctua coolers is a sufficient case. The case of course has to be physically large enough to allow installation of the large cooler, but it also has to have adequate air flow to allow the cooler to work properly. In a high air flow larger mid or full tower case the NH-D15 is hard to beat even when compared to all in one water coolers.


----------



## zila

ShrimpBrime said:


> It looks like the difference is the cooling method and mother board choice.
> 
> I dony even have a PBO selection in the bios.... And Im ok with that. It wont booost past 4.2ghz while using the stock cooler.....


 @Shrimp: I have PBO in my bios(4024)but the latest bios(4207)actually hid PBO so you can't use it...dumb. But, PBO adds heat.............at least in my case. And heat is my current enemy. I can't believe this huge cooler with 140mm fans cranked to max and high grade thermal paste can't remove the heat off the freaking die efficiently enough and that I actually have to go to water. Sheeesh. 

My problem as of right now is heat. This chip is hot as all hell when clocked up. Mine does not like vcore. I will see just what it can do when I go to water cooling. Sandman has some serious cooling going there with that XSPC RX 360 setup. My chip goes to an all core auto clock at 60*C. The cooler the better. At about 70*C the cores begin to drop. Also, could be a motherboard thing but I dont' think I will be able to confirm til I have a better one to compare it to. But Sandmans run may be all I need. 

I must have a Crosshair VI. LMAO


----------



## constructorx

cowboy44mag said:


> Lets not forget that Noctua coolers are in a different league than normal air coolers. The NH-D15 was well known to actually be able to outperform several high end AIO water cooling solutions. Those it can't outperform it comes within a few degrees of. The biggest limiting factor for the big Noctua coolers is a sufficient case. The case of course has to be physically large enough to allow installation of the large cooler, but it also has to have adequate air flow to allow the cooler to work properly. In a high air flow larger mid or full tower case the NH-D15 is hard to beat even when compared to all in one water coolers.


I fully agree. It is a premium cooling solution and very large. There is still a lot of spare room in my case (View 71) as there are no radiators installed, and plenty of ventilation. I have always been hesitant to go with water cooling, even though they must be, by now, quite reliable.


----------



## zila

cowboy44mag said:


> Lets not forget that Noctua coolers are in a different league than normal air coolers. The NH-D15 was well known to actually be able to outperform several high end AIO water cooling solutions. Those it can't outperform it comes within a few degrees of. The biggest limiting factor for the big Noctua coolers is a sufficient case. The case of course has to be physically large enough to allow installation of the large cooler, but it also has to have adequate air flow to allow the cooler to work properly. In a high air flow larger mid or full tower case the NH-D15 is hard to beat even when compared to all in one water coolers.


That thing is a beast.


----------



## ShrimpBrime

zila said:


> @Shrimp: I have PBO in my bios(4024)but the latest bios(4207)actually hid PBO so you can't use it...dumb. But, PBO adds heat.............at least in my case. And heat is my current enemy. I can't believe this huge cooler with 140mm fans cranked to max and high grade thermal paste can't remove the heat off the freaking die efficiently enough and that I actually have to go to water. Sheeesh.
> 
> My problem as of right now is heat. This chip is hot as all hell when clocked up. Mine does not like vcore. I will see just what it can do when I go to water cooling. Sandman has some serious cooling going there with that XSPC RX 360 setup. My chip goes to an all core auto clock at 60*C. The cooler the better. At about 70*C the cores begin to drop. Also, could be a motherboard thing but I dont' think I will be able to confirm til I have a better one to compare it to. But Sandmans run may be all I need.
> 
> I must have a Crosshair VI. LMAO


Well the only thing I see different with guys with High end coolers is that they can run SMT (all threads enabled) at the max boost of 4350Mhz and top out at 4.4Ghz..... I can do the same but must remove SMT. It's a cross between a heat issue and a voltage hungry chip. 

If I'm not mistaken, if the chip is a good leaker, it will take more voltage but generally seems to clock a little better. But that was with past processors. 

Hope you do get a Crosshair VI.... But I think you need to drop some time and money on a water loop. Need anything, let me know Eddie. I have some gear in a box here. Small rads big rads, got a res and pump too. Boxed the stuff up when I moved to Geothermal cooling.

I tried to post up some special 4550Mhz clocks 4 cores no SMT. Made it into windows ONCE and it hung like a coat hanger in 5 seconds at about 1.58750v!! I'm too chicken to try passing 1.6v on the stock air cooler HAHA>


----------



## zila

@ Shrimp: Thanks pal o mine. I think I have everything I need to water cool this puppy. Dual rad setup: Coolermaster Glacer 240L in the roof expanded with XSPC RX240 V3 Front rad. I'm dry fitting all the parts now. The Coolermaster's pump is real strong so it should be no problem to move some water. Will be interesting to see how far I can get these temps down. I haven't had this much fun in a long time. I really do love this chip and I'm glad I have the spare components in stock.


----------



## The Sandman

zila said:


> @*The Sandman* : Custom cooling on that sucker. Even with all that heavy duty cooling you have on that thing I'm seeing temps in the 70's.
> 
> Edit: Nice cooling solution. That kind of cooling is just what these things need. And that Crosshair VI Hero is nice board too. Nice setup indeed.





zila said:


> @*Shrimp* : I have PBO in my bios(4024)but the latest bios(4207)actually hid PBO so you can't use it...dumb. But, PBO adds heat.............at least in my case. And heat is my current enemy. I can't believe this huge cooler with 140mm fans cranked to max and high grade thermal paste can't remove the heat off the freaking die efficiently enough and that I actually have to go to water. Sheeesh.
> 
> My problem as of right now is heat. This chip is hot as all hell when clocked up. Mine does not like vcore. I will see just what it can do when I go to water cooling. Sandman has some serious cooling going there with that XSPC RX 360 setup. My chip goes to an all core auto clock at 60*C. The cooler the better. At about 70*C the cores begin to drop. Also, could be a motherboard thing but I dont' think I will be able to confirm til I have a better one to compare it to. But Sandmans run may be all I need.
> 
> I must have a Crosshair VI. LMAO



Thanks man :thumb: My current cooling solution is left over from a FX9590 build I ran at 5117MHz 24 hr P95 stable for 2+ years (1.5v). Believe me, it took every inch of these rads when stress testing that puppy lol.

One thing I was hoping to show https://www.overclock.net/forum/27811976-post1327.html was how much temps increase when running a manual Offset voltage vs Auto, and for a mere 100MHz.
Remember on the C6H we have PE 1-4 settings (Performance Enhancer/PBO) but not the same as C7H (x470) which allows more adjustments to parameters. 1 and 2 are Asus code while 3 and 4 are the work of The Stilt. I'm able to run Auto Vcore and CPU LLC Auto on PE3 which shows IMHO. For me Auto (Vcore/LLC) is where it's at.

In case you're not aware, you could look here https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...yzen-bios-mods-how-update-bios-correctly.html for a mod Bios which will show those lost settings. Sorry haven't seen what mobo you're currently running.

The freq/voltage parameters for PE/PBO is all set during post depending on temps at that point, in case anyone was curious.


----------



## ShrimpBrime

zila said:


> @ Shrimp: Thanks pal o mine. I think I have everything I need to water cool this puppy. Dual rad setup: Coolermaster Glacer 240L in the roof expanded with XSPC RX240 V3 Front rad. I'm dry fitting all the parts now. The Coolermaster's pump is real strong so it should be no problem to move some water. Will be interesting to see how far I can get these temps down. I haven't had this much fun in a long time. I really do love this chip and I'm glad I have the spare components in stock.


Welcome Eddie. 

The thing about the temps is not the eventual load temp. It's the spike that worries me like you see with IBT. That spike is internal and is not transferred quickly through the solder and IHS plate. Those heat spikes are OC breakers. 

So been looking around trying to justify moving from air cooling. Yea the Geothermal bench cooling would suffice rather well and would be interesting to see if I could break that 4500Mhz wall I've got..... But to have an ambient loop just to run SMT enabled at the 4350mhz frequency to me is not enough justification while the processor boosts from the box to that frequency... on the stock cooler lol. 

I will be very interested in your water cooling results. Hopefully soon you'll tear down and rebuild your rig. You're making me anxious!


----------



## zila

@ The Sandman: I'm running an Asus Prime X370 Pro and it doesn't have all the options in the bios that yours has. I do have PBO activated on it and seems to work with bios 4024. I know what you mean when you say the chip uses up every bit of the rad on manual over clocking. Jeez, I now have a dual rad setup on this and it still gets warm. I'm just gonna leave it on auto for now. With the extra cooling I am seeing more stable auto clocking but nothing like what you showed on your setup. Eventually I think I will have to get a much better motherboard. 

I did subscribe to that bios thread you linked. Thank you for that. I will look into it.


----------



## cowboy44mag

I must admit that I have some buyers remorse with my ROG Strix X470-F motherboard. It lacks a lot of the features that the Crosshair Hero VII has. While I understand not giving all the bells and whistles that the CHVII has, the Strix lacks so many of them one is left wondering how and why it even got the ROG label. I was always led to believe that with Asus if it was labeled ROG it had more options and a more robust design than other boards in Asus's lineup. The smaller heat sinks on the VRMs (when compared to the Hero VII) don't really bother me as I have fans blowing directly on them, however the lack of bios options for tweaking is annoying for a "ROG" product. I keep hoping an updated bios will be released to address this, however the Strix performs well enough that I'll hold onto it at at least until the X570 boards release, then I might upgrade to one of those and sell the Strix.


----------



## umeng2002

Yeah that's my only gripe with Asus, they only really support their halo products well.


----------



## cowboy44mag

umeng2002 said:


> Yeah that's my only gripe with Asus, they only really support their halo products well.





Yea, I kind of already knew that about Asus, however I thought that their ROG line was higher up in their priorities.... I always thought the "ROG" label meant something. As stated, its not that its a bad motherboard, far from it, it just lacks bios features that an ROG board should have. If it had more bios features, not to the same extent as the Hero VII (as that has to remain their premium board), but had bios settings for BCLK, manually setting the scalar, these are things that a "ROG" product should have. It is a very good board that is handicapped by an underwhelming bios.


----------



## zila

ShrimpBrime said:


> Welcome Eddie.
> 
> The thing about the temps is not the eventual load temp. It's the spike that worries me like you see with IBT. That spike is internal and is not transferred quickly through the solder and IHS plate. Those heat spikes are OC breakers.
> 
> So been looking around trying to justify moving from air cooling. Yea the Geothermal bench cooling would suffice rather well and would be interesting to see if I could break that 4500Mhz wall I've got..... But to have an ambient loop just to run SMT enabled at the 4350mhz frequency to me is not enough justification while the processor boosts from the box to that frequency... on the stock cooler lol.
> 
> I will be very interested in your water cooling results. Hopefully soon you'll tear down and rebuild your rig. You're making me anxious!



Okay Shrimp, this is my first CB Run with the dual rad setup after burping the rads out overnight. My board doesn't have all the fancy doo dads in the bios to adjust XFR2 and PBO but PBO IS enabled on the board. With this board the chip pins to an auto clock of 4 gig and is more consistent now that it is cooler. But still this chip is a bit hot for my tastes. The heat is internal to the die and as you mentioned also those spikes seem to be internal as well. Aida64 will take this setup still north of 80*C and that's with auto settings..........Hot *****. Manually overclocking the chip in my particular case does not win me much higher scores..........only higher temps. I can get the score about 100 points higher manually but in my case it just isn't worth. This chip needs a much better board to control it. This is a very good board though. I under clocked the ram a little bit from 3200 to 3000 because I can run the sub timings tighter with less voltage and I don't have to have the SOC voltage up so high to stabilize the ram. Trying to find ways to drop voltage where ever I can to cool this ***** down. LOL

Edit: I used to think my FX-9590 was hot, well the same coolers that I am using now used to make a 9590 cold................but they don't work well on my 2700X.


----------



## constructorx

When it comes to overclocking, do users look at bios options and support first, or hardware specifications, VRMs etc?

I say this because I have noticed the board I have gone with performs excellently for OC, yet seems to have gone under the radar a little.

When selecting components I actually had power deliver and quality of power supply as paramount when pushing frequency. Combine this with great cooling and the chances of high quality overclocking is in my mind increased.bthis has been my experience.

Does anyone know of a list of recent benchmark results that show full system components including power supply?


----------



## MishelLngelo

constructorx said:


> When it comes to overclocking, do users look at bios options and support first, or hardware specifications, VRMs etc?
> 
> I say this because I have noticed the board I have gone with performs excellently for OC, yet seems to have gone under the radar a little.
> 
> When selecting components I actually had power deliver and quality of power supply as paramount when pushing frequency. Combine this with great cooling and the chances of high quality overclocking is in my mind increased.bthis has been my experience.
> 
> Does anyone know of a list of recent benchmark results that show full system components including power supply?


Lol. any hardass overclocker would look at VRM first and cooling options. That also includes number of fan and pump headers.


----------



## constructorx

MishelLngelo said:


> Lol. any hardass overclocker would look at VRM first and cooling options. That also includes number of fan and pump headers.


What is a 'hardass overclocker'?

Does one qualify by overclocking results or some BS forum meta pride?


----------



## MishelLngelo

constructorx said:


> What is a 'hardass overclocker'?
> 
> Does one qualify by overclocking results or some BS forum meta pride?


In my case it's starting from Atari but anybody with 386 and up is in the club. Good thing it doesn't take any soldering now.


----------



## constructorx

MishelLngelo said:


> In my case it's starting from Atari but anybody with 386 and up is in the club. Good thing it doesn't take any soldering now.


Nice. True tech enthusiasm.
I had C64 > Amiga > DX2/4 > Athlon (more than one) > 2600k > 2700k.
I made my systems last because I chose wisely when to upgrade and what components to include in my system.
AMD are on a CPU roll. So excited for 2019. Completely happy with my choice of components, configuration and OC results. Thankfull for the help I have received and willing to help others. No time for BS.


----------



## zila

@ Shrimpbrime: During stress testing the motherboard(Prime X370 Pro)is barely warm. Rads are cold to the touch. Reservoir is cold. VRM and SOC heatsinks are lukewarm. The chokes however are a bit hot. Eventually I'll get a better board but it's just not in the budget right now. I think this is what The Sandman was eluding to when he said it uses every bit of his rads. LOL

Edit: of course this is just stress testing for my own use to see how my particular cooling solutions are standing up. In regular everyday use it gets no where near that kind of heat works as it should and beautifully may I add. Hell of a chip.


----------



## ShrimpBrime

zila said:


> Okay Shrimp, this is my first CB Run with the dual rad setup after burping the rads out overnight. My board doesn't have all the fancy doo dads in the bios to adjust XFR2 and PBO but PBO IS enabled on the board. With this board the chip pins to an auto clock of 4 gig and is more consistent now that it is cooler. But still this chip is a bit hot for my tastes. The heat is internal to the die and as you mentioned also those spikes seem to be internal as well. Aida64 will take this setup still north of 80*C and that's with auto settings..........Hot *****. Manually overclocking the chip in my particular case does not win me much higher scores..........only higher temps. I can get the score about 100 points higher manually but in my case it just isn't worth. This chip needs a much better board to control it. This is a very good board though. I under clocked the ram a little bit from 3200 to 3000 because I can run the sub timings tighter with less voltage and I don't have to have the SOC voltage up so high to stabilize the ram. Trying to find ways to drop voltage where ever I can to cool this ***** down. LOL
> 
> Edit: I used to think my FX-9590 was hot, well the same coolers that I am using now used to make a 9590 cold................but they don't work well on my 2700X.


OH!! I did not know you had the Loop up and running!! Awesome. But the results are exactly what I've been seeing around. I've also seen some exceptions like the Sandman. You see how low he can undervolt??? Dang chip runs solid as F! 

OK Zila, I got some ideas would like to run by you. If I get a chance, I'll PM you and see what you think.


----------



## zila

I just now selected TPU II in the bios. Upon reboot to desktop the chip is now at 4100MHz automatically and I'm stressing with Aida64 right now.


----------



## rdr09

zila said:


> Okay Shrimp, this is my first CB Run with the dual rad setup after burping the rads out overnight. My board doesn't have all the fancy doo dads in the bios to adjust XFR2 and PBO but PBO IS enabled on the board. With this board the chip pins to an auto clock of 4 gig and is more consistent now that it is cooler. But still this chip is a bit hot for my tastes. The heat is internal to the die and as you mentioned also those spikes seem to be internal as well. Aida64 will take this setup still north of 80*C and that's with auto settings..........Hot *****. Manually overclocking the chip in my particular case does not win me much higher scores..........only higher temps. I can get the score about 100 points higher manually but in my case it just isn't worth. This chip needs a much better board to control it. This is a very good board though. I under clocked the ram a little bit from 3200 to 3000 because I can run the sub timings tighter with less voltage and I don't have to have the SOC voltage up so high to stabilize the ram. Trying to find ways to drop voltage where ever I can to cool this ***** down. LOL
> 
> Edit: I used to think my FX-9590 was hot, well the same coolers that I am using now used to make a 9590 cold................but they don't work well on my 2700X.


How are you setting PBO. If you go back a few pages, you'd see that others are using a negative offset. In your case, it does not seem so cos your vcore is going upwards of 1.5v. That's prolly why your cpu gets so hot.


----------



## zila

rdr09 said:


> How are you setting PBO. If you go back a few pages, you'd see that others are using a negative offset. In your case, it does not seem so cos your vcore is going upwards of 1.5v. That's prolly why your cpu gets so hot.


Thank you for that tip. When I finish this round of stress tests I'll give that a shot. I didn't see that or just wasn't paying enough attention to it.


----------



## The Sandman

ShrimpBrime said:


> I've also seen some exceptions like the Sandman. You see how low he can undervolt??? Dang chip runs solid as F!


That under volting is exactly what I was showing a few pages back. I don't consider it actually under volting (by me anyway) it's the result of this PE3 (PBO with The Stilt setting up parameters/XFR) as an Asus preset. The Vcore and CPU LLC are both set to Auto so what you see (the low Vcore under load) is Bios monitored/controlled. I've never been able to match it with a manual OC without PE3 it's crazy.

Like always not all chips can manage it, took a few months to stabilize due to AGESA constantly changing/screwing with things  
These chips remind me so much on how sensitive they are to voltage just like the ole 9590 at 5117MHz lol. I know *you* know what I mean.
Less is often times more, you know how it goes.


----------



## zila

The Sandman said:


> That under volting is exactly what I was showing a few pages back. I don't consider it actually under volting (by me anyway) it's the result of this PE3 (PBO with The Stilt setting up parameters/XFR) as an Asus preset. The Vcore and CPU LLC are both set to Auto so what you see (the low Vcore under load) is Bios monitored/controlled. I've never been able to match it with a manual OC without PE3 it's crazy.
> 
> Like always not all chips can manage it, took a few months to stabilize due to AGESA constantly changing/screwing with things
> These chips remind me so much on how sensitive they are to voltage just like the ole 9590 at 5117MHz lol. I know *you* know what I mean.
> Less is often times more, you know how it goes.



Oh yes, I understand that very well. I am working on negative offsets right now and stress testing. 


@ The Sandman: Thanks for the tips. I really appreciate it. 

@ rdr09: Thanks for steering me in the right direction, also much appreciated.


----------



## ShrimpBrime

The Sandman said:


> That under volting is exactly what I was showing a few pages back. I don't consider it actually under volting (by me anyway) it's the result of this PE3 (PBO with The Stilt setting up parameters/XFR) as an Asus preset. The Vcore and CPU LLC are both set to Auto so what you see (the low Vcore under load) is Bios monitored/controlled. I've never been able to match it with a manual OC without PE3 it's crazy.
> 
> Like always not all chips can manage it, took a few months to stabilize due to AGESA constantly changing/screwing with things
> These chips remind me so much on how sensitive they are to voltage just like the ole 9590 at 5117MHz lol. I know *you* know what I mean.
> Less is often times more, you know how it goes.


When I looked at the bios modification thread you left a link for, It look as if it was mainly/stricktly for B350 or X3xx chipsets? It was interesting to me for sure, but am wondering if I could get a mod for memory support as I lack it badly for my particular board. 

Ah yes, the old FX-9590. All of the FX chips where a blast, especially running on Dice or LN2!!


----------



## ShrimpBrime

Have any of you guys noticed with an under-volt and 2700X that the Bus clocks will drop? usually mines around 99.77 or something of the like. I tried to under-volt at only 3.8Ghz, so running that frquency at 1.2v cause the bus frequency to drop to as low as 97.2mhz. Once I bumped the voltage up closer to 1.25-1.3v it went back closer to 100mhz like it should be..... And on that note...

Is there a way I can get 100Mhz bus clocks? I'm not looking to overclock past 100Mhz per say, just to get it there or a tad over. I love how my multi says 43.5 but runs 4315Mhz instead (as an example)


----------



## zila

This is better. I didn't know before hand that you could adjust voltages thru offset while PBO was enabled. You learn something new every day. Thank you for all the help fellas.


----------



## rdr09

zila said:


> This is better. I didn't know before hand that you could adjust voltages thru offset while PBO was enabled. You learn something new every day. Thank you for all the help fellas.



Good job, zila. Not sure about the X370 Pro's vrm but the X470 heatsinks are not that beefy. Airflow aids a lot in cooling them. Maybe a dedicated fan over them might help bring any temp above 80c.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

Just for reference, this is what I am getting on a B350 Tuf gaming plus board with PBO turned on and a -.1 volt offset... This board only has PBO enabled on one bios and there is no adjustments on it, but I'm pretty happy with what I'm getting out of it... I can't get much better than 1900 with an all core OC as high as this board will let me go and then the single core suffers... so I just leave it like this.


Edit: I should probably re-run this since I've changed video cards since then... probably would get better opengl fps


----------



## constructorx

Minotaurtoo said:


> Just for reference, this is what I am getting on a B350 Tuf gaming plus board with PBO turned on and a -.1 volt offset... This board only has PBO enabled on one bios and there is no adjustments on it, but I'm pretty happy with what I'm getting out of it... I can't get much better than 1900 with an all core OC as high as this board will let me go and then the single core suffers... so I just leave it like this.
> 
> Edit: I should probably re-run this since I've changed video cards since then... probably would get better opengl fps


Good results. What is the level of improvement you see with the -.1 volt offset? What Cinebench score do you get without the offset normally?


----------



## Minotaurtoo

Bone stock I got 1854 with 3000mhz ram cas 16.... the last result also had 3200mhz cas 14 ram... the -.1 volt offset pushed me from 1871 with PBO turned on to 1906....


----------



## umeng2002

Without the offset, you start getting to hot and drawing too much power, so for sustained workloads, you see an improvement in average clocks.

Be careful with going bellow -.1 offset because your voltage at idle will be extremely low and you might not be able to post or just crash while not under heavy load.


----------



## zila

Thanks again for all the help fellas. You guys have been great. Lots of info here. This chip is not easy for an old overclocker to understand. PBO really threw me for a loop with it's massive auto voltage and heat production. But I'm learning still. You guys have steered me in the right direction.

Here we go:


----------



## umeng2002

Yeah, I'm coming from an AMD FX system, and learning to OC this with PBO is interesting to say the least, mainly because the default PBO blasts the chip with 1.55 volts in some circumstance. 

When I went to a low, constant voltage, I was unstable at idle and stable at load... now I'm back to voltage offset and haven't crashed since.


----------



## cowboy44mag

umeng2002 said:


> Yeah, I'm coming from an AMD FX system, and learning to OC this with PBO is interesting to say the least, mainly because the default PBO blasts the chip with 1.55 volts in some circumstance.
> 
> When I went to a low, constant voltage, I was unstable at idle and stable at load... now I'm back to voltage offset and haven't crashed since.



How high are you clocking to when its blasted with 1.55V? After setting my negative offset the very highest voltage I've seen is 1.4V and that was only for a second or two under Prime 95. Cinebench runs never exceed 1.36V. On Cinebench at the beginning of my run I'm clocking at 4.250Ghz all core and about 3/4 of the way though it downclocks to 4.166Ghz (when I hit 70C it begins to downclock) and on Prime 95 I boost to 4.250Ghz all core however for some reason with Prime 95 the voltage will spike to 1.4V and after a minute or so will go to 4.166Ghz with the thermal limitation. I've never run anything that will have spikes of 1.55V since I set the negative offset. Before the negative offset just launching into windows produced spikes of 1.55V which really surprised me.


----------



## zila

^^^^^^^^^exactly^^^^^^^ PBO is nuts when left to it's own.


----------



## constructorx

zila said:


> ^^^^^^^^^exactly^^^^^^^ PBO is nuts when left to it's own.


It is completely nuts when left on it's own. I think this is because it has to be stable on the lowest level of hardware, so they just ramp up the voltages. Those with higher end hardware that can run much more efficiently end up pushing a s**tload of unnecessary voltage and therefore heat.

Lowering the voltage and letting the PBO do it's thing is the best of both worlds, you get higher clocks when required, at lower voltages and you get the lower CPU frequencies at idle you would not get with a static OC. AMD have done real good with this 2700X, can't wait to see what is next up.


----------



## Bruizer

*Joined the club.*

2700X PBO enabled, no bias, -0.1 undervolt with a Thermalright True Spirit 140 Power on an ASUS ROG STRIX x470-F.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

zila said:


> Thanks again for all the help fellas. You guys have been great. Lots of info here. This chip is not easy for an old overclocker to understand. PBO really threw me for a loop with it's massive auto voltage and heat production. But I'm learning still. You guys have steered me in the right direction.
> 
> Here we go:


not bad at all... I feel like I had went with a better board when I built my first Ryzen system then I'd be seeing much better out of this chip.


----------



## ShrimpBrime

2700X 4.2Ghz No PBO. XFR disabled. Cpu v-core on auto. VRM on Auto. Cpu multi only SMT enabled. This is the best I can pull of without altering anything in my bios besides memory and cpu multi.Pretty stable, will pass IBT. Having troubles uploading a screen shot here....? (NVM got it)

Additional comment. C-states are also disabled and Windows is running in performance mode. Is good, keeps clocks nice and steady. It's running 4.2Ghz no jumpy jumpies going on around here tonight.


----------



## rdr09

ShrimpBrime said:


> 2700X 4.2Ghz No PBO. XFR disabled. Cpu v-core on auto. VRM on Auto. Cpu multi only SMT enabled. This is the best I can pull of without altering anything in my bios besides memory and cpu multi.Pretty stable, will pass IBT. Having troubles uploading a screen shot here....? (NVM got it)
> 
> Additional comment. C-states are also disabled and Windows is running in performance mode. Is good, keeps clocks nice and steady. It's running 4.2Ghz no jumpy jumpies going on around here tonight.


That's about what i get with my 2700 at 4.1. But, my ram i at 3466 cl14.


----------



## enigma7820

*to the dark side*

new AMD owner here figured I would say hi and drop a cpuz screen shot.


----------



## constructorx

enigma7820 said:


> new AMD owner here figured I would say hi and drop a cpuz screen shot.


What frequencies, voltages and settings are you running and what Cinebench scores and temps are you getting with your setup?


----------



## enigma7820

here you go i needed some time to test, 59c max with my 7+ hour test on occt. using nh-d15. Tested with 1 hour of linpack too and 20+ runs of cinebench and of course this occt screenshot and many games. 4.2ghz is possible too but i have voltage spikes to j1.525 at times to make it stable with an average vcore of 1.45v and it isn't worth it in my opinion. My board only does offset which i am sure if i bought a better board i can overclock a bit better but am satisfied since on siliconlottery website 13% of 2700x's do 4.2ghz at 1.45v, so my 1.35v for 4.1ghz is right on par with their samples as well.


----------



## Saiger0

enigma7820 said:


> here you go i needed some time to test, 59c max with my 7+ hour test on occt. using nh-d15. Tested with 1 hour of linpack too and 20+ runs of cinebench and of course this occt screenshot and many games. 4.2ghz is possible too but i have voltage spikes to j1.525 at times to make it stable with an average vcore of 1.45v and it isn't worth it in my opinion. My board only does offset which i am sure if i bought a better board i can overclock a bit better but am satisfied since on siliconlottery website 13% of 2700x's do 4.2ghz at 1.45v, so my 1.35v for 4.1ghz is right on par with their samples as well.


how did you get only 59c with a nh d15 after 7 hours of occt? I´m in the 70s after just a couple of minutes. (also with 1.35 vcore)


----------



## zila

Try CPU Linpack with AVX and use at least 75% of your ram. Then let's see what kind of heat is produced.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

enigma7820 said:


> here you go i needed some time to test, 59c max with my 7+ hour test on occt. using nh-d15. Tested with 1 hour of linpack too and 20+ runs of cinebench and of course this occt screenshot and many games. 4.2ghz is possible too but i have voltage spikes to j1.525 at times to make it stable with an average vcore of 1.45v and it isn't worth it in my opinion. My board only does offset which i am sure if i bought a better board i can overclock a bit better but am satisfied since on siliconlottery website 13% of 2700x's do 4.2ghz at 1.45v, so my 1.35v for 4.1ghz is right on par with their samples as well.


I get the best results on my tuf board by using PBO and a negative voltage offset of .1. Not sure if yours has that feature though... I get around 1900 in cinebench with that and still have the advantage of 4.3+ ghz single core boosts that helps out in normal apps and games.


----------



## CelticGamer

I'm on the fence about increasing the BCLK frequency on my 2700X. I'm just hesitant, as I understand it can effect other components such as the PCI-E, Ram, and HDD.

1. Is there any kind of data in regards to what kind of long term impact running a higher BCLK frequency has on other components, such as the GPU? I don't care much about the other components in my system as much as my GPU, and don't want to take any chances of damaging it.

2. Would a BCLK overclock of 101 or 102 be safe short term, just to benchmark a few things?


----------



## The Sandman

CelticGamer said:


> I'm on the fence about increasing the BCLK frequency on my 2700X. I'm just hesitant, as I understand it can effect other components such as the PCI-E, Ram, and HDD.
> 
> 1. Is there any kind of data in regards to what kind of long term impact running a higher BCLK frequency has on other components, such as the GPU? I don't care much about the other components in my system as much as my GPU, and don't want to take any chances of damaging it.
> 
> 2. Would a BCLK overclock of 101 or 102 be safe short term, just to benchmark a few things?


 You'll know right a way.
Usually all that happens is an SSD may not be recognized or the PC won't boot.
104 is about the upper limit and not everyone can run even a 101 bclk as it's hw dependent.

Work your way up slow. Set CPU multiplier to 37.
Bare in mind that a 102 bclk will probably require you to drop a mem strap.
Etc 100 bclk x 3466 = 3466MHz, 102 x 3466 = 3535MHz so use 102 x 3400 to get back to 3466MHz.

I'm working on this PE3 x 102 bclk, almost there...


----------



## zila

Ugh, I am so jealous. My motherboard doesn't support Bclk overclocking.


----------



## CelticGamer

Tried bumping up BCLK to 101, while dropping my RAM speed down from 3466 to 3200 to compensate.

Ended up hung at the windows loading screen right away. 

Well, at least now I know and got that off my chest LOL.

On the bright side, MSI just gave us negative offset voltage, so I was able to undervolt 0.0875V, and dropped 5 to 6 degrees off my temps, which helps PBO boost a little higher in games now.


----------



## constructorx

Sandman was 100% right calling 104 the limit. I can make 103, never 104.

BCLK 103 : 4.430GHz : 55 Degrees : CPU-Z 5582  : https://valid.x86.fr/leg0su

Apologies for poor quality tablet (screenshot of video frame).



Spoiler


----------



## cowboy44mag

CelticGamer said:


> Tried bumping up BCLK to 101, while dropping my RAM speed down from 3466 to 3200 to compensate.
> 
> Ended up hung at the windows loading screen right away.
> 
> Well, at least now I know and got that off my chest LOL.
> 
> On the bright side, MSI just gave us negative offset voltage, so I was able to undervolt 0.0875V, and dropped 5 to 6 degrees off my temps, which helps PBO boost a little higher in games now.



Got further than mine. I don't have "true" BCLK overclocking on my motherboard (Strix X470-F) but when I try going for 101 even with lowering my ram down to 3000Mhz (usually runs at 3600Mhz) it won't even post. I get the start up shut down three times and then the bios message telling me my settings won't work:doh:


As far as I understand it though BCLK is safe for most hardware, even most SSDs. I have however read where you have to be extremely careful if you have an M.2 SSD. Unfortunately for us unlucky ones who BCLK doesn't work for our best option is to use PBO, a negative offset, and try like heck to get the temps as low as possible to allow PBO to do its thing totally unrestricted. In my area we had a really bitter cold front go through so I took advantage and did some testing of my rig outside. I did notice really good boost clocks and very good Cinebench scores, however its doubtful I could keep the processor that cool inside (with a comfortable temperature) even on water cooling (well maybe a custom loop but that's not going to happen).


----------



## CelticGamer

cowboy44mag said:


> Got further than mine. I don't have "true" BCLK overclocking on my motherboard (Strix X470-F) but when I try going for 101 even with lowering my ram down to 3000Mhz (usually runs at 3600Mhz) it won't even post. I get the start up shut down three times and then the bios message telling me my settings won't work:doh:
> 
> 
> As far as I understand it though BCLK is safe for most hardware, even most SSDs. I have however read where you have to be extremely careful if you have an M.2 SSD. Unfortunately for us unlucky ones who BCLK doesn't work for our best option is to use PBO, a negative offset, and try like heck to get the temps as low as possible to allow PBO to do its thing totally unrestricted. In my area we had a really bitter cold front go through so I took advantage and did some testing of my rig outside. I did notice really good boost clocks and very good Cinebench scores, however its doubtful I could keep the processor that cool inside (with a comfortable temperature) even on water cooling (well maybe a custom loop but that's not going to happen).


Take a look at what PBO will do extremely cold temps

https://youtu.be/K0e6DXN4K2k?t=74

Must be nice seeing 4.350ghz across all cores like that.


----------



## CelticGamer

Double Post


----------



## cowboy44mag

CelticGamer said:


> Take a look at what PBO will do extremely cold temps
> 
> https://youtu.be/K0e6DXN4K2k?t=74
> 
> Must be nice seeing 4.350ghz across all cores like that.



Don't think I'll be seeing 4.35Ghz across all cores, however I am expecting to see 4.25Ghz across all cores next week, and that will be good enough for me. I have a NH-U14S and new high performance RGB 140mm fans to mount on it coming on Friday. The sound of 140mm fans running even at 100% doesn't bother me at all (in fact I like the sound, makes you know you are turning on a performance PC and not a console), so I'll set the fans in push pull to run at 100% all the time. Given the performance I'm already getting on the stock cooler I expect to see a nearly constant 4.25Ghz boost (all core) and 4.35Ghz boost when using 1-4 cores on most applications.


----------



## zila

Loved that video. Very interesting.


----------



## CelticGamer

What's interesting about that video, is that you can watch in real time, and see exactly how the frequency changes as the temperature rises. 

Under 13C- 4350mhz
18C- Drops to 4300mhz
25C- Drops to 4250mhz
36C- Drops to 4225mhz
45C- Drops to 4200mhz
52C- Drops to 4175mhz
58C- Drops to 4150mhz
63C- Drops to 4100mhz

Granted, that's just the behavior in that one game, and I'm sure it could vary differently depending on the game and the load, but it gives you a general idea of what's going on with temps and boost.


----------



## constructorx

CelticGamer said:


> Take a look at what PBO will do extremely cold temps
> 
> https://youtu.be/K0e6DXN4K2k?t=74
> 
> Must be nice seeing 4.350ghz across all cores like that.



It is possible to do this without refrigeration. I get 4.348GHz solid when gaming. Here is a video I just took with a phone (bad quality).



Spoiler


----------



## Saiger0

constructorx said:


> It is possible to do this without refrigeration. I get 4.348GHz solid when gaming. Here is a video I just took with a phone (bad quality).
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> https://youtu.be/O--pnueU9KA
> 
> 
> 
> I use an NH-D15 SE-AM4, yes it is a premium air cooler but it is in no way exotic like a fridge unit.
> 
> Here is someone else so I am not alone. I just searched YouTube:
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XB4_rF72BJY


well you´ve got a golden chip anyway  4.3ghzz at that voltage is just insane


----------



## constructorx

Saiger0 said:


> well you´ve got a golden chip anyway  4.3ghzz at that voltage is just insane


Well, maybe I have just been very fortunate then.

When I purchased (end of November 2018) I ensured that solid, clean , noise free power delivery (an RM 850x Gold) along with a solid board (VRM wise) was a priority so that I can upgrade if we get 16 cores this year. I am sure that this has helped also.


----------



## w00dstock

can any 2700x owner help me, the question is what are the temps like for a 4.2ghz stable across all cores @full load.Do you find noctua dh15 or any aio better for temps.(24/7 operation)


----------



## constructorx

w00dstock said:


> can any 2700x owner help me, the question is what are the temps like for a 4.2ghz stable across all cores @full load.Do you find noctua dh15 or any aio better for temps.(24/7 operation)


1 Hour+ of Prime95 @4.3, 69 degrees Tdie using an NH-D15 SE-AM4 (as stated above).

https://www.overclock.net/forum/10-...sion-boost-overdrive-only-4.html#post27798800


----------



## w00dstock

@constructorx can you tell me what is the power consumption for the same.Would a 650w be enough for 2700x @ 4.2 ghz + msi armor 2070 (with a little oc) or 750w would be better ?

Im stuck between x470 taichi ultimate / msi gaming ac7 / ch7.Which would be the best choice ? (bios + updates are the priority)


----------



## constructorx

w00dstock said:


> @constructorx can you tell me what is the power consumption for the same.Would a 650w be enough for 2700x @ 4.2 ghz + msi armor 2070 (with a little oc) or 750w would be better ?
> 
> Im stuck between x470 taichi ultimate / msi gaming ac7 / ch7.Which would be the best choice ? (bios + updates are the priority)



I would not tell others what to buy. I would only tell others what I decided to buy. I went for an 850W PSU and these components: 
https://www.overclock.net/forum/10-...mance-pbo-precision-boost-overdrive-only.html

Everyone has different expectations and reasons for buying, so it depends on balance what your priorities are. Get as much information as you can, look at reviews etc, get what seems right for you.


----------



## Bruizer

w00dstock said:


> @constructorx can you tell me what is the power consumption for the same.Would a 650w be enough for 2700x @ 4.2 ghz + msi armor 2070 (with a little oc) or 750w would be better ?
> 
> Im stuck between x470 taichi ultimate / msi gaming ac7 / ch7.Which would be the best choice ? (bios + updates are the priority)


I have a 650 pushing mine but it's a quality power supply (EVGA SuperNOVA G3). Don't skimp on the quality. More isn't always better. Sometimes I wonder if I should have gone higher, but I haven't had an issue yet.


----------



## Mike-EEE

w00dstock said:


> @constructorx can you tell me what is the power consumption for the same.Would a 650w be enough for 2700x @ 4.2 ghz + msi armor 2070 (with a little oc) or 750w would be better ?
> 
> Im stuck between x470 taichi ultimate / msi gaming ac7 / ch7.Which would be the best choice ? (bios + updates are the priority)


Funny you should ask this because I myself bought a watt meter yesterday to see how much exact power I am pulling from my 2700x setup when using PBO at its max. I am using a Snow Silent 650 and the fan never even doesn't kick in. Wondering how close the Snow Silent fan is to spinning up, I got the wattmeter to find out (and to make sure everything is as I understand it to be in regards to drawing power with my OC endeavors).

At full Cinebench utilization (yielding in ~1950 @ 4.28-4.31) I am hitting around 310-315 watts of draw.

FWIW I have 4 SSDs, 2 M.2 drives, a 1050ti and a GTX 660 attached to my board, along with 2 140mm Noctua fans attached to my U14s and a controller board with 7 120mms case fans connected to Molex from the Snow Silent. At idle these all draw around 125w. HTH.


----------



## constructorx

Bruizer said:


> I have a 650 pushing mine but it's a quality power supply (EVGA SuperNOVA G3). Don't skimp on the quality. More isn't always better. Sometimes I wonder if I should have gone higher, but I haven't had an issue yet.


I agree with this 100%. When I decided to buy the RM 850x I did so, not only because it was modular, but because of the quality of power it delivers and also how this can effect performance. 
I am convinced that this, at least in some part, has something to do with my 2700X PBO UV OC results.


----------



## w00dstock

Yes i agree, that is why im targeting atleast 80+ gold psu.


----------



## zila

I wonder if that's why my 2700X is so stable no matter what I do to it. Hot running yes, but stable as all heck. I'm running an HX850i 80+ Platinum.


----------



## cowboy44mag

w00dstock said:


> Yes i agree, that is why im targeting atleast 80+ gold psu.



The rating, ie 80+ gold ect... is important but make sure you check the PSU hierarchy charts posted by trusted reviewers as well. Not all PSUs are made equal and some lesser known name PSUs are marking their products 80+ and such but are pure crap and pulling that rating out of their arses. As a rule of thumb I usually always go for top end Corsair and EVGA and have never had any issues. I am currently running a EVGA Supernova 750 P2 80+ Platinum and it is more than enough even when I was running my older R9 290, which is known to draw a ton of power (now upgraded to MSI Armor RTX 2070).


----------



## lightsout

ShrimpBrime said:


> Well the only thing I see different with guys with High end coolers is that they can run SMT (all threads enabled) at the max boost of 4350Mhz and top out at 4.4Ghz..... I can do the same but must remove SMT. It's a cross between a heat issue and a voltage hungry chip.
> 
> If I'm not mistaken, if the chip is a good leaker, it will take more voltage but generally seems to clock a little better. But that was with past processors.
> 
> Hope you do get a Crosshair VI.... But I think you need to drop some time and money on a water loop. Need anything, let me know Eddie. I have some gear in a box here. Small rads big rads, got a res and pump too. Boxed the stuff up when I moved to Geothermal cooling.
> 
> I tried to post up some special 4550Mhz clocks 4 cores no SMT. Made it into windows ONCE and it hung like a coat hanger in 5 seconds at about 1.58750v!! I'm too chicken to try passing 1.6v on the stock air cooler HAHA>


I can't touch that (2600X). Mine with PBO level 2 boost to 4100, and sometimes clocks down to 4000, PBO level 3 and 4 are unstable. I also can't get past 4000 on a static OC, I have tried to get 4100 with too much voltage and it always fails. I wonder if its my board as I first had a 2600 non x that was a real dog as well.


----------



## umeng2002

Going from 10 mV of ripple to 20 mV of ripple (both excellent values) in your PSU 12V rail wouldn't affect your OC that much.


----------



## rdr09

lightsout said:


> I can't touch that (2600X). Mine with PBO level 2 boost to 4100, and sometimes clocks down to 4000, PBO level 3 and 4 are unstable. I also can't get past 4000 on a static OC, I have tried to get 4100 with too much voltage and it always fails. I wonder if its my board as I first had a 2600 non x that was a real dog as well.


Could be something other than your cpu. Could be the motherboard. My 2700 will only do 4GHz with B350F Strix, but with the X470 Pro it can do 4.1GHz easy. Have not tried any higher.


----------



## ShrimpBrime

@lightsout, it seems most of these 2600 and 2700 x processors top out statically at or near the max FXR which for the 27 is 4350mhz. Some guys higher some a little lower.
Im running a B450M-A. Its not a top end board, but for the price does just fine. 
Im a firm believer that a mix of good VRM PSU and make a difference just as much as choosing the right memory where A LOT of performance is to be had.


----------



## lightsout

ShrimpBrime said:


> @lightsout, it seems most of these 2600 and 2700 x processors top out statically at or near the max FXR which for the 27 is 4350mhz. Some guys higher some a little lower.
> Im running a B450M-A. Its not a top end board, but for the price does just fine.
> Im a firm believer that a mix of good VRM PSU and make a difference just as much as choosing the right memory where A LOT of performance is to be had.


Yeah its weird I am not getting near that, I built a rig for my daughter with a fatality B450 (we both have itx) and I am tempted to throw it in there to see if its any difference. I also have a B450 TUF, that runs a 2200g. Could try it in one of those. I know the PSU is fine, 850w EVGA, the VRM is not the greatest but not sure thats what is holding back.


----------



## ShrimpBrime

Well, from what I experienced you may try? 

@ 4.1Ghz manual or static overclock, I can leave voltages and VRMs on automatic. However....
@4.2Ghz I either have to run LLC to extreme or increase Cpu v-core past 1.406v and run between 1.425 and 1.450v seems to fair pretty well. 

I experienced my 2700X does horrible at under-volting. It prefers high voltage vs low. The processor also does not like SMT enabled with clocks higher than 4300Mhz. Not a stitch more. Gotta be a 43 multi and less than 100 bus clocks which it always is.

@ 4300+Mhz, I must disable SMT and run v-core at 1.450v-1.4785v and LLC on extreme or High either is stable. 

@4400+ Mhz I cut down to 4 cores and can maintain just around 1.5v ++ and bench all day at 4.5Ghz, pretty much any benchmark. 

But with the last configuration even say at 4.5Ghz, it runs pretty cool and doesn't seem to be a big load on the board.

@ 4525Mhz everything fails. 2 cores 1 core, 4 cores SMT on off, memory at stock, underclocked at daily clocks.... It just fails to load winders. I've tried everything except Dice or LN2.


----------



## CelticGamer

Experience with my 2700X has been just the opposite.

Mine needs 1.425V just to be "barely" stable at 4.2ghz.

On the other hand, I can under volt 0.1000V with PBO enabled, shave a good bit off my temps, let PBO do it's thing, and boost past 4.2ghz all core in gaming. Lightly CPU bound games will hit 4.35ghz on several cores. And it's stable all day every day, no matter what I throw at it.

I'm certain your chip is degrading very fast if you are frequently pushing those kind of voltages through it. I wouldn't expect it to last.

In my opinion, less voltage is better with Ryzen, at least as far as PBO/XFR2 is concerned.


----------



## constructorx

CelticGamer said:


> In my opinion, less voltage is better with Ryzen, at least as far as PBO/XFR2 is concerned.


This is my experience also, though I suppose it depends on the components in each individual system and how they work together. A quality power supply (5.7 mV ripple - RM 850x Gold), motherboard and good cooling will give the best chances of success in my opinion. After all, PBO is all about regulating voltages and frequencies automatically and extremely precisely to achieve best performance.


----------



## ShrimpBrime

I generally run 4.1ghz static and dont have to touch v-core and its happy and cool. 
The only setting I have for PBO which is actually in XFR is enable disable or automatic. It really doesnt seem to do anything except load the cores at a bunch of random clocks. At full load via stress testing it only runs 4ghz with cooling headroom. 
I actually get better performance manually clocking cores, but the chip is strong enough at stock to just turn it on and play.

I think the PBO you guys are having fun with is great though.

But you are not overclocking, the system is. And it also throttles at high loads and heat, something I have yet to experience with a manual OC.

Luv ya guys, put up some benchmarks!! 🙂,


----------



## constructorx

ShrimpBrime said:


> I generally run 4.1ghz static and dont have to touch v-core and its happy and cool.
> The only setting I have for PBO which is actually in XFR is enable disable or automatic. It really doesnt seem to do anything except load the cores at a bunch of random clocks. At full load via stress testing it only runs 4ghz with cooling headroom.
> I actually get better performance manually clocking cores, but the chip is strong enough at stock to just turn it on and play.
> 
> I think the PBO you guys are having fun with is great though.
> 
> But you are not overclocking, the system is. And it also throttles at high loads and heat, something I have yet to experience with a manual OC.
> 
> Luv ya guys, put up some benchmarks!! 🙂,


I accept what you are saying 100%. What it comes down to is performance. By that I mean overall performance of the system (CPU clocks, memory, voltages and temps). I can push 4.45GHz at 1.44V (giving way over 2000 Cinebench) but I would rather let PBO do it's work with pushing a constant 4.35GHz at *much* lower temps and voltages (via an undervolt) giving me 1972 Cinebench on my systems 24/7 everyday settings.

Since you asked to put up some benchmarks, I did so a short while back here, they are benchmarks for my 24/7 settings: https://www.overclock.net/forum/10-...mance-pbo-precision-boost-overdrive-only.html

My settings are Prime95 and memory tested.

There are lots of different configurations and benches on that thread, no point re-posting. I set the voltages to as low as 1.225V (which would load Windows but not bench). The lowest voltages I benched were 1.25V giving Cinebench 1951, Vcore 1.304 (under load), 1.256V idle. There is much more on that thread anyway for those interested.


----------



## rock14

Hi everyone! just joined the club with a Ryzen 7 2700x. coming from a skylake i5 the ryzen is a beast! 
I'd like to ask you a question though... my 2700x sits at 50 degree at idle. can i consider this a "normal" idle temp? i'm looking at temps from ryzen master and this is the rest of my pc: asus rog strix x470, cryorig h5 universal, 16gb ddr4 3200 gkill, evga rtx 2080 xc. the only things that i changed from the bios are the ram frequencies and the fan curve (used the asus bios to automaticaly set it)


----------



## bmaxa

With CPB/PBO enabled that's normal.


----------



## cowboy44mag

rock14 said:


> Hi everyone! just joined the club with a Ryzen 7 2700x. coming from a skylake i5 the ryzen is a beast!
> I'd like to ask you a question though... my 2700x sits at 50 degree at idle. can i consider this a "normal" idle temp? i'm looking at temps from ryzen master and this is the rest of my pc: asus rog strix x470, cryorig h5 universal, 16gb ddr4 3200 gkill, evga rtx 2080 xc. the only things that i changed from the bios are the ram frequencies and the fan curve (used the asus bios to automaticaly set it)





bmaxa said:


> With CPB/PBO enabled that's normal.





I wouldn't necessarily call 50C at idle "normal" with PBO enabled. I am still sitting on the stock cooler (my Nh-U14S will hopefully be here today, but more than likely won't arrive till Monday) and right now at idle I'm sitting at 33.8C. 50C at idle seems high and won't leave very much room for boosting using PBO. The most common reason for this is if your Vcore is still set to AUTO. When the Vcore is set to AUTO for some reason it really over volts the CPU (I was seeing spikes of up to 20 seconds of 1.55V when at full load I only actually need 1.36V with my CPU). The easiest way to fix this issue is to set a negative offset on your Vcore.


If you aren't using a multiplier overclock and are using PBO to boost your CPU (and have the power plan set to Balanced) at idle your looking at your cores running around 2195Mhz. If your pulling 50C with the cores at only 2195Mhz then I would estimate you can only hit 3.8 or 3.9Ghz boost (all core). With a Cryorig H5 you should be able to hit at least 4.1Ghz boost all core.


----------



## ShrimpBrime

Thank you constructorX!!! Ill have a look when I get home 🙂.

I have a few things that prevent a little better performance right now I can only stabilize 2666 memory speeds. Waiting on Asus, but they seem to support the high end boards first and foremost.


----------



## zila

I have a dual rad setup at the moment and my chips sits at 20*C but is spikey. I've watched it spike up to 30*C just sitting at the desktop. Spikey chips.


----------



## ShrimpBrime

Mine does the same thing unless I run a super low clock frequency like 3.2Ghz at 0.98v. Then it seems to be "less spikey" I suppose pretty stable in temps.

I did lower my room temps by shutting closed the vents. I was able to bring room temps down to mid 60F range (so it's tolerable to the skin) and doesn't seem to help me gain any OC beyond my max.

Will be taking a break beating on my CPU though. I saw someone mention they feel I shortened the life span of the processor, I don't want to break it before the de-lidding. If it would just stop snowing every other day, I'd have a little time in my hands. Still need to make a hold down bracket for my water block also.


----------



## lightsout

ShrimpBrime said:


> Well, from what I experienced you may try?
> 
> @ 4.1Ghz manual or static overclock, I can leave voltages and VRMs on automatic. However....
> @4.2Ghz I either have to run LLC to extreme or increase Cpu v-core past 1.406v and run between 1.425 and 1.450v seems to fair pretty well.
> 
> I experienced my 2700X does horrible at under-volting. It prefers high voltage vs low. The processor also does not like SMT enabled with clocks higher than 4300Mhz. Not a stitch more. Gotta be a 43 multi and less than 100 bus clocks which it always is.
> 
> @ 4300+Mhz, I must disable SMT and run v-core at 1.450v-1.4785v and LLC on extreme or High either is stable.
> 
> @4400+ Mhz I cut down to 4 cores and can maintain just around 1.5v ++ and bench all day at 4.5Ghz, pretty much any benchmark.
> 
> But with the last configuration even say at 4.5Ghz, it runs pretty cool and doesn't seem to be a big load on the board.
> 
> @ 4525Mhz everything fails. 2 cores 1 core, 4 cores SMT on off, memory at stock, underclocked at daily clocks.... It just fails to load winders. I've tried everything except Dice or LN2.


Yeah I have tried all of that at 4.2 and it always locks up as soon as a stress starts. I just finally gave up.


----------



## nick name

ShrimpBrime said:


> Mine does the same thing unless I run a super low clock frequency like 3.2Ghz at 0.98v. Then it seems to be "less spikey" I suppose pretty stable in temps.
> 
> I did lower my room temps by shutting closed the vents. I was able to bring room temps down to mid 60F range (so it's tolerable to the skin) and doesn't seem to help me gain any OC beyond my max.
> 
> Will be taking a break beating on my CPU though. I saw someone mention they feel I shortened the life span of the processor, I don't want to break it before the de-lidding. If it would just stop snowing every other day, I'd have a little time in my hands. Still need to make a hold down bracket for my water block also.


Have you seen the derBauer de-lid video?


----------



## rock14

cowboy44mag said:


> I wouldn't necessarily call 50C at idle "normal" with PBO enabled. I am still sitting on the stock cooler (my Nh-U14S will hopefully be here today, but more than likely won't arrive till Monday) and right now at idle I'm sitting at 33.8C. 50C at idle seems high and won't leave very much room for boosting using PBO. The most common reason for this is if your Vcore is still set to AUTO. When the Vcore is set to AUTO for some reason it really over volts the CPU (I was seeing spikes of up to 20 seconds of 1.55V when at full load I only actually need 1.36V with my CPU). The easiest way to fix this issue is to set a negative offset on your Vcore.
> 
> 
> If you aren't using a multiplier overclock and are using PBO to boost your CPU (and have the power plan set to Balanced) at idle your looking at your cores running around 2195Mhz. If your pulling 50C with the cores at only 2195Mhz then I would estimate you can only hit 3.8 or 3.9Ghz boost (all core). With a Cryorig H5 you should be able to hit at least 4.1Ghz boost all core.


Thanks for the help!
I'll try to set a negative offset and yes looking at ryzen master sometimes the cpu voltage spikes ftom 0.8 to 1.5/1.53. I changed the power plan from amd ryzen balanced to balanced (the EDC just went down from 95% to now 35/40%) and now it's maybe 10 degree lower but i can see spikes from 38 degrees to 48... 
These are the results with aida64: cpu temp max 81, vcore 1.43, max cpu clock (core #2) 4.291.


----------



## cowboy44mag

rock14 said:


> Thanks for the help!
> I'll try to set a negative offset and yes looking at ryzen master sometimes the cpu voltage spikes ftom 0.8 to 1.5/1.53. I changed the power plan from amd ryzen balanced to balanced (the EDC just went down from 95% to now 35/40%) and now it's maybe 10 degree lower but i can see spikes from 38 degrees to 48...
> These are the results with aida64: cpu temp max 81, vcore 1.43, max cpu clock (core #2) 4.291.



10C cooler is much better:thumb: I would say that you can probably optimize it a little more to get even better temps, but there is also the fact that every case is different and everyone has different case air flow/ case cooling so at this point you may be very close to "margin of error".


----------



## cowboy44mag

I just installed my new NH-U14S and custom RGB fans. I have a lot of testing and benchmarking to do with my new cooling, will be trying Performance Enhancer level 3 and level 4 now, as well as a few other things, however I'm already seeing better performance. I am now holding 4.215Ghz across all cores and my Cinebench scores are sitting in the solid 1950s. For anyone who is thinking of switching cooling but concerned about loosing the RGB awesomeness of the Prism cooler: I tried to post a video as I have the cooler fans set to a cool flow effect, but it won't upload.


----------



## rock14

cowboy44mag said:


> 10C cooler is much better:thumb: I would say that you can probably optimize it a little more to get even better temps, but there is also the fact that every case is different and everyone has different case air flow/ case cooling so at this point you may be very close to "margin of error".


Thanks! Well... it's all in a phanteks evolv atx so airflow and cooling are not the best... 
I have tried to set a -0.1 volt offset but it's not helping, temps are near 50 degrees again and the voltage is spiking over 1.54.


----------



## cowboy44mag

Just one more pic, kind of a "front view"... Will have to post updates as I push performance higher now that I have better cooling.


----------



## cowboy44mag

rock14 said:


> Thanks! Well... it's all in a phanteks evolv atx so airflow and cooling are not the best...
> I have tried to set a -0.1 volt offset but it's not helping, temps are near 50 degrees again and the voltage is spiking over 1.54.





Do you have your negative offset set in bios? If not I would try that as I believe it would be much more effective that way. I still set everything I can in bios, I'm old school that way.


----------



## rock14

cowboy44mag said:


> Do you have your negative offset set in bios? If not I would try that as I believe it would be much more effective that way. I still set everything I can in bios, I'm old school that way.


Yes all set in bios. I don't trust ryzen master... 
I set it to auto again to see if that was the reason but now i'm hitting 50c again... it's the only thing that i changed. Seems pretty strange...


----------



## ShrimpBrime

nick name said:


> ShrimpBrime said:
> 
> 
> 
> Mine does the same thing unless I run a super low clock frequency like 3.2Ghz at 0.98v. Then it seems to be "less spikey" I suppose pretty stable in temps.
> 
> I did lower my room temps by shutting closed the vents. I was able to bring room temps down to mid 60F range (so it's tolerable to the skin) and doesn't seem to help me gain any OC beyond my max.
> 
> Will be taking a break beating on my CPU though. I saw someone mention they feel I shortened the life span of the processor, I don't want to break it before the de-lidding. If it would just stop snowing every other day, I'd have a little time in my hands. Still need to make a hold down bracket for my water block also.
> 
> 
> 
> Have you seen the derBauer de-lid video?
Click to expand...

I have seen the video. Poor guy killed 2 chips before successful de-lid. 
Ive done about 15 successful soldered chips. Have a little more experience there, but yea he did a great job.
I mentioned this at Warp9 forums actually.....
4c temp drop isnt bad. From a 63c to 59c drop is very good. These temp numbers are example only and do no reflect 8auers video.

On an average through years of testing Ive seen as much as 10c temp drops with an average 100mhz OC increase statically.

This is my most recent done back in June of 2018.
What 8auer is doing now, I did 10 years ago already. This is not a new thing, he's just more sponsored popular than myself


----------



## nick name

cowboy44mag said:


> I just installed my new NH-U14S and custom RGB fans. I have a lot of testing and benchmarking to do with my new cooling, will be trying Performance Enhancer level 3 and level 4 now, as well as a few other things, however I'm already seeing better performance. I am now holding 4.215Ghz across all cores and my Cinebench scores are sitting in the solid 1950s. For anyone who is thinking of switching cooling but concerned about loosing the RGB awesomeness of the Prism cooler: I tried to post a video as I have the cooler fans set to a cool flow effect, but it won't upload.


Can you tell us what your temps go to during a Cinebench run as well as the voltage and CPU multiplier for the run? And if you can the ambient room temp?


----------



## cowboy44mag

nick name said:


> Can you tell us what your temps go to during a Cinebench run as well as the voltage and CPU multiplier for the run? And if you can the ambient room temp?



After upgrading my cooling my max temp is now 63C (most of the run I'm seeing 61C maxing to 63C at the very end of the run) and the multiplier jumps at the beginning of a run but then settles at 42.25 throughout the run. The CPU voltage bounces around a little but on average full load its 1.36V and I'll see a quick second or two spike to 1.4V and quick second or two lows of 1.32V. I'm using Thermal Grizzly thermal paste and as the pics show I have two 140mm fans (1500rpm) in a push pull on a NH-U14S, I have 6 140mm case fans which are also 140mm (all set to 1500rpm except the bottom fan that I have running at 400rpm) I have played around with the configuration of my case fans and have found the setup that provides me the best performance is 2 intake fans in the front, 2 intake fans on the top, 1 intake fan on the bottom, and 1 exhaust fan in the rear making a "super" positive pressure air flow system. My ambient room temperature is around 68F.


----------



## nick name

cowboy44mag said:


> After upgrading my cooling my max temp is now 63C (most of the run I'm seeing 61C maxing to 63C at the very end of the run) and the multiplier jumps at the beginning of a run but then settles at 42.25 throughout the run. The CPU voltage bounces around a little but on average full load its 1.36V and I'll see a quick second or two spike to 1.4V and quick second or two lows of 1.32V. I'm using Thermal Grizzly thermal paste and as the pics show I have two 140mm fans (1500rpm) in a push pull on a NH-U14S, I have 6 140mm case fans which are also 140mm (all set to 1500rpm except the bottom fan that I have running at 400rpm) I have played around with the configuration of my case fans and have found the setup that provides me the best performance is 2 intake fans in the front, 2 intake fans on the top, 1 intake fan on the bottom, and 1 exhaust fan in the rear making a "super" positive pressure air flow system. My ambient room temperature is around 68F.


Ayyy that's pretty good. Your delta T over ambient is pretty much the same as my 360 AIO.


----------



## zila

When autoclocking my 2700X on this Prime X370 Pro it does what ever it darned well pleases. Scores can be different from one run to the next. -0.100 offset with dual rad setup. I'm guessing my ambient room temp to be about 22*C.

Edit: I've got PBO in the bios but no enhancement features so it does whatever it wants.


----------



## cowboy44mag

nick name said:


> Ayyy that's pretty good. Your delta T over ambient is pretty much the same as my 360 AIO.



The Noctua heat sinks have always been impressive... Huge but impressive. Most people just use the factory fan (which is very good by the way) and put it in as is not knowing that if they added a second fan (in push pull) they could be getting an additional 2C of cooling. Add the fact that I have a lot of supporting 140mm case fans (I'm estimating give me an additional 2-4C of cooling) and I would pit my CPU cooling against most any AIO. An AIO will usually give better idle temps, at idle I'm resting at 31C, however at full load most AIOs are going to be within a degree or two of what I can get with this setup. The trade-off is while a premium AIO may give maybe 2C better max load temp I never have to worry about pump failure or in extreme circumstances system leaks.


I'm wondering how long it takes Thermal Grizzly to fully set and perform its best. I know I use to always use Arctic Silver and they claimed it took 2 weeks at 8hrs use per day for their compound to set and perform its best. I think with Arctic Silver I use to see about 1C better cooling overall after a couple weeks of operation. I know that Thermal Grizzly is supposed to be better, will be interesting to see if I can pick up an additional 2C after a couple of weeks...


----------



## zila

I like the new air coolers that are coming out too. There is supposed to be a new 280 Watt TDP air cooler coming out called The Assassin.


----------



## cowboy44mag

zila said:


> When autoclocking my 2700X on this Prime X370 Pro it does what ever it darned well pleases. Scores can be different from one run to the next. -0.100 offset with dual rad setup. I'm guessing my ambient room temp to be about 22*C.
> 
> Edit: I've got PBO in the bios but no enhancement features so it does whatever it wants.



I have the ROG Strix X470-F motherboard, probably have a little more options than you, but I would guess not by much as this bios leaves a lot to be desired for tweaking. I hear what your saying about the motherboard doing as it pleases... I tried the Performance Enhancer Level 3 today, and after a lot of trial and error got it working properly by lowering my RAM speed from 3600Mhz to 3466Mhz and had to bump up the Vcore by setting my negative offset to .1000V (a good bump in voltage for my processor). The thing is when I finally got it stable my benchmark scores were either worse than or almost equal to the scores I was getting at Level 2 with faster RAM and lower voltage. I haven't tried Level 4 yet as I'm figuring it will be an even bigger voltage jump but Level 3 was a total bust for me.


----------



## cowboy44mag

zila said:


> I like the new air coolers that are coming out too. There is supposed to be a new 280 Watt TDP air cooler coming out called The Assassin.



My favorite part of air cooling is that other than a fan failing (very rare) there isn't anything that can break or go wrong with it. I think that in all the time I've been building my custom rigs and overclocking them I've only ever had one fan "die" on me and it was very old and actually still working but making a horrible noise. On the other hand I've seen friends that have gone the water cooling route have system shutdowns and loss of performance resulting from pump failures. Just because it doesn't fry your processor doesn't mean that it works the same after overheating to the point it shuts itself off... I've seen systems experience loss of performance but will still work after a major overheating issue.


Really the only "limiting factor" to big air coolers is weight. I actually managed to crack my Sabertooth motherboard on my previous FX 8370 rig. I had a NH-D15S with 3 fans in push pull mounted on it and I'm not sure if I bumped it while cleaning or the weight and heat of having it overclocked past 5Ghz for years on end caused the crack, but it definitely cracked.


----------



## zila

I hear ya, the draw back to those big coolers is the weight and stress that might be put onto the motherboard. But they sure look nice though.


----------



## Mike-EEE

cowboy44mag said:


> After upgrading my cooling my max temp is now 63C (most of the run I'm seeing 61C maxing to 63C at the very end of the run) and the multiplier jumps at the beginning of a run but then settles at 42.25 throughout the run. The CPU voltage bounces around a little but on average full load its 1.36V and I'll see a quick second or two spike to 1.4V and quick second or two lows of 1.32V. I'm using Thermal Grizzly thermal paste and as the pics show I have two 140mm fans (1500rpm) in a push pull on a NH-U14S, I have 6 140mm case fans which are also 140mm (all set to 1500rpm except the bottom fan that I have running at 400rpm) I have played around with the configuration of my case fans and have found the setup that provides me the best performance is 2 intake fans in the front, 2 intake fans on the top, 1 intake fan on the bottom, and 1 exhaust fan in the rear making a "super" positive pressure air flow system. My ambient room temperature is around 68F.


LOL it would seem we have switched roles and preferences, @cowboy44mag! Those RGB pictures look amazeballs. Really nice work.

I too have been fighting away at this and I did go back to Thermal Grizzly, using the pea method this time with better success. I idle at 25-31 with an ambient room temperature of 70.

However, I still battle with Cinebench max temperatures. They still climb with successive runs. The first run will be around 69-70, the second will be 70-71, and the third will be 71-72. That is, if the 3rd run completes. It will usually freeze, or if not, it will on the 4th run for sure.

I am beginning to wonder if something is wrong with my chip? Why am I seeing this condition? This happens with both Ryzen and Balanced plans, if it helps.

(FWIW I have asked this same question here without much help/replies: https://www.overclock.net/forum/21-...012-experiencing-weird-cinebench-results.html)


----------



## cowboy44mag

Ok, had some time to kill today so I did some benchmarking. I haven't been able to get stable on Performance Enhancer Level 3 or Level 4, and I'm not sure why, so I just did some benchmarking with my new cooling on Level 2 (where I've been stuck for awhile). The first screenshot the ambient room temperature was at around 70F, and the second screenshot the ambient room temperature was about 60F. I'm still going to try to get stable on Level 3 and 4, but for now I'm going to adjust my LLC and see if I can get further improvement on Level 2.


----------



## nick name

cowboy44mag said:


> Ok, had some time to kill today so I did some benchmarking. I haven't been able to get stable on Performance Enhancer Level 3 or Level 4, and I'm not sure why, so I just did some benchmarking with my new cooling on Level 2 (where I've been stuck for awhile). The first screenshot the ambient room temperature was at around 70F, and the second screenshot the ambient room temperature was about 60F.


Ooof we gotta get those RAM timings sorted. That tRFC is terrible. Also, you can run HWiNFO with the Sensors window only.


----------



## cowboy44mag

nick name said:


> Ooof we gotta get those RAM timings sorted. That tRFC is terrible. Also, you can run HWiNFO with the Sensors window only.





I'm still trying to sort out the timings. My RAM kit is good but for some reason I can get higher clock speeds a lot easier than tighter timings. I have to go back and start tightening them up again, but it is a long process as I have to do one at a time, test it and see if its stable (if not loosen it and try again...) and then go on to the next one... I've tried the Ryzen RAM calculator (even with lowering my clock to 3466Mhz and 3200Mhz), but for me it was a total bust.


----------



## nick name

cowboy44mag said:


> I'm still trying to sort out the timings. My RAM kit is good but for some reason I can get higher clock speeds a lot easier than tighter timings. I have to go back and start tightening them up again, but it is a long process as I have to do one at a time, test it and see if its stable (if not loosen it and try again...) and then go on to the next one... I've tried the Ryzen RAM calculator (even with lowering my clock to 3466Mhz and 3200Mhz), but for me it was a total bust.


What DRAM voltage are you running?


----------



## cowboy44mag

nick name said:


> What DRAM voltage are you running?



1.38V


----------



## nick name

cowboy44mag said:


> 1.38V


Crank that up to 1.45V and get those timings down.


----------



## cowboy44mag

nick name said:


> Crank that up to 1.45V and get those timings down.



Is it safe to run over 1.4V long term on DDR4?


----------



## nick name

cowboy44mag said:


> Is it safe to run over 1.4V long term on DDR4?


Absolutely. And I imagine you have enough air flow in your case to keep RAM temps low.


----------



## cowboy44mag

I managed to tighten up my timings a bit. Wish I could have gotten more, but this kit likes speed and hates tight timings for some reason... I actually had to do a battery pull CMOS reset 3 times while tightening the timings. I'll have to do further testing but so far in Cinebench I'm seeing about 10 extra points.


----------



## nick name

cowboy44mag said:


> I managed to tighten up my timings a bit. Wish I could have gotten more, but this kit likes speed and hates tight timings for some reason... I actually had to do a battery pull CMOS reset 3 times while tightening the timings. I'll have to do further testing but so far in Cinebench I'm seeing about 10 extra points.


Do you have Ryzen Timing Checker installed? Let's get a screenshot of that.


----------



## cowboy44mag

nick name said:


> Do you have Ryzen Timing Checker installed? Let's get a screenshot of that.



As it sits right now these are my timings according to Ryzen Timing Checker. One thing I find a little odd is I have tCL in bios set to 15 not 16....


----------



## nick name

cowboy44mag said:


> As it sits right now these are my timings according to Ryzen Riming Checker. One thing I find a little odd is I have tCL in bios set to 15 not 16....


If you have Geardown Enabled it will usually change odd CAS timings to even.


----------



## nick name

cowboy44mag said:


> As it sits right now these are my timings according to Ryzen Riming Checker. One thing I find a little odd is I have tCL in bios set to 15 not 16....


You mentioned that the DRAM Calculator gave you some grief -- one thing you should watch out for is tRCDWR and tRCDRD in the calculator are in a different order than in some BIOS. ASUS for example. It took me a long time to realize this, but when I did it was a game changer. So for 3600 I use 14-15-14-14-28 but in the DRAM Calculator it is ordered as 14-14-15-14-28. Before I realized it I was punching them all in the order they appeared in the Calculator and that was not.good.at all.


----------



## cowboy44mag

nick name said:


> If you have Geardown Enabled it will usually change odd CAS timings to even.



It is indeed enabled, however what is strange is when I disable it my computer won't post at all and the only way to get it going again is with a battery pull CMOS reset. I will have to play with the timings in Ryzen RAM calculator again.


----------



## lightsout

ShrimpBrime said:


> I have seen the video. Poor guy killed 2 chips before successful de-lid.
> Ive done about 15 successful soldered chips. Have a little more experience there, but yea he did a great job.
> I mentioned this at Warp9 forums actually.....
> 4c temp drop isnt bad. From a 63c to 59c drop is very good. These temp numbers are example only and do no reflect 8auers video.
> 
> On an average through years of testing Ive seen as much as 10c temp drops with an average 100mhz OC increase statically.
> 
> This is my most recent done back in June of 2018.
> What 8auer is doing now, I did 10 years ago already. This is not a new thing, he's just more sponsored popular than myself


What did you do with that Phenom II? Direct die?


----------



## nick name

cowboy44mag said:


> It is indeed enabled, however what is strange is when I disable it my computer won't post at all and the only way to get it going again is with a battery pull CMOS reset. I will have to play with the timings in Ryzen RAM calculator again.


Yeah odd CAS timings aren't great on Ryzen if you're pushing even the slightest overclock.


----------



## enigma7820

Thx for the tip works great and keeps my vcore right where I had it for my manual 4.1 overclock.


----------



## enigma7820

Saiger0 said:


> enigma7820 said:
> 
> 
> 
> here you go i needed some time to test, 59c max with my 7+ hour test on occt. using nh-d15. Tested with 1 hour of linpack too and 20+ runs of cinebench and of course this occt screenshot and many games. 4.2ghz is possible too but i have voltage spikes to j1.525 at times to make it stable with an average vcore of 1.45v and it isn't worth it in my opinion. My board only does offset which i am sure if i bought a better board i can overclock a bit better but am satisfied since on siliconlottery website 13% of 2700x's do 4.2ghz at 1.45v, so my 1.35v for 4.1ghz is right on par with their samples as well.
> 
> 
> 
> how did you get only 59c with a nh d15 after 7 hours of occt? I´m in the 70s after just a couple of minutes. (also with 1.35 vcore)
Click to expand...

Really good airflow I guess. Airflow 540 5 140mm fans? Better thermal paste application? lower room temp? Maybe all reasons why.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

cowboy44mag said:


> I managed to tighten up my timings a bit. Wish I could have gotten more, but this kit likes speed and hates tight timings for some reason... I actually had to do a battery pull CMOS reset 3 times while tightening the timings. I'll have to do further testing but so far in Cinebench I'm seeing about 10 extra points.


my kit is the polar opposite... I couldn't get speed for nothing (probably motherboard related), but my timings were easily tightened... I want to get another board and try for more speed just to see...


----------



## ShrimpBrime

@lightsout yes direct die cooling always on liquid loop. Otherwise theres no point in doing a delid.


----------



## cowboy44mag

Minotaurtoo said:


> my kit is the polar opposite... I couldn't get speed for nothing (probably motherboard related), but my timings were easily tightened... I want to get another board and try for more speed just to see...



I've been having a love/ hate relationship with my board. On one end it is a good quality board that is very stable and I'm getting overall good performance out of it. On the other hand I know my other equipment can be pushed further and lack of bios options has me hamstrung where I am. I also find it strange that sometimes after making a failed adjustment I needed to do full CMOS resets by pulling the battery and other times it will do what its supposed to do with the three cycle power on/ off and your settings are crap press F1 screen. I've also found with this board that after the three cycle power down and press F1 to correct your settings I have to do a "load optimal defaults" allow to fully boot, power down and then power back up and go into bios and try again. If I don't do the load optimal defaults first everything acts really screwy.


I've entertained getting a better motherboard several times, but with Ryzen 3rd gen so close to launch now I'll hold off and if I'm still extremely annoyed with this motherboard at that time I'll get a quality X570 motherboard (this time either the Asus Hero or quality MSI). If the rumors of Ryzen 3rd gen are true with a 13% IPC gain over the 2700X I may just upgrade the processor too and either sell this motherboard and processor or make a build around it to sell. As much as I love my 2700X, a 13% IPC gain (and possibly 12 - 16 cores) would be amazing.


----------



## cowboy44mag

nick name said:


> You mentioned that the DRAM Calculator gave you some grief -- one thing you should watch out for is tRCDWR and tRCDRD in the calculator are in a different order than in some BIOS. ASUS for example. It took me a long time to realize this, but when I did it was a game changer. So for 3600 I use 14-15-14-14-28 but in the DRAM Calculator it is ordered as 14-14-15-14-28. Before I realized it I was punching them all in the order they appeared in the Calculator and that was not.good.at all.



Went back through and made sure every setting was entered properly, but Ryzen RAM calculator just doesn't work with my setup. I tried to keep the settings I know work and tighten the other ones with the RAM calculator but it won't post with those settings. I would literally have to go through each one, one by one and find where the best setting is. I will eventually do that, but I need the rig up and doing rendering/ video editing projects.


The really strange thing is I can actually clock the RAM easily past 3600Mhz, had it totally stable at 3800Mhz with default timings and 1.4V, but tightening up the timings plays hell with it. I ended up scaling back to 3600Mhz as at 3800Mhz the gain was very minimal and I wanted to work on tightening the timings.


----------



## enigma7820

Minotaurtoo said:


> enigma7820 said:
> 
> 
> 
> here you go i needed some time to test, 59c max with my 7+ hour test on occt. using nh-d15. Tested with 1 hour of linpack too and 20+ runs of cinebench and of course this occt screenshot and many games. 4.2ghz is possible too but i have voltage spikes to j1.525 at times to make it stable with an average vcore of 1.45v and it isn't worth it in my opinion. My board only does offset which i am sure if i bought a better board i can overclock a bit better but am satisfied since on siliconlottery website 13% of 2700x's do 4.2ghz at 1.45v, so my 1.35v for 4.1ghz is right on par with their samples as well.
> 
> 
> 
> I get the best results on my tuf board by using PBO and a negative voltage offset of .1. Not sure if yours has that feature though... I get around 1900 in cinebench with that and still have the advantage of 4.3+ ghz single core boosts that helps out in normal apps and games.
Click to expand...

Hey man thanks for the recommendation, I did a -.100 offset with LLC at medium, with PBO on and perfect!! Thank you I prefer this method over my static 4.1ghz overclock. Same voltages as my 4.1 overclock and I get the 4.35ghz boost on less demanding tasks. If i leave the board on defaults it gives me spikes upto 1.525 with pbo i dont like that although I'm sure amd designed it to be safe i still like vcore at around 1.4v


----------



## nick name

cowboy44mag said:


> Went back through and made sure every setting was entered properly, but Ryzen RAM calculator just doesn't work with my setup. I tried to keep the settings I know work and tighten the other ones with the RAM calculator but it won't post with those settings. I would literally have to go through each one, one by one and find where the best setting is. I will eventually do that, but I need the rig up and doing rendering/ video editing projects.
> 
> 
> The really strange thing is I can actually clock the RAM easily past 3600Mhz, had it totally stable at 3800Mhz with default timings and 1.4V, but tightening up the timings plays hell with it. I ended up scaling back to 3600Mhz as at 3800Mhz the gain was very minimal and I wanted to work on tightening the timings.


Is your kit Hynix CJR?


----------



## cowboy44mag

nick name said:


> Is your kit Hynix CJR?



I actually have Hynix A die. When I bought it I thought it was Samsung B die, by the time I realized my mistake it was too late to return. Considering it isn't "B" die I have been happy with the performance I've gotten out of it as it is only rated to be 3200Mhz 16-18-18-38. I actually ordered a CL14 kit but was sent this, unfortunately I was so excited to just start building my new rig its something that went unnoticed till I started attempting to overclock the RAM and by then it was too late to send back.


I have done some further timing adjustments:


----------



## cowboy44mag

Been trying different RAM configurations all night, and have come up with the one posted above and the one below as my best possible configurations. The one above is stressing clock speed and the one below has tighter timings. I get very similar benchmark results from both, and both are stable with 1.4V. Does anyone think that there is an advantage to one over the other?


----------



## Hwgeek

Hi all, I also happy 2700X owner .
I got small problem, I must make my PC silent !, almost Passive cooling silent bcause I cannot stand even tiny fan/pump nose (got very sensitive ears ).
What do you recommend?
I have tried Arctie Freezer 240/Antec Khuler K240 -both have very noise pump for my ears.
Al so i got Nitro+ RX 470 that I would like to make him silent too.


----------



## cowboy44mag

Hwgeek said:


> Hi all, I also happy 2700X owner .
> I got small problem, I must make my PC silent !, almost Passive cooling silent bcause I cannot stand even tiny fan/pump nose (got very sensitive ears ).
> What do you recommend?
> I have tried Arctie Freezer 240/Antec Khuler K240 -both have very noise pump for my ears.
> Al so i got Nitro+ RX 470 that I would like to make him silent too.



Generally speaking the quietest cooling solutions have always been big heat sink air coolers like the Noctua NHD-15, NH-U14S, and their variants. Noctua fans are always rated at the top of performance for both air flow and low noise. With no running pump and a large 140mm quiet Noctua fan you just really can't get any quieter than that. As for your Nitro+ RX 470, that is another beast all together. The only real way to make it quieter is to run a water block on it and then your going to have pump noise and putting a water block on a RX 470 is just way over the top wasteful when considering expense. Unfortunately the RX cards are known to use a little more voltage, and thus run hotter therefore requiring a more robust cooling solution and fans running at higher rpm, not really a lot you can do about that.


----------



## Bruizer

Hwgeek said:


> Hi all, I also happy 2700X owner .
> I got small problem, I must make my PC silent !, almost Passive cooling silent bcause I cannot stand even tiny fan/pump nose (got very sensitive ears ).
> What do you recommend?
> I have tried Arctie Freezer 240/Antec Khuler K240 -both have very noise pump for my ears.
> Al so i got Nitro+ RX 470 that I would like to make him silent too.


As has been stated, there is not much more you are going to be able to do outside of low rpm/low noise fans OR a sound dampened case. A case with sound dampening may be your best bet, though will more than likely not keep things as cool as a high airflow case.

You are going to have to make a trade-off somewhere. You may potentially have unrealistic expectations.

OR... just wear noise canceling headphones if you can't compromise.


----------



## minal

Hwgeek said:


> Hi all, I also happy 2700X owner .
> I got small problem, I must make my PC silent !, almost Passive cooling silent bcause I cannot stand even tiny fan/pump nose (got very sensitive ears ).
> What do you recommend?
> I have tried Arctie Freezer 240/Antec Khuler K240 -both have very noise pump for my ears.
> Al so i got Nitro+ RX 470 that I would like to make him silent too.


 My 2700X build is completely inaudible at idle and moderate loads. I use a Noctua NH-D15 SE-AM4 with fans around 500 RPM at idle and I use the low noise adapter. My case is a Fractal Design Define C, my PSU has a semi-passive mode and I've never heard the fan turn on, and the video card is a GT1030 with passive cooling. I can give you more details on my fans and RPMs if you like. 

The main issue is that the Define C does restrict airflow, so temperatures are a few degrees higher than they would be with higher fan RPMs and the front panel removed. But it is possible to have a 2700X build with completely silent performance at idle and moderate load, and reasonably non-irritating sound at maximum/stress load.


----------



## constructorx

minal said:


> My 2700X build is completely inaudible at idle and moderate loads. I use a Noctua NH-D15 SE-AM4 with fans around 500 RPM at idle and I use the low noise adapter. My case is a Fractal Design Define C, my PSU has a semi-passive mode and I've never heard the fan turn on, and the video card is a GT1030 with passive cooling. I can give you more details on my fans and RPMs if you like.
> 
> The main issue is that the Define C does restrict airflow, so temperatures are a few degrees higher than they would be with higher fan RPMs and the front panel removed. But it is possible to have a 2700X build with completely silent performance at idle and moderate load, and reasonably non-irritating sound at maximum/stress load.


I also have a Noctua NH-D15 SE-AM4 and have zero issues, very cool and quiet.


----------



## Hwgeek

Thank you, I am considering now to go Noctua cooler and thought about accelero xtreme iii so with those big heatsinks I can run the fan's at low RPM and also the keep using the Accelero xtreme iii when i upgrade the GPU (had Zotac Amp Extreme 1080TI it was nice).


----------



## cowboy44mag

Hwgeek said:


> Thank you, I am considering now to go Noctua cooler and thought about accelero xtreme iii so with those big heatsinks I can run the fan's at low RPM and also the keep using the Accelero xtreme iii when i upgrade the GPU (had Zotac Amp Extreme 1080TI it was nice).



Your ears may be better than mine, but the Noctua 140mm fans even at full speed are pretty inaudible. High performance low noise is Noctua's reputation with fans. I just fine tuned my Vcore and am now at 1.3V under full load. With my Nh-U14S and two 140mm fans in push pull my idle temps are 18C and under full load I'm seeing max temps so far of 59 - 61C. Doing a simple Cinebench run I only hit a max temp of 49-50C. So far very impressed with this cooler (I also used Thermal Grizzly compound). The only thing I can't figure out now, after fine tuning my RAM and Vcore, is why under fulll load I'm capped off at 4250Mhz all core. Don't get me wrong, I'm not complaining as this is great performance and all I'm using is PBO, however my temps are totally under control and I was expecting a further boost of 4350Mhz+ as long as temps were under control. I don't understand with the temps totally in check why I'm not boosting further.


----------



## Mike-EEE

cowboy44mag said:


> Your ears may be better than mine, but the Noctua 140mm fans even at full speed are pretty inaudible. High performance low noise is Noctua's reputation with fans. I just fine tuned my Vcore and am now at 1.3V under full load. With my Nh-U14S and two 140mm fans in push pull my idle temps are 18C and under full load I'm seeing max temps so far of 59 - 61C. Doing a simple Cinebench run I only hit a max temp of 49-50C. So far very impressed with this cooler (I also used Thermal Grizzly compound). The only thing I can't figure out now, after fine tuning my RAM and Vcore, is why under fulll load I'm capped off at 4250Mhz all core. Don't get me wrong, I'm not complaining as this is great performance and all I'm using is PBO, however my temps are totally under control and I was expecting a further boost of 4350Mhz+ as long as temps were under control. I don't understand with the temps totally in check why I'm not boosting further.


WOW... how on earth?! Congrats but... HOW?! LOL... I can't get my Cinebench to complete a pass with anything near 1.35 or below. It simply freezes.

However... I did notice that your Cinebench looks different from mine. I downloaded mine from the Maxon site... is there another location for it that everyone is using? I am running into a bug with my freezes, I am thinking? The files are dated from 2016.


----------



## nick name

cowboy44mag said:


> Your ears may be better than mine, but the Noctua 140mm fans even at full speed are pretty inaudible. High performance low noise is Noctua's reputation with fans. I just fine tuned my Vcore and am now at 1.3V under full load. With my Nh-U14S and two 140mm fans in push pull my idle temps are 18C and under full load I'm seeing max temps so far of 59 - 61C. Doing a simple Cinebench run I only hit a max temp of 49-50C. So far very impressed with this cooler (I also used Thermal Grizzly compound). The only thing I can't figure out now, after fine tuning my RAM and Vcore, is why under fulll load I'm capped off at 4250Mhz all core. Don't get me wrong, I'm not complaining as this is great performance and all I'm using is PBO, however my temps are totally under control and I was expecting a further boost of 4350Mhz+ as long as temps were under control. I don't understand with the temps totally in check why I'm not boosting further.


Honestly, temps have to drop a lot lower to boost past 4.250GHz. If you wanna cheat to achieve it, though, you can. Use Sensi Mi Skew to lower reported temps and the CPU will boost more.


----------



## cowboy44mag

Mike-EEE said:


> WOW... how on earth?! Congrats but... HOW?! LOL... I can't get my Cinebench to complete a pass with anything near 1.35 or below. It simply freezes.
> 
> However... I did notice that your Cinebench looks different from mine. I downloaded mine from the Maxon site... is there another location for it that everyone is using? I am running into a bug with my freezes, I am thinking? The files are dated from 2016.



My processor doesn't seem to need an awful lot of voltage, in fact I was actually over volting it more than I need to for a long time. I can actually set the Vcore even lower, however the thermal gains are minimal and I don't want to under volt the processor and have a negative effect on performance. Here is a scree shot of a typical Cinebench run most of the way through. I don't remember where I downloaded my Cinebench R15 from, it was a long time ago, but it is product version 15.0.3.8. There is a help drop down that had check for updates under it, when I check it says its the latest product, you may want to see if yours says there is an update available.


----------



## cowboy44mag

nick name said:


> Honestly, temps have to drop a lot lower to boost past 4.250GHz. If you wanna cheat to achieve it, though, you can. Use Sensi Mi Skew to lower reported temps and the CPU will boost more.



Thanks :thumb:, I'll have to look into Sensi Mi, didn't know you could do that. I'm hoping that maybe giving myself another 5C will do the trick, I know my temperatures are well within check so I have some room to play with.


----------



## constructorx

cowboy44mag said:


> My processor doesn't seem to need an awful lot of voltage, in fact I was actually over volting it more than I need to for a long time. I can actually set the Vcore even lower, however the thermal gains are minimal and I don't want to under volt the processor and have a negative effect on performance. Here is a scree shot of a typical Cinebench run most of the way through. I don't remember where I downloaded my Cinebench R15 from, it was a long time ago, but it is product version 15.0.3.8. There is a help drop down that had check for updates under it, when I check it says its the latest product, you may want to see if yours says there is an update available.


Very similar to my 2700x, Cinebench of 1972 with CPU Core Voltage set to 1.3V are my 24/7 settings.


----------



## cowboy44mag

constructorx said:


> Very similar to my 2700x, Cinebench of 1972 with CPU Core Voltage set to 1.3V are my 24/7 settings.



I actually looked up your posts on how you configured your bios and used that as a base for making adjustments to my own. The only thing that I can't figure out is why PBO isn't scaling higher than it is. I boost to 4.250 all core and maintain that throughout benchmarking, but it won't boost higher than that even though it would appear that I have thermal headroom. Because it won't boost higher than 4.250 my cap Cinebench scores fall withing the 1950-1960 range. I know that you have gotten yours to scale up to 4.350Ghz all core. It was suggested that I use Sensi Mi Skew to lower the reported thermals and achieve a higher boost. Is that something that you did? My thermals as reported by HWMonitor are topping at 50C, hitting on average 48C. If I run a long test like Prime 95 for a couple hours I cap at 61C. I think that you have similar thermals, but I can't figure out why I won't boost higher than 4.250Ghz. I will be looking into the Sensi Mi Skew when I have time to do more fine tuning, but was just wondering what you did to get higher boosts.


----------



## nick name

cowboy44mag said:


> Thanks :thumb:, I'll have to look into Sensi Mi, didn't know you could do that. I'm hoping that maybe giving myself another 5C will do the trick, I know my temperatures are well within check so I have some room to play with.


The default value is 272. Going up lowers temps. So 287 drops it about 15*C.


----------



## constructorx

cowboy44mag said:


> I actually looked up your posts on how you configured your bios and used that as a base for making adjustments to my own. The only thing that I can't figure out is why PBO isn't scaling higher than it is.


Memory to did make a difference to my results, but I am assuming you have already used RMC to tighten your timings? What is your Vcore under load?


----------



## cowboy44mag

constructorx said:


> Memory to did make a difference to my results, but I am assuming you have already used RMC to tighten your timings? What is your Vcore under load?



Just did two stress tests and my Vcore was 1.286V (CPU-Z) under full load- all core boost was constant 4250Mhz, temp peaked at 52C, ambient room temp 70F.


----------



## constructorx

cowboy44mag said:


> Just did two stress tests and my Vcore was 1.286V (CPU-Z) under full load- all core boost was constant 4250Mhz, temp peaked at 52C, ambient room temp 70F.


Take a look at this post: 
https://www.overclock.net/forum/10-...sion-boost-overdrive-only-4.html#post27799228
That is where I found that lowering my Vcore a little too low has the effect of lowering my boost slightly. You could try tiny incremental increases in Vcore until or to check if the boost increases?


----------



## Hwgeek

I got Asus Prime pro X470 and 2*4GB hynix memory @2993Mhz (Ryzen Calculator) and without PBO I get ~1675~1725 points in CB.
I just noticed something- If you set the Max Processor state @99%(Min also lower the 99%) you get X32 max multi and power draw of ~60W in CB test (vs 125W) and 1445 Points, nice for Power saver profile and silent PC.


----------



## rdr09

Hwgeek said:


> I got Asus Prime pro X470 and 2*4GB hynix memory @2993Mhz (Ryzen Calculator) and without PBO I get ~1675~1725 points in CB.
> I just noticed something- If you set the Max Processor state @99%(Min also lower the 99%) you get X32 max multi and power draw of ~60W in CB test (vs 125W) and 1445 Points, nice for Power saver profile and silent PC.


1675 score is like a 3.7GHz clock. An Underclock.


----------



## Hwgeek

Yes, around 3.8Ghz with Stock cooler, around 3.95Ghz with AIO Antec Khuler k240.

Edit: I did another round of lapping, using 400/1000/3000 wet sand papers, and got little better results(~3 degrees lower).
This it's how it looked like while new:








This after first round lapping and used like this until today:








And today I made better effort- now its smooth and no gap between Heat-pipes(Flat surface).


----------



## Mike-EEE

cowboy44mag said:


> My processor doesn't seem to need an awful lot of voltage, in fact I was actually over volting it more than I need to for a long time. I can actually set the Vcore even lower, however the thermal gains are minimal and I don't want to under volt the processor and have a negative effect on performance. Here is a scree shot of a typical Cinebench run most of the way through. I don't remember where I downloaded my Cinebench R15 from, it was a long time ago, but it is product version 15.0.3.8. There is a help drop down that had check for updates under it, when I check it says its the latest product, you may want to see if yours says there is an update available.


OK I found the discrepancy... there's an "Advanced Benchmarks" option and it appears you have that checked whereas I did not.

Also, I believe there's a fundamental limit that I am running up against in my situation, that being four sticks of DRAM vs 2. I went back to basics here and did the XMP profile 1 (2933MHz) and with 1.35 vCore HCI froze in a few minutes. I am not sure how I can get it any lower.


----------



## cowboy44mag

nick name said:


> The default value is 272. Going up lowers temps. So 287 drops it about 15*C.



I tried all night to find a way to adjust SenseMi with my motherboard, but I think its a no go. From what I have found it has to be adjusted in bios and yet again the bios of the Strix X470-F is a let down. I actually really like the motherboard, its beefy without being totally overkill and you can see the quality of the build, but it is totally hamstrung by a very lightweight bios. I don't know if they were trying to make it "idiot proof" or what but for a product that is branded ROG the bios leaves little that can be fine tuned and customized. Really had I known when I was buying I would have grabbed a Crosshair VII.


----------



## cowboy44mag

constructorx said:


> Take a look at this post:
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/10-...sion-boost-overdrive-only-4.html#post27799228
> That is where I found that lowering my Vcore a little too low has the effect of lowering my boost slightly. You could try tiny incremental increases in Vcore until or to check if the boost increases?



I'll have to play around with the voltages more. I am now using a fixed voltage of 1.3V instead of a negative offset and fixed at 1.3V I'm maxing at 1.286V under full load, strange but that may mean I need to kick it up a little and see what happens at a true 1.3V under full load.


----------



## Mike-EEE

nick name said:


> Crank that up to 1.45V and get those timings down.


FWIW this inspired me to poke around a little more.

I was able to get my vCore down to 1.35, if I pumped my SoC to 1.0375 and vDram to 1.42. I am scoring 1944 now (up from 1930-35).

Two things going against me:
1) (Mentioned already) I am using 4 sticks instead of 2.
2) I am using my machine for a Hyper-V server. Turns out when you enable Hyper-V on the CPU it takes off ~.1 of a gigahertz of the top clock speed, for whatever reason. I was getting my top clock speed at around 4.35, but now it's around ~4.28. Sometimes I'll get 4.3, though... not sure how to make it consistently do that, yet. 

The other thing that I have noticed is that it seems that Windows stores the "state" of these voltages somehow. That is, upon first setting low voltages, I will hit a blue screen, but if I continue through and load again, it will work without problem.

So with each check, I make sure that I try at least twice now.


----------



## nick name

cowboy44mag said:


> I tried all night to find a way to adjust SenseMi with my motherboard, but I think its a no go. From what I have found it has to be adjusted in bios and yet again the bios of the Strix X470-F is a let down. I actually really like the motherboard, its beefy without being totally overkill and you can see the quality of the build, but it is totally hamstrung by a very lightweight bios. I don't know if they were trying to make it "idiot proof" or what but for a product that is branded ROG the bios leaves little that can be fine tuned and customized. Really had I known when I was buying I would have grabbed a Crosshair VII.


You can use ASUS TurboV Core to do it in Windows. Here is the link. Don't be thrown off by the page showing it for X299 -- it works for X470.

https://overclocking.guide/download/asus-turbov-core-x299/


----------



## cowboy44mag

constructorx said:


> Take a look at this post:
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/10-...sion-boost-overdrive-only-4.html#post27799228
> That is where I found that lowering my Vcore a little too low has the effect of lowering my boost slightly. You could try tiny incremental increases in Vcore until or to check if the boost increases?



Ok, so I just got through going through every voltage from 1.28 to 1.5 volts and I have found that with 1.31250V my system runs the most stable. With that set in bios my voltages range from 1.297 to 1.308V under full load stress testing. I seem to be getting a little extra performance as well:thumb:


----------



## cowboy44mag

nick name said:


> You can use ASUS TurboV Core to do it in Windows. Here is the link. Don't be thrown off by the page showing it for X299 -- it works for X470.
> 
> https://overclocking.guide/download/asus-turbov-core-x299/



I downloaded the application, however it won't launch as it finds that it doesn't have the required Intel drivers, of course due to the fact that I'm not running an Intel system. I am very wary of downloading and Installing Intel drives (Intel MEI Driver) as I would think it would cause serious driver conflicts with my AMD Ryzen processor.


----------



## nick name

cowboy44mag said:


> I downloaded the application, however it won't launch as it finds that it doesn't have the required Intel drivers, of course due to the fact that I'm not running an Intel system. I am very wary of downloading and Installing Intel drives (Intel MEI Driver) as I would think it would cause serious driver conflicts with my AMD Ryzen processor.


How odd. It is the link I used for my install. I guess it doesn't work with the Strix boards?


----------



## cowboy44mag

nick name said:


> How odd. It is the link I used for my install. I guess it doesn't work with the Strix boards?





The pop up window is the message I get, when Googling it I find this webpage, however I don't see how that would help as being an AMD processor its not going to find any Intel NUC drivers or anything else. Apparently without Intel MEI drivers it just won't work, not sure how you have MEI drivers installed on your rig.


One thing I just noticed it says something about drivers on the Asus disk, did you use the enclosed driver disk for your motherboard? I really never use the enclosed disks as I go online to update all the chipset drivers to the very latest versions. I'll have to see if I can find where I put the disk that came with my motherboard.


----------



## ShrimpBrime

It's a ROG board he's got and the program is geared for that board, however I see X299 chipset and Intel everywhere for this software, I was wondering if he hot swapped the OS from an Intel system to his AMD system and that's how he has some of the required files/drivers.

EDIT:
Yes looks very Intel specific. 
(Intel(R) Management Engine Interface V10.0.0.1204 for Windows 7/8/8.1 32bit & 64bit.(WHQL)

However, AMD and Ryzen, you'd be using AI Suite III and would carry any drivers needed to run turboV if bundled with your motherboard CD software.


----------



## nick name

cowboy44mag said:


> The pop up window is the message I get, when Googling it I find this webpage, however I don't see how that would help as being an AMD processor its not going to find any Intel NUC drivers or anything else. Apparently without Intel MEI drivers it just won't work, not sure how you have MEI drivers installed on your rig.
> 
> 
> One thing I just noticed it says something about drivers on the Asus disk, did you use the enclosed driver disk for your motherboard? I really never use the enclosed disks as I go online to update all the chipset drivers to the very latest versions. I'll have to see if I can find where I put the disk that came with my motherboard.


I didn't use any discs. Just downloads from ASUS. The only thing I can think of for Intel hardware is the NIC and I've gotten my drivers for it directly from Intel.


----------



## nick name

ShrimpBrime said:


> It's a ROG board he's got and the program is geared for that board, however I see X299 chipset and Intel everywhere for this software, I was wondering if he hot swapped the OS from an Intel system to his AMD system and that's how he has some of the required files/drivers.
> 
> EDIT:
> Yes looks very Intel specific.
> (Intel(R) Management Engine Interface V10.0.0.1204 for Windows 7/8/8.1 32bit & 64bit.(WHQL)
> 
> However, AMD and Ryzen, you'd be using AI Suite III and would carry any drivers needed to run turboV if bundled with your motherboard CD software.


Negative, clean Windows install with the motherboard. 

I may have had AI Suite at some point, but I definitely have Ryzen Master.


----------



## rock14

hi all,
i'm still struggling with 2700x temps... Idle sits around 50c and it's fluctuating a lot. I use ryzen master to look at temperature and volt. Tried the asus q-fan tuning in the bios but it tuned the chassis fan (2 front 140mm phanteks and 1 rear 140mm phanteks) at some audible levels that it's driving me crazy and it's not helping a lot... Any ideas on how to tune fans and about the temperature? 
How is it possible that a lot of people says idle temps around 30/40c and mine sits 10 degree more? 
I'm close to give up...


----------



## cowboy44mag

I think I'm just going to accept I can't really do anything to adjust temps for sense mi. If I had a "better" board I would have the bios options to do so. What really bugs me is the Strix X470-F is more than capable of doing those fine adjustments but it was left out of its very lean bios options. When I bought the board I was only looking at I had great performance with my Sabertooth board so I wanted to stay with Asus, and I was looking at the hardware options, VRM cooling, ect. The board had everything I needed, I knew I would be running with great case cooling so I figured the Crosshair VII was a little overkill and I could again go for the "second to the top" option and still have all the options of the top options (like I did with my Sabertooth board). Hardware wise there's nothing to complain about with the Stirx, bios wise it is a let down. It just isn't deserving of the "ROG" label with this light of a bios.


On a better front, I've found a buyer for my current RAM so in a week or two I'll be upgrading to Samsung "B" die. While my current RAM is by no means bad, the Samsung B die will allow for tighter timings and better overall performance for all the rendering and video editing I do. Saying I'm already getting Cinebench scores of 1945 with my current RAM kit I can't wait to see how much I can push out of Samsung B die.


----------



## cowboy44mag

rock14 said:


> hi all,
> i'm still struggling with 2700x temps... Idle sits around 50c and it's fluctuating a lot. I use ryzen master to look at temperature and volt. Tried the asus q-fan tuning in the bios but it tuned the chassis fan (2 front 140mm phanteks and 1 rear 140mm phanteks) at some audible levels that it's driving me crazy and it's not helping a lot... Any ideas on how to tune fans and about the temperature?
> How is it possible that a lot of people says idle temps around 30/40c and mine sits 10 degree more?
> I'm close to give up...



I would start with taking your Cryorig H5 off, cleaning everything with 100% rubbing alcohol, ensure your processor and heat sink are perfectly flat (if not you may have to lap them), and reapply a good quality thermal compound. Even with when I was running the stock Prism cooler my idle temps were around 25C. With a Cryorig H5 you should be seeing idle temps of 30C or less. There are a lot of other factors too of course such as case cooling, however you should be seeing better temps and its more than likely a bad mount or perhaps an uneven surface (either on your processor or heat sink).


----------



## The Sandman

cowboy44mag said:


> I downloaded the application, however it won't launch as it finds that it doesn't have the required Intel drivers, of course due to the fact that I'm not running an Intel system. I am very wary of downloading and Installing Intel drives (Intel MEI Driver) as I would think it would cause serious driver conflicts with my AMD Ryzen processor.


 Agreed, that is odd. 

I dl'd it and it works fine even on my C6H (x370).


----------



## rock14

cowboy44mag said:


> I would start with taking your Cryorig H5 off, cleaning everything with 100% rubbing alcohol, ensure your processor and heat sink are perfectly flat (if not you may have to lap them), and reapply a good quality thermal compound. Even with when I was running the stock Prism cooler my idle temps were around 25C. With a Cryorig H5 you should be seeing idle temps of 30C or less. There are a lot of other factors too of course such as case cooling, however you should be seeing better temps and its more than likely a bad mount or perhaps an uneven surface (either on your processor or heat sink).


Thanks! I have cleaned it already 2 times and applied thermal paste evenly on all the cpu surface this time. I'm pretty sure the h5 is mounted properly. 
Room temp is around 20/24 C. The next time i'm going to touch the h5 will be for mount the amd cooler to try if temps are better (next week maybe...). Sorry but i'm not going to lap the cpu...


----------



## constructorx

cowboy44mag said:


> Ok, so I just got through going through every voltage from 1.28 to 1.5 volts and I have found that with 1.31250V my system runs the most stable. With that set in bios my voltages range from 1.297 to 1.308V under full load stress testing. I seem to be getting a little extra performance as well:thumb:


That's great. I thought that you may get slightly better results using just a little tiny bit more voltage.


----------



## cowboy44mag

rock14 said:


> Thanks! I have cleaned it already 2 times and applied thermal paste evenly on all the cpu surface this time. I'm pretty sure the h5 is mounted properly.
> Room temp is around 20/24 C. The next time i'm going to touch the h5 will be for mount the amd cooler to try if temps are better (next week maybe...). Sorry but i'm not going to lap the cpu...






You would only have to lap the cpu if its not perfectly flat, which it may be. If you have to take off your heat sink again (as you said to try the stock cooler) then it would be a good idea to remove the processor, find a perfectly flat surface (ie a table you know is flat) and try the "spin test". If the processor doesn't spin then your fine, however if the processor spins like a top then there is a defect, its not totally flat and in that rare instance you may then want to lap the processor to make it perfectly flat.


----------



## cowboy44mag

The Sandman said:


> Agreed, that is odd.
> 
> I dl'd it and it works fine even on my C6H (x370).



I don't know why it won't launch on mine, but keeps telling me I need the MEI Driver... Very strange.. Would you recommend trying to install the Intel MEI Driver?


Update: was just looking through replies and found someone talking about Asus AI Suite 3. I never installed the AI Suite, that could be why I can't launch Turbo Vcore....


----------



## nick name

cowboy44mag said:


> I don't know why it won't launch on mine, but keeps telling me I need the MEI Driver... Very strange.. Would you recommend trying to install the Intel MEI Driver?


Trying installing AI Suite and then TurboV Core. I'd say just AI Suite, but I don't think it has the capability of adjusting Sense Mi. Also, it's way more than you'd need. 

I can't really think of what is on my system that may have installed the MEI driver and the only Intel hardware I have is the NIC.

Edit:
I don't think I ever installed AI Suite with this instance of Windows. I had it previously with my old Prime board, but I don't think I installed it again after switching to the Crosshair and re-installing Windows.

Edit 2:
I may have used Intel's software that scans your PC to find Intel hardware and whether that hardware's drivers are current. Perhaps that uses MEI.


----------



## The Sandman

cowboy44mag said:


> I don't know why it won't launch on mine, but keeps telling me I need the MEI Driver... Very strange.. Would you recommend trying to install the Intel MEI Driver?
> 
> 
> Update: was just looking through replies and found someone talking about Asus AI Suite 3. I never installed the AI Suite, that could be why I can't launch Turbo Vcore....


No I would NOT recommend installing MEI.

I've also never installed AI Suite on this NVME.
The C6H does have Intel Network Adapter but uses a MS driver. I'm guessing you've already tried re-downloading.


----------



## cowboy44mag

The Sandman said:


> No I would NOT recommend installing MEI.
> 
> I've also never installed AI Suite on this NVME.
> The C6H does have Intel Network Adapter but uses a MS driver. I'm guessing you've already tried re-downloading.



Yea, I've tried re-downloading. I don't understand why it won't run, but I guess I'll just chalk it up to yet one more thing that the Strix board can't do. At this point I'll just wait till I get the Samsung B die RAM and see what that does for me. Would be nice to adjust Sense MI because I have thermal headroom to boost higher, but its hard to really complain when your getting Cinebench scores of 1945 with Hynix A die RAM.


----------



## nick name

cowboy44mag said:


> Yea, I've tried re-downloading. I don't understand why it won't run, but I guess I'll just chalk it up to yet one more thing that the Strix board can't do. At this point I'll just wait till I get the Samsung B die RAM and see what that does for me. Would be nice to adjust Sense MI because I have thermal headroom to boost higher, but its hard to really complain when your getting Cinebench scores of 1945 with Hynix A die RAM.


What do you have your Performance Bias set to in BIOS?


----------



## cowboy44mag

nick name said:


> What do you have your Performance Bias set to in BIOS?



I think that is set to AUTO if I'm not mistaken. I'll have to check next time I'm in BIOS as I've tried tinkering with a lot of settings, but I think that one is still set to AUTO.


----------



## nick name

cowboy44mag said:


> I think that is set to AUTO if I'm not mistaken. I'll have to check next time I'm in BIOS as I've tried tinkering with a lot of settings, but I think that one is still set to AUTO.


Definitely set it to something. It optimizes the CPU cache and will increase your Cinebench scores.


----------



## cowboy44mag

nick name said:


> Definitely set it to something. It optimizes the CPU cache and will increase your Cinebench scores.



Any idea of what the best setting to have it on is? I would assume CB15 will increase the Cinebench scores, however sometimes high Cinebench scores and real world performance aren't exactly equal. What setting gives the best overall real world performance boost?


----------



## nick name

cowboy44mag said:


> Any idea of what the best setting to have it on is? I would assume CB15 will increase the Cinebench scores, however sometimes high Cinebench scores and real world performance aren't exactly equal. What setting gives the best overall real world performance boost?


Any of them will be better than none at all. I think the Geekbench one might do a little better than the Cinebench one, however. Even in Cinebench.


----------



## rul3s

Hi guys!
One question, is it possible to overclock CPU by multiplier (not PBO or XFR boost) and still having Cool and Quiet?

On my 2600 + MSI x470 Carbon, when I set 40x multiplier, stops doing Cool And Quiet, tried with auto voltage, offset and fixet, but same behaviour, voltage and multiplier not changing. Windows power plan tried balanced and also ryzen, but same thing.

I want to overclock my 2600 to 4.0ghz on all cores and still having cool and quiet, is this possible?

Thanks!

P.D: I understand that 2600 is the same as 2700 on this behaviour.


----------



## Ipak

x470 asus prime pro here. I have changed only voltage (by offset), and multiplier, cores downclock in system idle as expected after setting minimum power state to 10% or lower in power plan.


----------



## Mike-EEE

Mike-EEE said:


> FWIW this inspired me to poke around a little more.
> 
> Two things going against me:
> 2) I am using my machine for a Hyper-V server. Turns out when you enable Hyper-V on the CPU it takes off ~.1 of a gigahertz of the top clock speed, for whatever reason. I was getting my top clock speed at around 4.35, but now it's around ~4.28. Sometimes I'll get 4.3, though... not sure how to make it consistently do that, yet.


FWIW this was due to Ryzen Balanced Power Plan and not Virtualization. Virtualization is still enabled on my CPU but I installed Windows 10 from scratch and I am back to 4.35 boost clock again solidly. The only thing I can think of is that I have not installed the Ryzen chipset and have the power plan still set to the default Windows Balanced power plan.

If anyone has any additional context/information between the two and which is preferred I would be interested in hearing it. It would seem the one that gets me to 4.35 without having to install anything else wins.


----------



## rdr09

Mike-EEE said:


> FWIW this was due to Ryzen Balanced Power Plan and not Virtualization. Virtualization is still enabled on my CPU but I installed Windows 10 from scratch and I am back to 4.35 boost clock again solidly. The only thing I can think of is that I have not installed the Ryzen chipset and have the power plan still set to the default Windows Balanced power plan.
> 
> If anyone has any additional context/information between the two and which is preferred I would be interested in hearing it. It would seem the one that gets me to 4.35 without having to install anything else wins.


Glad you figured it out. I ran my system fine without installing the AMD chipset (and Ryzen Master of course) without issues. Recent BIOS update recommended the chipset driver be present so i installed it along with RM. RM power plan is present but i use Windows power plan since it gave better benching results and i assume better for gaming as well. Minimum Processor State is set to 25%.


----------



## rul3s

Ipak said:


> x470 asus prime pro here. I have changed only voltage (by offset), and multiplier, cores downclock in system idle as expected after setting minimum power state to 10% or lower in power plan.


I think that on MSI there is a problem/bug that doesnt downclock/downvolt when overclocking by multiplier...


----------



## Bruizer

According to the ASUS website for my motherboard (ASUS ROG Strix x470-F), there is a new AMD chipset driver. 18.50.06 posted on Jan 23. However, AMD's website still has 18.10.1810 as the latest (Oct 26).

Does anybody know anything about these new chipset drivers?


----------



## nick name

Bruizer said:


> According to the ASUS website for my motherboard (ASUS ROG Strix x470-F), there is a new AMD chipset driver. 18.50.06 posted on Jan 23. However, AMD's website still has 18.10.1810 as the latest (Oct 26).
> 
> Does anybody know anything about these new chipset drivers?


Manufacturers always seem to be behind AMD with their chipset drivers. What's new to ASUS is probably not the latest from AMD.


----------



## kazablanka

Bruizer said:


> According to the ASUS website for my motherboard (ASUS ROG Strix x470-F), there is a new AMD chipset driver. 18.50.06 posted on Jan 23. However, AMD's website still has 18.10.1810 as the latest (Oct 26).
> 
> Does anybody know anything about these new chipset drivers?


I have install asus drives and solved some issues i had, give them a try ,no problems until now. Maybe they are edited by asus


----------



## lightsout

So my 2600x does no better than 4ghz no matter what I do, I have thrown stupid amounts of voltage at it to no avail, I always lock up at x41 or above, I can get into windows but cinibench freezes instantly. Does anyone have a chip this bad or am I just a noob?

Anything above Level 2 for PBO is unstable (which results in a x41 all core load) and a static OC at x41 at any voltage is also unstable. Specs are in my sig, 
I have bumped ram voltage up, didn't help. 
I have tried with ram at slow speed (2400) and just oc the cpu)
I have tried voltage from 1.3 to 1.5 to no avail.

Is there something I am missing or is my chip just weak?

I know this is the R7 thread but the R5 thread gets no activity.


----------



## cowboy44mag

constructorx said:


> Memory to did make a difference to my results, but I am assuming you have already used RMC to tighten your timings? What is your Vcore under load?



I ordered 3200Mhz 14CL Samsung B die RAM that is coming tomorrow. I just couldn't get the performance and stability I needed from the Hynix A die kit I was running. I know that you said you used Ryzen calculator and fast settings, but what clock speed were you using? I know a lot of people with 3200Mhz are running it at 3466Mhz and tighter timings, did you go that route or use 3200Mhz and fast timings?


----------



## zack_orner

Also interested as my 3200 cl14 will be here friday.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## ShrimpBrime

lightsout said:


> So my 2600x does no better than 4ghz no matter what I do, I have thrown stupid amounts of voltage at it to no avail, I always lock up at x41 or above, I can get into windows but cinibench freezes instantly. Does anyone have a chip this bad or am I just a noob?
> 
> Anything above Level 2 for PBO is unstable (which results in a x41 all core load) and a static OC at x41 at any voltage is also unstable. Specs are in my sig,
> I have bumped ram voltage up, didn't help.
> I have tried with ram at slow speed (2400) and just oc the cpu)
> I have tried voltage from 1.3 to 1.5 to no avail.
> 
> Is there something I am missing or is my chip just weak?
> 
> I know this is the R7 thread but the R5 thread gets no activity.


Turn off SMT and try 4.1Ghz. I have the same issue at 4350Mhz and up, Dang thing locks up. I disable the SMT and she stables out pretty nicely. Plus you gain a little extra IPC per core this way. Unless you need all 16 threads.... NVM. For testing purposes, I'd love to see your results with SMT disabled vs enabled.


----------



## lightsout

ShrimpBrime said:


> Turn off SMT and try 4.1Ghz. I have the same issue at 4350Mhz and up, Dang thing locks up. I disable the SMT and she stables out pretty nicely. Plus you gain a little extra IPC per core this way. Unless you need all 16 threads.... NVM. For testing purposes, I'd love to see your results with SMT disabled vs enabled.


I might do it to mess around but not interested in permanently disabling one of the key features of the chip. That would suck.


----------



## Bruizer

lightsout said:


> So my 2600x does no better than 4ghz no matter what I do, I have thrown stupid amounts of voltage at it to no avail, I always lock up at x41 or above, I can get into windows but cinibench freezes instantly. Does anyone have a chip this bad or am I just a noob?
> 
> Anything above Level 2 for PBO is unstable (which results in a x41 all core load) and a static OC at x41 at any voltage is also unstable. Specs are in my sig,
> I have bumped ram voltage up, didn't help.
> I have tried with ram at slow speed (2400) and just oc the cpu)
> I have tried voltage from 1.3 to 1.5 to no avail.
> 
> Is there something I am missing or is my chip just weak?
> 
> I know this is the R7 thread but the R5 thread gets no activity.


Recommendation: Don't use anything above PE2 (I'm assuming that's what you are referring to with Level 2). Then, leave the vcore to auto and try applying a -0.05 offset and work down to -0.1 offset.

Also, I've had weird behavior with cinebench before where things appear to freeze, but if I wait they unfreeze and the test is done. (Only happens though when I switch priority to real time).


----------



## lightsout

Bruizer said:


> Recommendation: Don't use anything above PE2 (I'm assuming that's what you are referring to with Level 2). Then, leave the vcore to auto and try applying a -0.05 offset and work down to -0.1 offset.
> 
> Also, I've had weird behavior with cinebench before where things appear to freeze, but if I wait they unfreeze and the test is done. (Only happens though when I switch priority to real time).


Yeah PE2, its been a while since I messed with it. But I am already running PE2? Applying a negative offset is not going to make the clocks go up? PE2 gives me an all core clock of x40.


----------



## rock14

cowboy44mag said:


> You would only have to lap the cpu if its not perfectly flat, which it may be. If you have to take off your heat sink again (as you said to try the stock cooler) then it would be a good idea to remove the processor, find a perfectly flat surface (ie a table you know is flat) and try the "spin test". If the processor doesn't spin then your fine, however if the processor spins like a top then there is a defect, its not totally flat and in that rare instance you may then want to lap the processor to make it perfectly flat.


Back with some other tests. Changed the cooler from the cryorig H5 back to the AMD wraith prism. Tried the spin test and the cpu didn't spin. 
Now with the AMD cooler the idle temperature is up 5/10C and the max temp under stress with aida64 is 88C (80C with the H5) . I just recived the noctua nt-h2 thermal paste, i'll give it a try with the H5 at this point considering that the AMD cooler didn't solve the problem. 
Maybe a 240/280 AIO will be the next step and than i give up...


----------



## cowboy44mag

zack_orner said:


> Also interested as my 3200 cl14 will be here friday.
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk



Just got my RAM today, paid for rush shipping and didn't get rush shipping... Anyway, I set up my RAM at 3200Mhz using the Ryzen DRAM calculator fast settings and have seen a good boost in performance. I can't really give "normal" numbers right now as my mother in law is visiting so the freaking house is at 85F, however even with the heat jacked up beyond reason before the new RAM in Cinebench I was stuck at 1895, after the new B die I am hitting a very consistent 1935. I tried for 3466Mhz fast timings, but I keep getting blue screens so I have to tweak the 3466Mhz setting when I have more time to do so. Even without hitting 3466Mhz a 40 point increase @ 3200Mhz fast timings is a really nice bump in performance. Come Monday I'll be able to do better testing when the house is at a normal 70F...


----------



## nick name

cowboy44mag said:


> Just got my RAM today, paid for rush shipping and didn't get rush shipping... Anyway, I set up my RAM at 3200Mhz using the Ryzen DRAM calculator fast settings and have seen a good boost in performance. I can't really give "normal" numbers right now as my mother in law is visiting so the freaking house is at 85F, however even with the heat jacked up beyond reason before the new RAM in Cinebench I was stuck at 1895, after the new B die I am hitting a very consistent 1935. I tried for 3466Mhz fast timings, but I keep getting blue screens so I have to tweak the 3466Mhz setting when I have more time to do so. Even without hitting 3466Mhz a 40 point increase @ 3200Mhz fast timings is a really nice bump in performance. Come Monday I'll be able to do better testing when the house is at a normal 70F...


There are several folks running 1.5V daily on their b-die so I would say try more voltage to get more stability.


----------



## cowboy44mag

nick name said:


> There are several folks running 1.5V daily on their b-die so I would say try more voltage to get more stability.



I still have to do some stability testing to see if my 3466Mhz overclock is totally stable, but from the benchmarks I've done so far the performance gain from 3200Mhz fast timings to 3466Mhz fast timings isn't very impressive. In Cinebench I'm getting only an addition 2 - 5 points with 3466Mhz over 3200Mhz and considering the healthy bump in voltage needed to get to 3466Mhz stable the trade off is negligible. I still have to do some stability testing, but has anyone else had the same results? Should I be seeing better improvement from 3200 to 3466Mhz?


----------



## zack_orner

Thank you should have mine in couple hrs if I don't get the same luck with rush shipping. Then we can compare results.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Bruizer

lightsout said:


> Yeah PE2, its been a while since I messed with it. But I am already running PE2? Applying a negative offset is not going to make the clocks go up? PE2 gives me an all core clock of x40.


I can only speak for my 2700X. But for me, running the negative offset lowered my temps and improved my boost clocks. PBO, PE2, etc. all tend to overvolt beyond what you need. Which means more heat. So, lower the voltage which lowers the thermals. Which means...less throttling, more boosting while improving stability (assuming you don't offset the voltage negatively too much).


----------



## rdr09

cowboy44mag said:


> Just got my RAM today, paid for rush shipping and didn't get rush shipping... Anyway, I set up my RAM at 3200Mhz using the Ryzen DRAM calculator fast settings and have seen a good boost in performance. I can't really give "normal" numbers right now as my mother in law is visiting so the freaking house is at 85F, however even with the heat jacked up beyond reason before the new RAM in Cinebench I was stuck at 1895, after the new B die I am hitting a very consistent 1935. I tried for 3466Mhz fast timings, but I keep getting blue screens so I have to tweak the 3466Mhz setting when I have more time to do so. Even without hitting 3466Mhz a 40 point increase @ 3200Mhz fast timings is a really nice bump in performance. Come Monday I'll be able to do better testing when the house is at a normal 70F...


Oo, 3200 to 3466 shouid add about 30pts or more in C15. It's like a 100MHz oc on the cpu.


----------



## cowboy44mag

rdr09 said:


> Oo, 3200 to 3466 shouid add about 30pts or more in C15. It's like a 100MHz oc on the cpu.



Have to do some more benchmarking, but have my RAM stable now at 3466Mhz fast timing. I found out that the stability issues and blue screens I was having was due to a rather stupid mistake on my part. I updated my RTX 2070 to the latest driver and they changed their driver page slightly and long story short I ended up installing the notebook driver instead of the desktop driver. I have of course fixed this issue and am now having no problems with my system at all. My Cinebench scores have gone up around 20 points on average going from 3200Mhz to 3400Mhz. I only had about a 45 min window to do a few benchmarks with the ambient room temperature at 70F and with the 3466Mhz fast timings I am getting Cinebench scores of 1955 - 1960 on average, but will have to do more testing when I'm able to get the house to a normal temp again.


----------



## zack_orner

cowboy44mag said:


> Have to do some more benchmarking, but have my RAM stable now at 3466Mhz fast timing. I found out that the stability issues and blue screens I was having was due to a rather stupid mistake on my part. I updated my RTX 2070 to the latest driver and they changed their driver page slightly and long story short I ended up installing the notebook driver instead of the desktop driver. I have of course fixed this issue and am now having no problems with my system at all. My Cinebench scores have gone up around 20 points on average going from 3200Mhz to 3400Mhz. I only had about a 45 min window to do a few benchmarks with the ambient room temperature at 70F and with the 3466Mhz fast timings I am getting Cinebench scores of 1955 - 1960 on average, but will have to do more testing when I'm able to get the house to a normal temp again.


Do you have 2 or 4 sticks not seeing the same performance with 4 that I was with my 2 16 GB sticks of gskills with hyjinx dies 

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Heidi

zack_orner said:


> ...not seeing the same performance with 4 that I was with my 2 16 GB sticks...


Interesting...as opposite as I experienced...with 2 sticks had fair bit lower performance than with 4...might be something else, don't really know...


----------



## zack_orner

Are you on the 2700x system or your thread ripper bulid

2700x x470-f gaming 1 tb 970 evo gskiils 3200cl14 msi 2080 ti gaming x trio


----------



## cowboy44mag

zack_orner said:


> Do you have 2 or 4 sticks not seeing the same performance with 4 that I was with my 2 16 GB sticks of gskills with hyjinx dies
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk



I'm only running two sticks right now, surprisingly so far I haven't needed anymore than that even on my rendering and editing jobs. At some point I may have to upgrade to four sticks.


----------



## cowboy44mag

Heidi said:


> Interesting...as opposite as I experienced...with 2 sticks had fair bit lower performance than with 4...might be something else, don't really know...



If your on a Threadripper 2950X build that makes perfect sense. Threadripper has a quad channel memory controller, Ryzen Plus only has a dual channel memory controller.


----------



## cowboy44mag

zack_orner said:


> Are you on the 2700x system or your thread ripper bulid
> 
> 2700x x470-f gaming 1 tb 970 evo gskiils 3200cl14 msi 2080 ti gaming x trio



Have you had the chance to do any overclocking and testing with your RAM yet? I noticed something very strange late last night and haven't had time to address it yet. I've been running my RAM at 3466Mhz fast timings and had no issues at all. I passed every benchmark, stress test and general computing test I could throw at it. Had no issues with Prime 95, MemTest, Aida64, Performance test, Heaven, Superposition, Time Spy, Firestrike, and up to 20 windows of Firefox going at the same time. Nothing phased it. Then I booted up a game, Resident Evil 2 Remake, and I had 3 crash to desktop followed up by a memory error BSOD. I guess I have to work on my timings for 3466Mhz. I have no issues at all with the 3200Mhz fast timings, it passes all the benchmarks, stress tests and I have no issues playing RE2 Remake or any other title, so its definitely something wrong with the timings of the 3466Mhz overclock.


----------



## rdr09

cowboy44mag said:


> Have you had the chance to do any overclocking and testing with your RAM yet? I noticed something very strange late last night and haven't had time to address it yet. I've been running my RAM at 3466Mhz fast timings and had no issues at all. I passed every benchmark, stress test and general computing test I could throw at it. Had no issues with Prime 95, MemTest, Aida64, Performance test, Heaven, Superposition, Time Spy, Firestrike, and up to 20 windows of Firefox going at the same time. Nothing phased it. Then I booted up a game, Resident Evil 2 Remake, and I had 3 crash to desktop followed up by a memory error BSOD. I guess I have to work on my timings for 3466Mhz. I have no issues at all with the 3200Mhz fast timings, it passes all the benchmarks, stress tests and I have no issues playing RE2 Remake or any other title, so its definitely something wrong with the timings of the 3466Mhz overclock.


Sticks might be getting hot. Keep them under 40 if possible. If for work then 3200 fast is safer.


----------



## zack_orner

Using ryzen dram calculator fast settings had to enable gear down mode alt setting instead of disabled, to make it work. Then after some bench marking went back into bios and only changed mem frequency to 3400 and voltage to 1.39 and happy with the results for now. Im waiting on some kryonat past in the mail then will be lapping the IHS and aio, to try and beat some heat then more testing.

2700x x470-f gaming 1 tb 970 evo gskiils 3200cl14 msi 2080 ti gaming x trio


----------



## nick name

zack_orner said:


> Using ryzen dram calculator fast settings had to enable gear down mode alt setting instead of disabled, to make it work. Then after some bench marking went back into bios and only changed mem frequency to 3400 and voltage to 1.39 and happy with the results for now. Im waiting on some kryonat past in the mail then will be lapping the IHS and aio, to try and beat some heat then more testing.
> 
> 2700x x470-f gaming 1 tb 970 evo gskiils 3200cl14 msi 2080 ti gaming x trio


Does lapping a Ryzen IHS increase cooling? I haven't seen anything on it.


----------



## zack_orner

I will let you know and take before and after pics. Depends where you read and so much back and forth between opinions. But can't afford customers loop yet so seeing where I can save a few degrees

2700x x470-f gaming 1 tb 970 evo gskiils 3200cl14 msi 2080 ti gaming x trio


----------



## nick name

zack_orner said:


> I will let you know and take before and after pics. Depends where you read and so much back and forth between opinions. But can't afford customers loop yet so seeing where I can save a few degrees
> 
> 2700x x470-f gaming 1 tb 970 evo gskiils 3200cl14 msi 2080 ti gaming x trio


Sweet. Many thanks.


----------



## cowboy44mag

rdr09 said:


> Sticks might be getting hot. Keep them under 40 if possible. If for work then 3200 fast is safer.



I primarily use my rig for rendering and video editing, but I also game on it. I have my top fans set as intakes so I have a 140mm intake fan directly above the RAM. Highest temp I've ever seen is 28C on the RAM. As stated I was totally stable running any benchmark, stress test, or memory test at the 3466Mhz fast settings but when I loaded up Resident Evil 2 remake I had nothing but crashes to desktop, and a blue screen of death. I don't know if that game is a little buggy as I had no issues playing Odyssey, but for me to call a system stable it has to be able to do anything and everything without issue or its not stable. I will continue to work on the 3466Mhz setting, but right now have it running at 3200Mhz and extreme timings, this is totally stable and is giving me surprisingly good performance.


----------



## cowboy44mag

zack_orner said:


> Using ryzen dram calculator fast settings had to enable gear down mode alt setting instead of disabled, to make it work. Then after some bench marking went back into bios and only changed mem frequency to 3400 and voltage to 1.39 and happy with the results for now. Im waiting on some kryonat past in the mail then will be lapping the IHS and aio, to try and beat some heat then more testing.
> 
> 2700x x470-f gaming 1 tb 970 evo gskiils 3200cl14 msi 2080 ti gaming x trio



Just tried your method and it worked like a charm. It would appear that all my instability issues were being caused by gear down mode. I enabled gear down and haven't had a single issue since. Now running at 3466Mhz, but the crazy thing is other than increasing voltage (SOC and DRAM) I am still using the fast timing settings from my 3200Mhz overclock. I've tested it with every benchmark and stress test I have and have had no in game issues.


----------



## cowboy44mag

nick name said:


> Does lapping a Ryzen IHS increase cooling? I haven't seen anything on it.



Correct me if I'm wrong, but I was always taught that lapping only helps in cooling if your IHS or your heat sink are warped and not perfectly flat surfaces. While this can happen, especially when considering that both components are mass produced, I was always led to believe that it is a rare event.


----------



## CelticGamer

I really wish I knew what to think when it comes to overclocking my 2700X, as there seems to be some confusion, and it's totally beyond frustrating.

I have brought this up several times in several different threads and never get a straight answer.

It basically comes down to not knowing what voltage reading in HWinfo64 to trust, CPUCoreVoltage or VCORE, and no one seems to be able to answer this. 

If I manually set the CPU Core Voltage to 1.375V in my motherboards Bios, and go by the 1.375CPUCoreVoltage reading in HWINFO64, 4.2ghz is rock solid stable, all day long.

However, if I go by the VCORE reading in HWINFO64, my 2700X needs around 1.425V to be barely stable at 4.2ghz. 

Here's another thing to add. Using PBO and a negative voltage offset of 0.1000V, my 2700X is completely stable. I refuse to accept that my chip is good enough that it's stable at a negative 0.1000V undervolt while PBO is boosting to 4.175ghz on all core, but when manually overclocking needs a whopping 1.425V to be stable just 75mhz higher than PBO is delivering. That makes no sense to me.

I don't want to push 1.425V through it 24/7 and degrade it, but at the same time I'm about to just say F&%$ it and go by the CPUCOREVOLTAGE reading.


----------



## zack_orner

Put your cpu on a flat surface upside down and spin it if it stop right away its fine if it spins lap it. So waiting on paste to see. Also I don't remember it the aio was smooth polished or had groovess like I saw in another thread.if all is good then I guess the only test I will be doing is as5 verses kronat. Will keep you updated in a few days when paste comes and have sand paper ready probably Thursday or Friday.

2700x x470-f gaming 1 tb 970 evo gskiils 3200cl14 msi 2080 ti gaming x trio


----------



## Saiger0

CelticGamer said:


> I really wish I knew what to think when it comes to overclocking my 2700X, as there seems to be some confusion, and it's totally beyond frustrating.
> 
> I have brought this up several times in several different threads and never get a straight answer.
> 
> It basically comes down to not knowing what voltage reading in HWinfo64 to trust, CPUCoreVoltage or VCORE, and no one seems to be able to answer this.
> 
> If I manually set the CPU Core Voltage to 1.375V in my motherboards Bios, and go by the 1.375CPUCoreVoltage reading in HWINFO64, 4.2ghz is rock solid stable, all day long.
> 
> However, if I go by the VCORE reading in HWINFO64, my 2700X needs around 1.425V to be barely stable at 4.2ghz.
> 
> Here's another thing to add. Using PBO and a negative voltage offset of 0.1000V, my 2700X is completely stable. I refuse to accept that my chip is good enough that it's stable at a negative 0.1000V undervolt while PBO is boosting to 4.175ghz on all core, but when manually overclocking needs a whopping 1.425V to be stable just 75mhz higher than PBO is delivering. That makes no sense to me.
> 
> I don't want to push 1.425V through it 24/7 and degrade it, but at the same time I'm about to just say F&%$ it and go by the CPUCOREVOLTAGE reading.


Only trust SVI2 TFN in hwinfo64. Its the closest to the actual value.


----------



## CelticGamer

I appreciate you clearing that up. That makes sense. Trying to overclock by using the Vcore figure led me to believe that I had an extremely poor chip.


----------



## lightsout

Bruizer said:


> I can only speak for my 2700X. But for me, running the negative offset lowered my temps and improved my boost clocks. PBO, PE2, etc. all tend to overvolt beyond what you need. Which means more heat. So, lower the voltage which lowers the thermals. Which means...less throttling, more boosting while improving stability (assuming you don't offset the voltage negatively too much).


Ok I will do some testing. I agree they love to shoot crazy voltage. I think I was seeing 1.55v for PE3/4


----------



## Heidi

zack_orner said:


> Are you on the 2700x system or your thread ripper bulid
> 
> 2700x x470-f gaming 1 tb 970 evo gskiils 3200cl14 msi 2080 ti gaming x trio


I own both...2950x and a 2700x...when I replied to you it was referring to my experience with 2700x on Crosshair x370 extreme ...
I understand it looks odd but in my case it works.
Whether it is buggy bios glitch...one of so many...or it is a hidden feature not sure...point is it works well.
On the other hand I am trying to setup sig with that dual system's but so far it is not showing...


----------



## zack_orner

cowboy44mag said:


> Correct me if I'm wrong, but I was always taught that lapping only helps in cooling if your IHS or your heat sink are warped and not perfectly flat surfaces. While this can happen, especially when considering that both components are mass produced, I was always led to believe that it is a rare event.


So finally got some free time today and and am please with the results. My 2700x aio cooled during benchmarks would hit 75-78c gaming about 62-68c , now tops about 66c after multi bench runs and 42-52c gaming. Before I used the paste that came on the aio stock see pics now using thermal grizzly kryonoaut applied using there recommended method. Allmost didn't lap the IHS because it stopped right away when I spun it but was skeptical, and already had the sand paper ready. I did this on the glass side panel from the PC case to ensure I was working on a flat surface. As you can see from the pics the outside was higher, down to copper on outside 3 sheets of sand paper in and can still read Ryzen in the middle. Don't mind the little guy in the corner that is my gpu support.









2700x x470-f gaming 1 tb 970 evo gskiils 3200cl14 msi 2080 ti gaming x trio


----------



## zila

Wow. Nice work.


----------



## zack_orner

zila said:


> Wow. Nice work.


Thank you.

2700x x470-f gaming 1 tb 970 evo gskiils 3200cl14 msi 2080 ti gaming x trio


----------



## nick name

zack_orner said:


> Thank you.
> 
> 2700x x470-f gaming 1 tb 970 evo gskiils 3200cl14 msi 2080 ti gaming x trio


How were you holding the CPU while lapping it?


----------



## zack_orner

nick name said:


> How were you holding the CPU while lapping it?


By hand on the sides, you need to be careful to not bend the pins and or sand your fingertips. Pretty much squeezing it between my thumb , pointer, and middle finger. Lots of videos on youtube of the process.

2700x x470-f gaming 1 tb 970 evo gskiils 3200cl14 msi 2080 ti gaming x trio


----------



## teh n00binator

A general Zen+ question, has anyone actually experienced any rapid degradation issues from setting their vcore at or above 1.38v?

Reason I'm asking is because I recently got piled with down votes on reddit for not automatically recognising that according to those on reddit, if you set beyond 1.38v on your Zen+ CPU will be dead in 3 months. Curious to what the source of this was, I decided to google a few forums and the only thing I could find is a type up by "The Stilt":



Spoiler



Where is the limit?

The maximum safe voltages for CPUs are an eternal riddle, as neither of the two manufacturers release this information for public consumption. Public or even the NDA documents generally specify a vague limit, which most of the time relates to a point where the catastrophic failures become more common instead of specifying the voltage that is safe to sustain without causing any damage to the silicon. Such limit is admittingly rather hard to specify, as the limit will vary between the different CPU specimens (silicon variance, SIDD) and operating scenarios (peak current in different utilization scenarios, temperature, etc.).

In order to get the most accurate answer for this question I ended up “asking” the CPU itself. As stated previously, the CPU features various different limiters / safe guards (Package Power Tracking: PPT, Thermal Design Current: TDC, Electrical Design Current: EDC, thermal protection and FIT).

“FIT” as the name suggest is a feature to monitor / track the fitness of the silicon and adjust the operating parameters to maintain the specified and expected reliability. Many semiconductor manufacturers utilize such feature to eke out every last bit of performance, in an ERA where most of the semiconductors are process bound in terms of performance. In short: FIT feature allows the manufacturers to push their designs to the very limit out of the box, without jeopardizing the reliability of the silicon. A practical example would be the knock sensors on an engine. The control unit of the engine always tries to advance the ignition timing as much as possible, to produce the best possible power / torque figures. The purpose of the knock sensors is to listen if knocking occurs and tell the ECU to reduce the timing advance when it does, in order to protect the engine.

To see what the actual maximum voltage FIT allows the CPU to run at in various different scenarios is, I disabled all of the other limiters and safe guards. With every other limiter / safe guard disabled, the reliability (FIT) becomes the only restrain. The voltage command which the CPU sends to the VRM regulator via the SVI2 interface and the actual effective voltage were then recorded in various scenarios. In stock configuration the sustained maximum effective voltage during all-core stress allowed by FIT was =< 1.330V. Meanwhile, in single core workloads the sustained maximum was =< 1.425V. When the “FIT” parameters were adjusted by increasing the scalar value from the default 1x to the maximum allowed value of 10x, the maximum all-core voltage became 1.380V, while the maximum single core voltage increased to 1.480V. The recorded figures appear to fall very well in line with the seen and known behavior, frequency, power and thermal scaling wise.

The seen behavior suggests that the full silicon reliability can be maintained up to around 1.330V in all-core workloads (i.e. high current) and up to 1.425V in single core workloads (i.e. low current). Use of higher voltages is definitely possible (as FIT will allow up to 1.380V / 1.480V when scalar is increased by 10x), but it more than likely results in reduced silicon lifetime / reliability. By how much? Only the good folks at AMD who have access to the simulation data will know for sure.



While that says there might be degradation, it doesn't really say anything like whether it's substantial or anything really solid other than "Only the good folks at AMD who have access to the simulation data will know for sure".

I'm just asking because I haven't really heard of Zen+ CPU's dropping left & right, and I've seen a few people even in this thread running 1.4v long term no trouble.

So is there any serious truth to this? Or is this another case like with Sandy Bridge where people were saying not to run beyond 1.4v when some were running up to 1.5v for like 5 years?


----------



## Amir007

teh n00binator said:


> A general Zen+ question, has anyone actually experienced any rapid degradation issues from setting their vcore at or above 1.38v?
> 
> Reason I'm asking is because I recently got piled with down votes on reddit for not automatically recognising that according to those on reddit, if you set beyond 1.38v on your Zen+ CPU will be dead in 3 months. Curious to what the source of this was, I decided to google a few forums and the only thing I could find is a type up by "The Stilt":
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Where is the limit?
> 
> The maximum safe voltages for CPUs are an eternal riddle, as neither of the two manufacturers release this information for public consumption. Public or even the NDA documents generally specify a vague limit, which most of the time relates to a point where the catastrophic failures become more common instead of specifying the voltage that is safe to sustain without causing any damage to the silicon. Such limit is admittingly rather hard to specify, as the limit will vary between the different CPU specimens (silicon variance, SIDD) and operating scenarios (peak current in different utilization scenarios, temperature, etc.).
> 
> In order to get the most accurate answer for this question I ended up “asking” the CPU itself. As stated previously, the CPU features various different limiters / safe guards (Package Power Tracking: PPT, Thermal Design Current: TDC, Electrical Design Current: EDC, thermal protection and FIT).
> 
> “FIT” as the name suggest is a feature to monitor / track the fitness of the silicon and adjust the operating parameters to maintain the specified and expected reliability. Many semiconductor manufacturers utilize such feature to eke out every last bit of performance, in an ERA where most of the semiconductors are process bound in terms of performance. In short: FIT feature allows the manufacturers to push their designs to the very limit out of the box, without jeopardizing the reliability of the silicon. A practical example would be the knock sensors on an engine. The control unit of the engine always tries to advance the ignition timing as much as possible, to produce the best possible power / torque figures. The purpose of the knock sensors is to listen if knocking occurs and tell the ECU to reduce the timing advance when it does, in order to protect the engine.
> 
> To see what the actual maximum voltage FIT allows the CPU to run at in various different scenarios is, I disabled all of the other limiters and safe guards. With every other limiter / safe guard disabled, the reliability (FIT) becomes the only restrain. The voltage command which the CPU sends to the VRM regulator via the SVI2 interface and the actual effective voltage were then recorded in various scenarios. In stock configuration the sustained maximum effective voltage during all-core stress allowed by FIT was =< 1.330V. Meanwhile, in single core workloads the sustained maximum was =< 1.425V. When the “FIT” parameters were adjusted by increasing the scalar value from the default 1x to the maximum allowed value of 10x, the maximum all-core voltage became 1.380V, while the maximum single core voltage increased to 1.480V. The recorded figures appear to fall very well in line with the seen and known behavior, frequency, power and thermal scaling wise.
> 
> The seen behavior suggests that the full silicon reliability can be maintained up to around 1.330V in all-core workloads (i.e. high current) and up to 1.425V in single core workloads (i.e. low current). Use of higher voltages is definitely possible (as FIT will allow up to 1.380V / 1.480V when scalar is increased by 10x), but it more than likely results in reduced silicon lifetime / reliability. By how much? Only the good folks at AMD who have access to the simulation data will know for sure.
> 
> 
> 
> While that says there might be degradation, it doesn't really say anything like whether it's substantial or anything really solid other than "Only the good folks at AMD who have access to the simulation data will know for sure".
> 
> I'm just asking because I haven't really heard of Zen+ CPU's dropping left & right, and I've seen a few people even in this thread running 1.4v long term no trouble.
> 
> So is there any serious truth to this? Or is this another case like with Sandy Bridge where people were saying not to run beyond 1.4v when some were running up to 1.5v for like 5 years?


The truth is don't believe everything you read on Internet.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

teh n00binator said:


> A general Zen+ question, has anyone actually experienced any rapid degradation issues from setting their vcore at or above 1.38v?
> 
> Reason I'm asking is because I recently got piled with down votes on reddit for not automatically recognising that according to those on reddit, if you set beyond 1.38v on your Zen+ CPU will be dead in 3 months. Curious to what the source of this was, I decided to google a few forums and the only thing I could find is a type up by "The Stilt":
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Where is the limit?
> 
> The maximum safe voltages for CPUs are an eternal riddle, as neither of the two manufacturers release this information for public consumption. Public or even the NDA documents generally specify a vague limit, which most of the time relates to a point where the catastrophic failures become more common instead of specifying the voltage that is safe to sustain without causing any damage to the silicon. Such limit is admittingly rather hard to specify, as the limit will vary between the different CPU specimens (silicon variance, SIDD) and operating scenarios (peak current in different utilization scenarios, temperature, etc.).
> 
> In order to get the most accurate answer for this question I ended up “asking” the CPU itself. As stated previously, the CPU features various different limiters / safe guards (Package Power Tracking: PPT, Thermal Design Current: TDC, Electrical Design Current: EDC, thermal protection and FIT).
> 
> “FIT” as the name suggest is a feature to monitor / track the fitness of the silicon and adjust the operating parameters to maintain the specified and expected reliability. Many semiconductor manufacturers utilize such feature to eke out every last bit of performance, in an ERA where most of the semiconductors are process bound in terms of performance. In short: FIT feature allows the manufacturers to push their designs to the very limit out of the box, without jeopardizing the reliability of the silicon. A practical example would be the knock sensors on an engine. The control unit of the engine always tries to advance the ignition timing as much as possible, to produce the best possible power / torque figures. The purpose of the knock sensors is to listen if knocking occurs and tell the ECU to reduce the timing advance when it does, in order to protect the engine.
> 
> To see what the actual maximum voltage FIT allows the CPU to run at in various different scenarios is, I disabled all of the other limiters and safe guards. With every other limiter / safe guard disabled, the reliability (FIT) becomes the only restrain. The voltage command which the CPU sends to the VRM regulator via the SVI2 interface and the actual effective voltage were then recorded in various scenarios. In stock configuration the sustained maximum effective voltage during all-core stress allowed by FIT was =< 1.330V. Meanwhile, in single core workloads the sustained maximum was =< 1.425V. When the “FIT” parameters were adjusted by increasing the scalar value from the default 1x to the maximum allowed value of 10x, the maximum all-core voltage became 1.380V, while the maximum single core voltage increased to 1.480V. The recorded figures appear to fall very well in line with the seen and known behavior, frequency, power and thermal scaling wise.
> 
> The seen behavior suggests that the full silicon reliability can be maintained up to around 1.330V in all-core workloads (i.e. high current) and up to 1.425V in single core workloads (i.e. low current). Use of higher voltages is definitely possible (as FIT will allow up to 1.380V / 1.480V when scalar is increased by 10x), but it more than likely results in reduced silicon lifetime / reliability. By how much? Only the good folks at AMD who have access to the simulation data will know for sure.
> 
> 
> 
> While that says there might be degradation, it doesn't really say anything like whether it's substantial or anything really solid other than "Only the good folks at AMD who have access to the simulation data will know for sure".
> 
> I'm just asking because I haven't really heard of Zen+ CPU's dropping left & right, and I've seen a few people even in this thread running 1.4v long term no trouble.
> 
> So is there any serious truth to this? Or is this another case like with Sandy Bridge where people were saying not to run beyond 1.4v when some were running up to 1.5v for like 5 years?



I've had my 2700x since day one pretty much and running PBO the voltage under load stays around 1.4 (even with manual undervolt set)and clocks around 4.15-4.25ghz... so far so good... keep in mind that my rig doesn't often stay on more than 8 hours... occasionally I fold with it for a day or two... but mostly on to play and off when I'm not using it.


----------



## cowboy44mag

teh n00binator said:


> A general Zen+ question, has anyone actually experienced any rapid degradation issues from setting their vcore at or above 1.38v?
> 
> Reason I'm asking is because I recently got piled with down votes on reddit for not automatically recognising that according to those on reddit, if you set beyond 1.38v on your Zen+ CPU will be dead in 3 months. Curious to what the source of this was, I decided to google a few forums and the only thing I could find is a type up by "The Stilt":
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Where is the limit?
> 
> The maximum safe voltages for CPUs are an eternal riddle, as neither of the two manufacturers release this information for public consumption. Public or even the NDA documents generally specify a vague limit, which most of the time relates to a point where the catastrophic failures become more common instead of specifying the voltage that is safe to sustain without causing any damage to the silicon. Such limit is admittingly rather hard to specify, as the limit will vary between the different CPU specimens (silicon variance, SIDD) and operating scenarios (peak current in different utilization scenarios, temperature, etc.).
> 
> In order to get the most accurate answer for this question I ended up “asking” the CPU itself. As stated previously, the CPU features various different limiters / safe guards (Package Power Tracking: PPT, Thermal Design Current: TDC, Electrical Design Current: EDC, thermal protection and FIT).
> 
> “FIT” as the name suggest is a feature to monitor / track the fitness of the silicon and adjust the operating parameters to maintain the specified and expected reliability. Many semiconductor manufacturers utilize such feature to eke out every last bit of performance, in an ERA where most of the semiconductors are process bound in terms of performance. In short: FIT feature allows the manufacturers to push their designs to the very limit out of the box, without jeopardizing the reliability of the silicon. A practical example would be the knock sensors on an engine. The control unit of the engine always tries to advance the ignition timing as much as possible, to produce the best possible power / torque figures. The purpose of the knock sensors is to listen if knocking occurs and tell the ECU to reduce the timing advance when it does, in order to protect the engine.
> 
> To see what the actual maximum voltage FIT allows the CPU to run at in various different scenarios is, I disabled all of the other limiters and safe guards. With every other limiter / safe guard disabled, the reliability (FIT) becomes the only restrain. The voltage command which the CPU sends to the VRM regulator via the SVI2 interface and the actual effective voltage were then recorded in various scenarios. In stock configuration the sustained maximum effective voltage during all-core stress allowed by FIT was =< 1.330V. Meanwhile, in single core workloads the sustained maximum was =< 1.425V. When the “FIT” parameters were adjusted by increasing the scalar value from the default 1x to the maximum allowed value of 10x, the maximum all-core voltage became 1.380V, while the maximum single core voltage increased to 1.480V. The recorded figures appear to fall very well in line with the seen and known behavior, frequency, power and thermal scaling wise.
> 
> The seen behavior suggests that the full silicon reliability can be maintained up to around 1.330V in all-core workloads (i.e. high current) and up to 1.425V in single core workloads (i.e. low current). Use of higher voltages is definitely possible (as FIT will allow up to 1.380V / 1.480V when scalar is increased by 10x), but it more than likely results in reduced silicon lifetime / reliability. By how much? Only the good folks at AMD who have access to the simulation data will know for sure.
> 
> 
> 
> While that says there might be degradation, it doesn't really say anything like whether it's substantial or anything really solid other than "Only the good folks at AMD who have access to the simulation data will know for sure".
> 
> I'm just asking because I haven't really heard of Zen+ CPU's dropping left & right, and I've seen a few people even in this thread running 1.4v long term no trouble.
> 
> So is there any serious truth to this? Or is this another case like with Sandy Bridge where people were saying not to run beyond 1.4v when some were running up to 1.5v for like 5 years?



I don't think that 1.4V will be an issue for Ryzen. I'm saying this based on the fact that with everything set on AUTO I was seeing max voltages of 1.55V that would linger at 1.55V for an unsettling long period of time. Using a negative offset to lower the voltage or setting the voltage for anything lower that 1.55V is going to be better than running it at AUTO or "optimal defaults".


With that said, after using my rig for several months and subjecting it to everything from benchmarking to gaming to long rendering and video editing projects I have found that it is best to run a negative offset. While I can get better benchmark scores with a set voltage at 1.3V and am totally stable running Prime 95 and gaming it wasn't totally stable for video editing and rendering. While video editing and rendering I would experience random system freezes needing a hard reset. This off and on problem persisted until I went back to running a negative offset. With the negative offset my max voltage is 1.36V and Cinebench scores range from 1930-1940, whereas the set 1.3V I was seeing Cinebench scores of 1940-1950. For total system stability I believe Ryzen does better with a negative offset. Be sure to run a "balanced" power profile as well (one in which the maximum minimum state doesn't exceed 40%) so that your core voltage isn't pegged at 1.4V 24/7.


Even though I had to go back to using a negative offset my Cinebench scores are still 1930-1940 which I think is impressive given that my wife keeps the heat jacked up in the winter (ambient room temp for the below screen shot was 77F).


----------



## teh n00binator

Amir007 said:


> The truth is don't believe everything you read on Internet.


Usually the case but I was getting absolutely piled with down votes for questioning why someone said the OP would "kill their CPU" at 1.4v and didn't realize why, turns out after even more checking the reason for this was this FAQ on r/overclocking which bases it's advice on Stilts findings:

https://www.reddit.com/r/overclocking/wiki/faq#wiki_...amd_ryzen_2000_series.3F



> What are the max safe voltages and temperatures for...
> ...AMD Ryzen 2000 series?
> AMD have been uncharacteristically tight-lipped on Ryzen 2000 series voltage. However, based on The Stilt's reverse engineering of the boost algorithm, we recommend;
> 
> 1.33V max Vcore with 85C max temp
> 
> 1.38V max Vcore with improved cooling (65C)
> 
> 1.425V has been reported to cause degradation over a relatively short timespan of 3 months even with temps around 50-60C.
> 
> 1.025-1.05V SoC voltage is typically optimal, going over 1.15V isn't recommended because it may or may not be safe and is unlikely to help.
> 
> ProcODT should be the same as 1000 series, IE 60 ohms (or auto) advised for best results, 80 ohms absolute max.


Apparently the writer of that FAQ might have "overreached" on the findings and redditors are taking that as gospel. Still don't know if that rapid degradation mentioned is something that's actually been witnessed, they say it's reported but I can't find any examples...


----------



## cowboy44mag

teh n00binator said:


> Usually the case but I was getting absolutely piled with down votes for questioning why someone said the OP would "kill their CPU" at 1.4v and didn't realize why, turns out after even more checking the reason for this was this FAQ on r/overclocking which bases it's advice on Stilts findings:
> 
> https://www.reddit.com/r/overclocking/wiki/faq#wiki_...amd_ryzen_2000_series.3F
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently the writer of that FAQ might have "overreached" on the findings and redditors are taking that as gospel. Still don't know if that rapid degradation mentioned is something that's actually been witnessed, they say it's reported but I can't find any examples...



I personally find that really interesting as if I were to go into bios and set for optimal defaults on AUTO settings the processor would be hitting 1.4V, 1.5V, and even 1.55V. What was really worrying to me was when I noticed the high AUTO voltages would hang on 1.55V for a disturbingly long time. The common user who doesn't optimize his bios settings and goes with an "out of the box" experience is going to running much higher voltage than anyone using a negative offset.


With the negative offset I'm using the processor almost never goes beyond 1.36V and when it does have a "spike" it will hit as high as 1.4V but only for a second or two. The negative offset is much healthier than "optimal defaults" and also allows higher boost clocks. I personally use PBO and the only real overclocking I do is with the RAM. Allowing the processor to boost itself with PBO I have all core sustained boost of 4.250Ghz and up to four core boost of 4.350Ghz. Some people have gotten even better PBO performance, however I firmly believe you get just as good overclocking using PBO as you do trying to manually overclock the 2700X. Usually you need less voltage while using PBO as well.


----------



## Nuzzi

4.3 no oc..

I read that many of you have 4.1-4.2 when you oc dif settings.
I get 4.3 without tweaking anything..
Only thing i have some probs with are ram speeds. Stuck at 2900- 3200 with 3400 sticks.. but sure im getting it right at some point.

Back to the cpu.
A thing i tryed tweaking is..
-Multitrhead of.
-Precision boost on.
-2 cores parked

This gave me 10- 30 fps gained in Squad gameplay.
And with 4.1-4.3 and once i even saw it boost to 4.5. And its without oc,ecept for the tweaks i mentioned..

Looking forward to see the gameplay fps, when i get my ramspeed tweaked right😊


----------



## cowboy44mag

Nuzzi said:


> 4.3 no oc..
> 
> I read that many of you have 4.1-4.2 when you oc dif settings.
> I get 4.3 without tweaking anything..
> Only thing i have some probs with are ram speeds. Stuck at 2900- 3200 with 3400 sticks.. but sure im getting it right at some point.
> 
> Back to the cpu.
> A thing i tryed tweaking is..
> -Multitrhead of.
> -Precision boost on.
> -2 cores parked
> 
> This gave me 10- 30 fps gained in Squad gameplay.
> And with 4.1-4.3 and once i even saw it boost to 4.5. And its without oc,ecept for the tweaks i mentioned..
> 
> Looking forward to see the gameplay fps, when i get my ramspeed tweaked right😊



Are you saying you get 4.3Ghz with "optimal defaults" ie everything on AUTO except maybe the RAM? Or are you saying that you get 4.3Ghz with SMT turned off with 2 parked cores? Or are you saying you have SMT on, Precision Boost on and two parked cores? The differences between those three setups are substantial. 



Most of the results people are posting here is with SMT enabled ie 8 cores and 16 threads. If I disable SMT and run with 8 cores and 8 threads I can hit 4.350Ghz on all cores for as long as I'm running that application using PE Level 2. If I use PE level 4 with SMT disabled I can run 4.4 - 4.5Ghz all core boost (seems to be application dependent for the boost clock ie some benchmarks won't push it past 4.4Ghz but on Prime 95 and Cinebench it will hit 4.5Ghz). With SMT enabled I can't run PE level 3 or 4 totally stable so I'm running level 2. I believe at level 2 it boost is limited to 4.250Ghz all core unless temps are insanely low, although up to 4 cores will boost to 4.350Ghz without issue. 



The problem I personally have with this is I do a lot of rendering and video editing and the 8 additional threads with SMT enabled are far more effective than the additional 250Mhz I can get with only 8 threads (SMT disabled). Now of course for gaming, or in any case where extra treads won't matter for performance, then disabling SMT and using PE Level 4 is definitely the way to go. The thing is I haven't ever run into a game where this processor has felt sluggish and I'm always seeing really good FPS so my 24/7 settings are SMT enabled, PBO enabled and boosting the full 8 cores and 16 threads of this powerful processor to 4.250Ghz all core.


As for RAM the best thing for getting your RAM optimized on Ryzen is the Ryzen RAM calculator. Using that and a little advice from this forum I have my 3200Mhz B die running at 3400Mhz and really tight timings. Basically I used all the timings the RAM calculator gave me for the Fast preset @ 3200Mhz then just increased the speed to 3400Mhz and it worked perfectly. Optimizing the RAM gives the 2700X a huge bump in performance.


----------



## Nuzzi

Its with everything on default, its about the same with the tweaks i mentioned. (Without going into details, and only wathing ryzenmaster) 
Squad is showing more fps cause of the core parked. The game handles cpu usage kind of odd. Not good on high core cpus.
At least thats my logig thinking.
The benchmarking tools have yet to be testet, if going in to more details. I only use the rig for gaming, but i will look into the th7ngs you mentionet..


----------



## Undervolter

teh n00binator said:


> A general Zen+ question, has anyone actually experienced any rapid degradation issues from setting their vcore at or above 1.38v?
> 
> Reason I'm asking is because I recently got piled with down votes on reddit for not automatically recognising that according to those on reddit, if you set beyond 1.38v on your Zen+ CPU will be dead in 3 months. Curious to what the source of this was, I decided to google a few forums and the only thing I could find is a type up by "The Stilt":
> 
> While that says there might be degradation, it doesn't really say anything like whether it's substantial or anything really solid other than "Only the good folks at AMD who have access to the simulation data will know for sure".
> 
> I'm just asking because I haven't really heard of Zen+ CPU's dropping left & right, and I've seen a few people even in this thread running 1.4v long term no trouble.
> 
> So is there any serious truth to this? Or is this another case like with Sandy Bridge where people were saying not to run beyond 1.4v when some were running up to 1.5v for like 5 years?


I don't overclock, but this may be of help:

Ryzen Generation 2, Safe/Unsafe Voltages Tested

My completely subjective opinion based on what i 've read about the FX, is that, some CPUs are tougher than others and some initially think their CPU will never degrade, only to find degradation after 1,2 years. It's a crapshoot, but if you intend to keep a CPU for long time, better not push it too hard. Just a hunch based on speculation, but the smaller the manufacturer process, the more sensitive to overvoltage the CPU becomes.

Oh, about 1 1/2 years ago, i remember reading about Intel CPUs having premature degradation. This was beautifully solved, by calling it "break in period". So, there! Let's call it break in and it's not degradation anymore!


----------



## cowboy44mag

Nuzzi said:


> Its with everything on default, its about the same with the tweaks i mentioned. (Without going into details, and only wathing ryzenmaster)
> Squad is showing more fps cause of the core parked. The game handles cpu usage kind of odd. Not good on high core cpus.
> At least thats my logig thinking.
> The benchmarking tools have yet to be testet, if going in to more details. I only use the rig for gaming, but i will look into the th7ngs you mentionet..



I had a discussion with another member here about disabling SMT and the possible advantages. After that I did more research on my own and also did some trial and error with it disabled. For my main purposes disabling SMT is like shooting myself in the foot. Some programs gave me better performance (basically Adobe based editors) but while rendering disabling SMT was a huge performance hit. I didn't want to change bios profiles a couple times in a day as I switched between applications so my 24/7 settings are with SMT enabled. As stated with SMT enabled the best I can do is 4.250Ghz across all cores, with SMT disabled I can hit a maximum of 4.5Ghz across all cores.


If your main or only purpose of your rig is gaming then disabling SMT could give you a good performance boost in most, but not all games. There are games like Ashes that will use a lot of threads but most aren't going to truly leverage more than 8. In gaming the higher frequencies that you can hit with SMT disabled will more than likely give you a nice performance bump.


----------



## Saiger0

So a new cinebench version just got realeased what scores do you all get?


----------



## nick name

Saiger0 said:


> So a new cinebench version just got realeased what scores do you all get?


Ugh, I wish I would have known about this last night when I had some good cold weather and could've pushed a proper overclock. 

And *** is with the Windows Store distribution? I understand it offloads server costs, but it breaks my heart.


----------



## Hwgeek

> Cinebench R20 also offers improved accuracy in benchmarks meant "to test if a machine runs stable on a high-CPU load, if the cooling solution of a desktop or notebook is sufficient for longer-running tasks to deliver the full potential of the CPU and if a machine is able to handle demanding real-life 3D tasks."



Interesting, finally they thought about it-Maybe they Liked the CB EXTREME popularity .
Interested to see TR 2990WX vs 2950X.


----------



## nick name

My scores:
4504 @ 4.317GHz
4503 @ 4.317GHz

TurboV doesn't actually change BCLK as it appears to do so when I thought I was running lower speeds -- I was not.


----------



## nick name

Someone talked me into single core runs. God, those take forever. 

At 4.47GHz.

Please disregard the fact that I forgot to click the Memory tab in the second CPU-Z windows.


----------



## constructorx

Saiger0 said:


> So a new cinebench version just got realeased what scores do you all get?


Just run a quick bench on it, got 4310 for my 24/7 settings (1.3V and PBO enabled only).


----------



## nanotm

just tested mine iirc everything but the ram is at default settings, the ram I put on xmp profile for the 3000mhz speed...
wondering why my score is that much higher than the rest of yours soemthing doesnt seem right there either you guys have a lot of stuff running in the background or something else going on there


----------



## Minotaurtoo

nanotm said:


> just tested mine iirc everything but the ram is at default settings, the ram I put on xmp profile for the 3000mhz speed...
> wondering why my score is that much higher than the rest of yours soemthing doesnt seem right there either you guys have a lot of stuff running in the background or something else going on there


from what I'm seeing yours is lower... not even hitting 4000.


----------



## The Sandman

PE3 Auto Vcore/CPU LLC 3466 C14
CPU = 4312 cb (4.2GHz all cores)

Single Core = 447 cb (4350MHz)



PE3 with 102 Bclk 3467 C14 

CPU = 4403 cb (4263MHz all cores)

Single Core = 457 cb (4436MHz)


----------



## nanotm

Minotaurtoo said:


> from what I'm seeing yours is lower... not even hitting 4000.


yeah my bad I didnt look at the scores properly, should probably not do stuff when I'm tired and well on the way to inebriated lol, thanks for catching it /


----------



## rdr09

2700 @ 4GHz 3466 Cl14. My 4.1 have to be tweaked. Score does not save.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

nanotm said:


> yeah my bad I didnt look at the scores properly, should probably not do stuff when I'm tired and well on the way to inebriated lol, thanks for catching it /


no worries, I've done the same thing before


----------



## nick name

With my last spurt of colder weather I attempted to hit 4600, but was probably too drunk to get it done. So I'm gonna be stuck here for a while.


----------



## kitfit1

I actually ran this this for a Cinebench R20 thread on another forum, but the run is just as valid here.
CPU is @ 4.25Ghz on all cores using PBO, single thread boost goes to 4.35Ghz. Ram is @ 3533Mhz Cas14.


----------



## rdr09

kitfit1 said:


> I actually ran this this for a Cinebench R20 thread on another forum, but the run is just as valid here.
> CPU is @ 4.25Ghz on all cores using PBO, single thread boost goes to 4.35Ghz. Ram is @ 3533Mhz Cas14.


You're giving as a glimps of what the Ryzen 3000 could be capable of.
@kitfit1, here is 2700 @ 4.1GHz with RAM @ 3533MHz as well.

Ran Single test and went to breakfast. It was still running when i came back and only got 418.


----------



## MrPhilo

Does anyone have a late 2700x production model and how does it perform? I can get one that was manu on 1836sus.

Reason I'm asking is because my 1700 I had a while ago was week 7 (1707) and I got another 1700 on week 41 and I was able to overlook that to 4.1Ghz. so just wondered if later 2700x would produce better oc at lower voltage maybe


----------



## cowboy44mag

I have some new Cinebench R15 and R20 scores, but had to totally reconfigure my system after a new bios update I applied yesterday. Up till yesterday, using Asus bios 4207 on my Strix x470-F motherboard, I was using PE2 (which was the highest stable one I could use) with a negative offset and was getting boost clocks of 4.250Ghz all core and Cinebench scores around 1950. I upgraded my bios to the new Asus 4406 bios and it changed literally everything. I was having huge performance hits on PE2 and could only hit 4.0Ghz all core boost. After optimizing my system all day long yesterday I now have to use a positive offset, and using PE3 as my everyday setting. I am getting boost clock of 4.2Ghz all core, am seeing lower Vcore usage of 1.330 down from 1.365 (average Vcore) and am getting slightly better Cinebench R15 scores of ~1955. With the new bios I'm also able to get PE4 to work, however it must not be totally stable as I can run all my normal stress tests (ie Prime 95, Aida64, ect) can run all my normal benchmarks like Cinebench R15, RealBench, Performance Test, Fire Strike, Time Spy, ect) but I get a total freeze black screen of death about halfway though the new Cinebench R20 when using PE4. While using PE4 my temps will hit a max of 72C and Vcore is 1.41V and my all core boost is 4.35Ghz, wish I could call it totally stable but it can't do a Cinebench R20 run without black screen of death. Here are some of my new benchmarks:


All benchmarks shown here were with normal background applications (ie Kaspersky Total Security antivirus, all the "normal" Windows 10 background apps - didn't disable anything) and an ambient room temperature of 70F. 


Using PE3, Cinebench R15 hasn't really changed, but my new Cinebench R20 score is 4305.
Using PE4, Cinebench R15 is now 1997 (highest I've gotten thus far is 1998, so close to breaking 2000), my Performance Test benchmark is 20,071.


----------



## cowboy44mag

rdr09 said:


> You're giving as a glimps of what the Ryzen 3000 could be capable of.
> 
> @*kitfit1* , here is 2700 @ 4.1GHz with RAM @ 3533MHz as well.
> 
> Ran Single test and went to breakfast. It was still running when i came back and only got 418.





I personally expect much more out of the the Ryzen 3000 line. At CES the Ryzen processor pitted against the i9 9900K is said to more than likely be an R5 3000 series processor. From what is being reported the new R5 will be 8 cores 16 threads, the R7 is reported to be 12 cores 24 threads and there is speculation they are going to release a R9 processor with 16 cores and 32 threads. With the low power usage we saw from the tested Ryzen processor at CES and the fact that it was an early engineering sample it isn't hard to imaging the R5 8 core 16 thread processor with a 5Ghz boost clock after optimization. If these reports are correct, and there is no reason to believe they aren't, that means that the new R5 processors will be able to outperform Intel's flagship i9 9900K and Intel will have no answer to the R7 and R9 processors. I believe that AMD, having regained market share with Ryzen first and second gen, is now going for a "death blow" before Intel can optimize 10nm or release their own 7nm. It looks like AMD is well positioned to take a lot of market share from Intel with the release of 7nm Zen 2.


I know that although I don't upgrade my rig very often (just upgraded from FX 8370 a few months ago) I will be upgrading to R7 3000 series if they have boost clocks near or better than 4.8Ghz and 12 cores.


----------



## rdr09

cowboy44mag said:


> I personally expect much more out of the the Ryzen 3000 line. At CES the Ryzen processor pitted against the i9 9900K is said to more than likely be an R5 3000 series processor. From what is being reported the new R5 will be 8 cores 16 threads, the R7 is reported to be 12 cores 24 threads and there is speculation they are going to release a R9 processor with 16 cores and 32 threads. With the low power usage we saw from the tested Ryzen processor at CES and the fact that it was an early engineering sample it isn't hard to imaging the R5 8 core 16 thread processor with a 5Ghz boost clock after optimization. If these reports are correct, and there is no reason to believe they aren't, that means that the new R5 processors will be able to outperform Intel's flagship i9 9900K and Intel will have no answer to the R7 and R9 processors. I believe that AMD, having regained market share with Ryzen first and second gen, is now going for a "death blow" before Intel can optimize 10nm or release their own 7nm. It looks like AMD is well positioned to take a lot of market share from Intel with the release of 7nm Zen 2.
> 
> 
> I know that although I don't upgrade my rig very often (just upgraded from FX 8370 a few months ago) I will be upgrading to R7 3000 series if they have boost clocks near or better than 4.8Ghz and 12 cores.



IMO. its fine if it they are a tad slower so long as they don't suffer a host of vulnerabilities like Foreshadow and Spoilers. I game and work on my systems. Have one more intel rig to get rid off.


----------



## cowboy44mag

rdr09 said:


> IMO. its fine if it they are a tad slower so long as they don't suffer a host of vulnerabilities like Foreshadow and Spoilers. I game and work on my systems. Have one more intel rig to get rid off.





I agree with that. From what I understand with the security flaws is AMD processors are either totally immune to or are at much less risk than Intel systems. I believe that for most of the security flaws to attack an AMD system administrative access has to be granted by the user.


----------



## Drake87

MrPhilo said:


> Does anyone have a late 2700x production model and how does it perform? I can get one that was manu on 1836sus.
> 
> Reason I'm asking is because my 1700 I had a while ago was week 7 (1707) and I got another 1700 on week 41 and I was able to overlook that to 4.1Ghz. so just wondered if later 2700x would produce better oc at lower voltage maybe


I can check mine. It needs a ton of voltage in PBO, so much that's it's not worth enabling.


----------



## nick name

cowboy44mag said:


> I have some new Cinebench R15 and R20 scores, but had to totally reconfigure my system after a new bios update I applied yesterday. Up till yesterday, using Asus bios 4207 on my Strix x470-F motherboard, I was using PE2 (which was the highest stable one I could use) with a negative offset and was getting boost clocks of 4.250Ghz all core and Cinebench scores around 1950. I upgraded my bios to the new Asus 4406 bios and it changed literally everything. I was having huge performance hits on PE2 and could only hit 4.0Ghz all core boost. After optimizing my system all day long yesterday I now have to use a positive offset, and using PE3 as my everyday setting. I am getting boost clock of 4.2Ghz all core, am seeing lower Vcore usage of 1.330 down from 1.365 (average Vcore) and am getting slightly better Cinebench R15 scores of ~1955. With the new bios I'm also able to get PE4 to work, however it must not be totally stable as I can run all my normal stress tests (ie Prime 95, Aida64, ect) can run all my normal benchmarks like Cinebench R15, RealBench, Performance Test, Fire Strike, Time Spy, ect) but I get a total freeze black screen of death about halfway though the new Cinebench R20 when using PE4. While using PE4 my temps will hit a max of 72C and Vcore is 1.41V and my all core boost is 4.35Ghz, wish I could call it totally stable but it can't do a Cinebench R20 run without black screen of death. Here are some of my new benchmarks:
> 
> 
> All benchmarks shown here were with normal background applications (ie Kaspersky Total Security antivirus, all the "normal" Windows 10 background apps - didn't disable anything) and an ambient room temperature of 70F.
> 
> 
> Using PE3, Cinebench R15 hasn't really changed, but my new Cinebench R20 score is 4305.
> Using PE4, Cinebench R15 is now 1997 (highest I've gotten thus far is 1998, so close to breaking 2000), my Performance Test benchmark is 20,071.


This might help get you over the 2000 R15 hump.
- use Task Manager to close Explorer and everything else you may not need. You can close Cortana after you close Explorer. (to re-open Task Manager: Cntrl+Shift+Esc)
- in Task Manager: set Cinebench priority, under Detail Tab, to High Priority (the image will not render so give it time before assuming the PC has frozen)
- don't maximize the Cinebench window and then you can drag the window so that the image being rendered is off screen. (not sure how much this helps, but it's a common enough practice to recommend.)


----------



## cowboy44mag

nick name said:


> This might help get you over the 2000 R15 hump.
> - use Task Manager to close Explorer and everything else you may not need. You can close Cortana after you close Explorer. (to re-open Task Manager: Cntrl+Shift+Esc)
> - in Task Manager: set Cinebench priority, under Detail Tab, to High Priority (the image will not render so give it time before assuming the PC has frozen)
> - don't maximize the Cinebench window and then you can drag the window so that the image being rendered is off screen. (not sure how much this helps, but it's a common enough practice to recommend.)



I'll have to try setting Cinebench to high priority, however yesterday after making the post I used task manager to stop Microsoft Edge (for some reason I always have 5 active windows running for some reason in task manager) and that was enough to get me over 2000:thumb:


What has been driving me absolutely nuts is I can run every stress test and benchmark I have with PE4 and it will be just fine, I even did a small rendering and video editing project without any issue, but I can't get a run of the new Cinebench R20 to complete with PE4 enabled. I get a black screen of death every time. I would love to call my system stable using PE4 but with Cinebench R20 crashing I don't want to call it stable and use as my 24/7 settings for fear that it will crash at a really bad time (while doing an update, paying on a bill, or halfway though an important render).


----------



## nick name

cowboy44mag said:


> I'll have to try setting Cinebench to high priority, however yesterday after making the post I used task manager to stop Microsoft Edge (for some reason I always have 5 active windows running for some reason in task manager) and that was enough to get me over 2000:thumb:
> 
> 
> What has been driving me absolutely nuts is I can run every stress test and benchmark I have with PE4 and it will be just fine, I even did a small rendering and video editing project without any issue, but I can't get a run of the new Cinebench R20 to complete with PE4 enabled. I get a black screen of death every time. I would love to call my system stable using PE4 but with Cinebench R20 crashing I don't want to call it stable and use as my 24/7 settings for fear that it will crash at a really bad time (while doing an update, paying on a bill, or halfway though an important render).


What multiplier do you land at with PE4?


----------



## cowboy44mag

nick name said:


> What multiplier do you land at with PE4?



With PE4 enabled I'm pegged at 4.350Ghz across all cores so the multiplier would be 43.5.


----------



## kitfit1

rdr09 said:


> You're giving as a glimps of what the Ryzen 3000 could be capable of.
> 
> @kitfit1, here is 2700 @ 4.1GHz with RAM @ 3533MHz as well.
> 
> Ran Single test and went to breakfast. It was still running when i came back and only got 418.


I'm in the camp that's looking forward to a much bigger uplift with Zen2.
If you have a look at the thread below at OCUK, you'll see there isn't much difference between a 2700x and Intel's finest at the moment. Once Zen2 hits retail i fully expect most of Intel's SKU's to be history.

https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/threads/the-official-ocuk-cinebench-r20-benchmark-thread.18849380/


----------



## MishelLngelo

4.3GHz is all I get stable enough to run CB20 but with RAM at 3600MHz:


----------



## cowboy44mag

MishelLngelo said:


> 4.3GHz is all I get stable enough to run CB20 but with RAM at 3600MHz:



I've never tried a true "old school" overclock with Ryzen as I have preferred to use PBO, however using your results as a "chart" of sorts I can extrapolate that I must be running at between 4.25Ghz and 4.26Ghz. I wish there were a way to alter the PBO settings that are utilized when its calculating the max boost as I have thermal headroom while running PE3, and for some reason I get a black screen of death when I try to run Cinebench R20 using PE4.


When you are overclocked to 4.3, 4.35Ghz what is your Vcore set at? With PE3 I'm hitting 1.33V on average with spikes to ~1.37V and with PE4 I'm hitting 1.37V on average with spikes of ~1.4V. Been thinking that I need to increase the voltage to run Cinebench R20 with PE4 but don't know where the "safe" Vcore range is for Ryzen Plus. I can run anything else I've tested with at PE4 other than Cinebench R20 and a voltage range of 1.37 spiking to 1.4V.


Just one more question for you, do you leave your LLC on AUTO or have you adjusted the LLC as well?


----------



## nick name

When I was trying to push R20 to hit 4600 points I was getting locks and not black screens. Question: What multiplier are you at with PE3? Those voltages seem low, but not if your multiplier is lower also. And you can change the PE3 multiplier up and down after boot. You probably won't get it up to 43.5, but maybe up to 43. It depends on what your thermals are at POST. I'll link below how to do it. At 4.35GHz I'd imagine that you probably need some more voltage to get yourself stable, but you almost certainly need to set your LLC. 

R20 is also giving some 9900K guys a hard time with their pre-R20 overclocks. 

https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...tiplier-adjustments-through-ryzen-master.html


----------



## MishelLngelo

cowboy44mag said:


> I've never tried a true "old school" overclock with Ryzen as I have preferred to use PBO, however using your results as a "chart" of sorts I can extrapolate that I must be running at between 4.25Ghz and 4.26Ghz. I wish there were a way to alter the PBO settings that are utilized when its calculating the max boost as I have thermal headroom while running PE3, and for some reason I get a black screen of death when I try to run Cinebench R20 using PE4.
> 
> 
> When you are overclocked to 4.3, 4.35Ghz what is your Vcore set at? With PE3 I'm hitting 1.33V on average with spikes to ~1.37V and with PE4 I'm hitting 1.37V on average with spikes of ~1.4V. Been thinking that I need to increase the voltage to run Cinebench R20 with PE4 but don't know where the "safe" Vcore range is for Ryzen Plus. I can run anything else I've tested with at PE4 other than Cinebench R20 and a voltage range of 1.37 spiking to 1.4V.
> 
> 
> Just one more question for you, do you leave your LLC on AUTO or have you adjusted the LLC as well?


Strange things are happening here. For 4.3GHz I set voltage manually to 1.425v and LLc3 but during CB20 voltage didn't go over 1.4v hitting 1.416 for short times and only if polling interval is set to very short times. As temps never came to 70c I presume it's VRM cutting it down not letting CPU give it's best. This CPU sample won't stay stable enough for any benchmark a Hertz over 4.3 no matter what voltage etc.


----------



## cowboy44mag

nick name said:


> When I was trying to push R20 to hit 4600 points I was getting locks and not black screens. Question: What multiplier are you at with PE3? Those voltages seem low, but not if your multiplier is lower also. And you can change the PE3 multiplier up and down after boot. You probably won't get it up to 43.5, but maybe up to 43. It depends on what your thermals are at POST. I'll link below how to do it. At 4.35GHz I'd imagine that you probably need some more voltage to get yourself stable, but you almost certainly need to set your LLC.
> 
> R20 is also giving some 9900K guys a hard time with their pre-R20 overclocks.
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...tiplier-adjustments-through-ryzen-master.html



I'll try adjusting EDC in Ryzen Master and see what happens. With PE3 and just testing my current settings CPU-Z shows my multiplier is 42.


----------



## nick name

cowboy44mag said:


> I'll try adjusting EDC in Ryzen Master and see what happens. With PE3 and just testing my current settings CPU-Z shows my multiplier is 42.


Oh, if you're starting at 42 then I would expect you to get to at least 43. I start at 41 or 41.3 due to my undervolt and ambient and get up to 42.5 after adjusting EDC. With the same undervolt, but lower ambient I can get up to 43 and with very low ambient I get higher. I typically use BCLK to get higher when I'm benchmarking competitively.


----------



## cowboy44mag

MishelLngelo said:


> Strange things are happening here. For 4.3GHz I set voltage manually to 1.425v and LLc3 but during CB20 voltage didn't go over 1.4v hitting 1.416 for short times and only if polling interval is set to very short times. As temps never came to 70c I presume it's VRM cutting it down not letting CPU give it's best. This CPU sample won't stay stable enough for any benchmark a Hertz over 4.3 no matter what voltage etc.



In your sig is says your bios is 4207. Have you upgraded to bios 4406? Using 4207 the highest PE I could utilize was PE2, with 4406 I can set at PE3 and PE4 and run almost anything (the exception being Cinebench R20 won't run at PE4). Using PE3 I now have to set a positive offset with bios 4406 but have lower overall Vcore, going from 1.36V on average with 4207 and PE2 to 1.33V on average with bios 4406 and PE3.


----------



## cowboy44mag

nick name said:


> Oh, if you're starting at 42 then I would expect you to get to at least 43. I start at 41 or 41.3 due to my undervolt and ambient and get up to 42.5 after adjusting EDC. With the same undervolt, but lower ambient I can get up to 43 and with very low ambient I get higher. I typically use BCLK to get higher when I'm benchmarking competitively.



Unfortunately with the ROG Strix X470-F I can't utilize BCLK overclocking and have no option of setting a SensiMi Skew of any type. The Strix X470-F has limited bios features... I actually considered upgrading to the Hero X470, but with the 3000 series only a few months from launch if I am going to upgrade the motherboard I'll wait for the X570 boards.


----------



## MishelLngelo

cowboy44mag said:


> In your sig is says your bios is 4207. Have you upgraded to bios 4406? Using 4207 the highest PE I could utilize was PE2, with 4406 I can set at PE3 and PE4 and run almost anything (the exception being Cinebench R20 won't run at PE4). Using PE3 I now have to set a positive offset with bios 4406 but have lower overall Vcore, going from 1.36V on average with 4207 and PE2 to 1.33V on average with bios 4406 and PE3.


Yeah, just recently updated to 4406 but results are same except PBO doesn't work now.


----------



## nick name

cowboy44mag said:


> Unfortunately with the ROG Strix X470-F I can't utilize BCLK overclocking and have no option of setting a SensiMi Skew of any type. The Strix X470-F has limited bios features... I actually considered upgrading to the Hero X470, but with the 3000 series only a few months from launch if I am going to upgrade the motherboard I'll wait for the X570 boards.


I would encourage it. The next Crosshair that is. BCLK is super useful when benchmarking/overclocking. I'm actually able to do much more with the combination of PE/adjusting the multiplier with EDC/BCLK than I am with traditional overclocking. I can't get 4.3GHz stable at all with traditional overclocking, but can hit it and stay stable with PE/adjusting the multiplier with EDC/BCLK.


----------



## cowboy44mag

nick name said:


> I would encourage it. The next Crosshair that is. BCLK is super useful when benchmarking/overclocking. I'm actually able to do much more with the combination of PE/adjusting the multiplier with EDC/BCLK than I am with traditional overclocking. I can't get 4.3GHz stable at all with traditional overclocking, but can hit it and stay stable with PE/adjusting the multiplier with EDC/BCLK.



As much as I love my 2700X I am thinking that I'm going to sell my Strix board, 2700X, and my old 3200Mhz Ram kit as a bundle and upgrade to the Hero X570 motherboard and R7 3000 series processor.


----------



## cowboy44mag

nick name said:


> When I was trying to push R20 to hit 4600 points I was getting locks and not black screens. Question: What multiplier are you at with PE3? Those voltages seem low, but not if your multiplier is lower also. And you can change the PE3 multiplier up and down after boot. You probably won't get it up to 43.5, but maybe up to 43. It depends on what your thermals are at POST. I'll link below how to do it. At 4.35GHz I'd imagine that you probably need some more voltage to get yourself stable, but you almost certainly need to set your LLC.
> 
> R20 is also giving some 9900K guys a hard time with their pre-R20 overclocks.
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...tiplier-adjustments-through-ryzen-master.html





You are the MAN:thumb::thumb:


I just increased my EDC to 153 using Ryzen Master and I'm already showing big performance increases I am going to have a lot of testing to do with this new knowledge but will update with benchmarks and let you know how far I was able to get. This is the best kept trick/ secret I've come across yet for improving performance, Thank you a ton:thumb:


----------



## cowboy44mag

MishelLngelo said:


> Yeah, just recently updated to 4406 but results are same except PBO doesn't work now.



When I updated my bios to 4406 I had to basically redo all my voltages and settings across the board. I went from using a negative offset with 4207 to using positive offset of I think .0250. What was really strange is my overall reported voltage in my monitoring apps went from 1.36V using 4207 and a negative offset to 1.33V using a positive offset in 4406. When I first upgraded to 4406 I was going insane because I lost a lot of performance until I figured out what was going on.


I don't know if everyone will have the same experience with the new bios, but that was my experience.


----------



## nick name

cowboy44mag said:


> As much as I love my 2700X I am thinking that I'm going to sell my Strix board, 2700X, and my old 3200Mhz Ram kit as a bundle and upgrade to the Hero X570 motherboard and R7 3000 series processor.


I am going to do the same. Probably gonna sell my RAM too now that 4000MHz kits cost as much as I paid for my 3600MHz kit. I am super excited.


----------



## nick name

cowboy44mag said:


> You are the MAN:thumb::thumb:
> 
> 
> I just increased my EDC to 153 using Ryzen Master and I'm already showing big performance increases I am going to have a lot of testing to do with this new knowledge but will update with benchmarks and let you know how far I was able to get. This is the best kept trick/ secret I've come across yet for improving performance, Thank you a ton:thumb:


No problem. I don't know why more people don't. Other than they don't know -- which is why I created a post for it. 

The Stilt said he intended to be able to make the adjustment in BIOS, but ASUS didn't implement it that way. I kinda prefer using Ryzen Master since you don't know which multiplier you're gonna boot at and you can adjust after-the-fact. Also, on-the-fly.


----------



## cowboy44mag

nick name said:


> No problem. I don't know why more people don't. Other than they don't know -- which is why I created a post for it.
> 
> The Stilt said he intended to be able to make the adjustment in BIOS, but ASUS didn't implement it that way. I kinda prefer using Ryzen Master since you don't know which multiplier you're gonna boot at and you can adjust after-the-fact. Also, on-the-fly.



I never really liked software overclocking utilities, always preferred to do overclocking in bios, however the Strix X470-F leaves little other options with the scant bios options it offers. Ryzen Master is impressing me though. I had to increase my Vcore a little, but with Ryzen Master I'm now hitting 4.29 - 4.3Ghz using PE3 and PBO.


----------



## nick name

cowboy44mag said:


> I never really liked software overclocking utilities, always preferred to do overclocking in bios, however the Strix X470-F leaves little other options with the scant bios options it offers. Ryzen Master is impressing me though. I had to increase my Vcore a little, but with Ryzen Master I'm now hitting 4.29 - 4.3Ghz using PE3 and PBO.


The best thing about Ryzen Master is you don't need it running. Set it. Close it. Go back and change it if you want. It can also be used to downclock. Reduce EDC and you can get the multiplier down quite a bit.


----------



## cowboy44mag

nick name said:


> The best thing about Ryzen Master is you don't need it running. Set it. Close it. Go back and change it if you want. It can also be used to downclock. Reduce EDC and you can get the multiplier down quite a bit.



I'm learning to like Ryzen Master


----------



## nick name

cowboy44mag said:


> I'm learning to like Ryzen Master


You should go back and see if you can best your previous R15 scores now too.


----------



## Deviousdb1

Freshly upgraded from an FX8350. Served me well over the last five years, decided on the 2700 non X variant. So far I enjoy it, but 16gb of memory is my biggest bottleneck. Planning on replacing the 16gb with 32gb with cl14.


----------



## nick name

Deviousdb1 said:


> Freshly upgraded from an FX8350. Served me well over the last five years, decided on the 2700 non X variant. So far I enjoy it, but 16gb of memory is my biggest bottleneck. Planning on replacing the 16gb with 32gb with cl14.


What type of work do you do with your machine?


----------



## Deviousdb1

nick name said:


> What type of work do you do with your machine?


Nothing other than gaming. It's your basic gaming pc.


----------



## nick name

Deviousdb1 said:


> Nothing other than gaming. It's your basic gaming pc.


Have you considered using less RAM for better performance? If you're not using all of it you may find yourself finding some extra speed using a 2x8GB kit.


----------



## cowboy44mag

Deviousdb1 said:


> Nothing other than gaming. It's your basic gaming pc.



nick name is right, you don't need 32Gb of RAM for gaming. No game is going to require that much RAM, and if they ever do we will all probably be using DDR8 by then. I actually end up doing more rendering and video editing with my rig than gaming, however the relatively small projects I do rarely push up to my 16Gb limit and rendering and video editing require more RAM than gaming. I was considering a 32Gb kit but decided against it based on cost and so far I haven't really needed more than 16Gb. 



For even the most modern games 32Gb of RAM is a total waste, 16Gb is more than enough.


----------



## skline00

I get 4162 with my stock 2700x and PBO enabled in my rig below. Happy with that. Despite the tweaking done by some, I think the 2700x was released just about at max with very little headroom. It will be very interesting to see the clock speeds of the 3000 series.


----------



## rdr09

skline00 said:


> I get 4162 with my stock 2700x and PBO enabled in my rig below. Happy with that. Despite the tweaking done by some, I think the 2700x was released just about at max with very little headroom. It will be very interesting to see the clock speeds of the 3000 series.


Have HWINFO64 in the background and observe the clocks when running the same bench. I get about the same score at 4GHz with a 2700. Unless your RAM is running low.


----------



## skline00

rdr09, thank you for the info. 

At work now, so I'll try it tonight when I get home.


----------



## cowboy44mag

skline00 said:


> I get 4162 with my stock 2700x and PBO enabled in my rig below. Happy with that. Despite the tweaking done by some, I think the 2700x was released just about at max with very little headroom. It will be very interesting to see the clock speeds of the 3000 series.



There isn't a lot of headroom, but there is some and it can make a notable difference. With little optimizations my 2700X will run at 4.125Ghz all core with PBO enabled. While I do get really good performance overall at 4.125Ghz with a little optimizations (ie running at PE3, tweaking RAM, using the very useful Ryzen Master optimizations I just found out about) I can get my processor all the way up to 4.35Ghz all core. Heat isn't really bad, just higher than I would like maxing around 74C @ 4.35Ghz, and the performance is really good. It comes in very handy for benchmarking and if I'm really crunched to get something done on a very tight time frame. I have settled at running my rig at 4.275Ghz all Core (of course 4.35Ghz up to four core) for 24/7 use as there isn't much performance difference at 4.275Ghz and my max temp hovers just around 65C, which I'm much more comfortable with.



For most every day applications your not going to see a big difference between 4Ghz all core and 4.275Ghz and even 4.35Ghz. If all your doing is internet surfing, gaming, streaming video, ect your really not going to notice much of a difference. With gaming running at 4.35Ghz may net you an additional 3, 5 FPS and while I know a lot of people will claim they can notice it, I've never been able to notice a 5 FPS difference unless your tanking below 30FPS. Really your only going to notice the difference if your rendering, video/ photo editing, or something like folding. Even then for the most part the "big" difference is going to be measured in mere seconds or a couple minutes at most (with the exception of folding).


----------



## rdr09

skline00 said:


> rdr09, thank you for the info.
> 
> At work now, so I'll try it tonight when I get home.


My bad. I think im mistaken. When i see PBO on or enabled i immediately think 4.2-4.3 on all cores and that the 2700X at stock will run cinebench at 4GHz all cores. So, i think your score is right on.


----------



## zack_orner

nick name said:


> Have you considered using less RAM for better performance? If you're not using all of it you may find yourself finding some extra speed using a 2x8GB kit.


So after hours of testing I don't fully agree. I'm not saying it is worth the extra money for the 4 8gb kit vs the 2 8gb kit. But I wouldn't say you will loose performance because of using 32 GB(4x8gb). So I bought the 4x8gb kit and run my everyday setup 3200 MHz 14cl fast timings from ryzen dram calculator. So 4 sticks at those timings are only stable to about 3400 MHz . Today I pulled two sticks out without changing the timings just upping the dram voltage I could get to 3600 MHz. I started at 3200 and slowly bumped up the speed and voltage and ran 10 to 15 test let system cool and move up till not stable. And all of the testing the scores are within 20 points of each other. So I put the other two sticks back in and dropped speed and voltage back down and still within 5 to 10 points of highest scores all day. So in conclusion I feel if you don't want to pay for it don't but if you want it get it. I have the gskills trident rgb so think it looks better fully populated, also with aura on my Asus board it gives you 20 different individual leds to customize.









2700x rog cross hair hero vii 1 tb 970 evo gskiils 3200cl14 msi 2080 ti gaming x trio asus rog ryou 240 aio


----------



## cowboy44mag

rdr09 said:


> My bad. I think im mistaken. When i see PBO on or enabled i immediately think 4.2-4.3 on all cores and that the 2700X at stock will run cinebench at 4GHz all cores. So, i think your score is right on.



4162cb @ 4Ghz on Cinebench R20 sounds about right. At 4290.9Mhz across all cores I get a CB 20 score of 4443cb.


----------



## nick name

zack_orner said:


> So after hours of testing I don't fully agree. I'm not saying it is worth the extra money for the 4 8gb kit vs the 2 8gb kit. But I wouldn't say you will loose performance because of using 32 GB(4x8gb). So I bought the 4x8gb kit and run my everyday setup 3200 MHz 14cl fast timings from ryzen dram calculator. So 4 sticks at those timings are only stable to about 3400 MHz . Today I pulled two sticks out without changing the timings just upping the dram voltage I could get to 3600 MHz. I started at 3200 and slowly bumped up the speed and voltage and ran 10 to 15 test let system cool and move up till not stable. And all of the testing the scores are within 20 points of each other. So I put the other two sticks back in and dropped speed and voltage back down and still within 5 to 10 points of highest scores all day. So in conclusion I feel if you don't want to pay for it don't but if you want it get it. I have the gskills trident rgb so think it looks better fully populated, also with aura on my Asus board it gives you 20 different individual leds to customize.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2700x rog cross hair hero vii 1 tb 970 evo gskiils 3200cl14 msi 2080 ti gaming x trio asus rog ryou 240 aio


Wait, you got your 4x8GB kit up to 3600CL14?


----------



## cowboy44mag

nick name said:


> Wait, you got your 4x8GB kit up to 3600CL14?



He said he pulled 2 sticks to get to 3600Mhz CL14. He was able to run all 4 sticks at 3400Mhz (everyday setup he quoted at 3200Mhz) but could only get to 3600Mhz by running 2 sticks at CL 14.


----------



## cowboy44mag

I have a general RAM question for the experts that have done more testing than I have. With the Ryzen 2700X I haven't done a lot of RAM optimization since I upgraded to Samsung B die. With they Hynix A die I was running I noted that RAM speeds above 3400Mhz produced very little to no gain (depending on the task running) and it was a much better option to tighten timings than increase speed past 3400Mhz. When I got my B die I didn't do the whole "barrage" of testing, all I did was set the timings for FAST (3200Mhz settings) using the RAM calculator, and then I bumped up the speed to 3400Mhz so the timings at 3400Mhz would be very fast/ extreme. So basically I want to ask if there is any real performance increase to be had with the 2700X running RAM above 3400Mhz CL14 (very fast timings). I could always loosen my timings to 3400Mhz Fast and increase the speed to 3600Mhz... Does anyone think that would give better performance than 3400Mhz at faster timings?


----------



## rdr09

cowboy44mag said:


> 4162cb @ 4Ghz on Cinebench R20 sounds about right. At 4290.9Mhz across all cores I get a CB 20 score of 4443cb.


Thanks for this. So, the 4160 score, is it with PBO on or enabled? While the latter is with PBO on with tweaks. right?


----------



## Saiger0

cowboy44mag said:


> all I did was set the timings for FAST (3200Mhz settings) using the RAM calculator, and then I bumped up the speed to 3400Mhz so the timings at 3400Mhz would be very fast/ extreme.


Don´t do stuff like this Ram doesnt work like that. Timings can be too tight which will affect performance negatively.

The sweetspot for b-die is 3466cl14 (or 3400cl14). Try if you can get its fast preset from the dram calculator stable. And do a quick aida64 memory benchmark to check your general ram performance. here is mine


----------



## rdr09

Saiger0 said:


> Don´t do stuff like this Ram doesnt work like that. Timings can be too tight which will affect performance negatively.
> 
> The sweetspot for b-die is 3466cl14 (or 3400cl14). Try if you can get its fast preset from the dram calculator stable. And do a quick aida64 memory benchmark to check your general ram performance. here is mine



i get about the same. It would be interesting to see how 3600 Cl16 compares.

Anyway, i was comparing my R5 1600 and R7 2700 both at stock in the same game and it seems my 2700 uses less energy. If i can call it that and if HWINFO is showing the right reading.


----------



## MishelLngelo

Asus prime x470 pro just got a new BIOS with AGESA 0.0.7.2 with new and detailed PBO/XFR settings, things are looking better. Fast benches show performance of about 4.2GHz manual OC. Power saving settings enabled.


----------



## cowboy44mag

rdr09 said:


> Thanks for this. So, the 4160 score, is it with PBO on or enabled? While the latter is with PBO on with tweaks. right?



Exactly. I don't do real "overclocking" on the 2700X. I optimize the settings as best as I can and allow PBO to automatically scale the processor clock speeds. I just did some testing to show that indeed at ~4Ghz your going to see a Cinebench R20 score of ~4160cb. This was done with RAM set at 3400Mhz CL14, everything else set at AUTO, PBO enabled, and I then used Ryzen Master to control the clock speed and got as close to 4Ghz as possible. If I were actually hitting 4Ghz and not 3991.7Mhz with Ryzen Master and hardware info running in the background the score would have easily been ~4160.


----------



## cowboy44mag

Saiger0 said:


> Don´t do stuff like this Ram doesnt work like that. Timings can be too tight which will affect performance negatively.
> 
> The sweetspot for b-die is 3466cl14 (or 3400cl14). Try if you can get its fast preset from the dram calculator stable. And do a quick aida64 memory benchmark to check your general ram performance. here is mine





Posting a screenshot of my run. Later today I'll try to set the timings for 3400Mhz Fast and clock speed at 3466 and see if there is an improvement. Will compare against 3466 with Fast timings as well. If I have enough time today I may even try to set for 3600 Fast timings for a comparison of that as well. I was always under the impression that you ran at as tight of timings as possible without creating errors and blue screens, but I may be running too tight.


----------



## Saiger0

cowboy44mag said:


> Posting a screenshot of my run. Later today I'll try to set the timings for 3400Mhz Fast and clock speed at 3466 and see if there is an improvement. Will compare against 3466 with Fast timings as well. If I have enough time today I may even try to set for 3600 Fast timings for a comparison of that as well. I was always under the impression that you ran at as tight of timings as possible without creating errors and blue screens, but I may be running too tight.


unless you run 3600 at cl14 it will perform worse than 3466cl14.

But you have to ensure your settings are stable unless you want to risk corrupting your os/files over time. Conforming ram stabiltiy at these frequencies needs at least 5 hrs of testing.


----------



## cowboy44mag

Saiger0 said:


> unless you run 3600 at cl14 it will perform worse than 3466cl14.
> 
> But you have to ensure your settings are stable unless you want to risk corrupting your os/files over time. Conforming ram stabiltiy at these frequencies needs at least 5 hrs of testing.



Haven't gotten to 3600Mhz yet, just got through preliminary testing with 3466Mhz CL14, pretty tight timings. Still have some testing to do, but results are posted below:


----------



## rdr09

cowboy44mag said:


> Haven't gotten to 3600Mhz yet, just got through preliminary testing with 3466Mhz CL14, pretty tight timings. Still have some testing to do, but results are posted below:


Nice. That really helps in gaming, especially if you got Ryzen paired with a fast gpu. But with mid-tier gpus, 2400MHz is fine.


----------



## cowboy44mag

rdr09 said:


> Nice. That really helps in gaming, especially if you got Ryzen paired with a fast gpu. But with mid-tier gpus, 2400MHz is fine.



Not sure which "tier" my GPU would be considered to be in. I wanted a definite upgrade from my R9 290 (which when I bought it was a powerful card and has actually aged well) so I upgraded to a RTX 2070 which I have overclocked to 2260Mhz. In its overclocked state the performance is about equal to a stock 1080Ti.


----------



## rdr09

cowboy44mag said:


> Not sure which "tier" my GPU would be considered to be in. I wanted a definite upgrade from my R9 290 (which when I bought it was a powerful card and has actually aged well) so I upgraded to a RTX 2070 which I have overclocked to 2260Mhz. In its overclocked state the performance is about equal to a stock 1080Ti.


I think the 2070 is a highend. Mid would be a 2060. The 2080Ti is on a league of its own. The 290 or 1060 is now considered low end.


----------



## AmaKatsu

I'm not worried that much about PBO due to temperature limit and my room temperature is about 29-32'C a year, yeah we have wintertime but just for a week actually

So, even use Noctua D15s or MasterLiquid 280 Pro with MX-4 2019 still hit 80'C at full load.
Aida64 8hrs max 80'C
Cinebench R20 5 times max 71'C

Old school OC 4.0GHz 1.27500V
PBO PE1 (-0.05V) All core 4.0GHz, boost 4.30GHz

they are all same at 80'C, except for PBO vCore sometime hit 1.46V and 0.76V at lowest

PBO for me not take much time to test when compared to RAM, at most a week for fine tuned PBO

In RAM test for all fine tuning may take a month or more (4 dimms)

mobo : C7H bios 1201


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## cowboy44mag

rdr09 said:


> I think the 2070 is a highend. Mid would be a 2060. The 2080Ti is on a league of its own. The 290 or 1060 is now considered low end.



The performance of the 2080Ti is what throws me off for determining where the new tier list is... It is extremely expensive, but it truly is in a league of its own. Coming from a R9 290 and FX 8370 I'm very happy with my RTX 2070 and R7 2700X


----------



## rdr09

cowboy44mag said:


> The performance of the 2080Ti is what throws me off for determining where the new tier list is... It is extremely expensive, but it truly is in a league of its own. Coming from a R9 290 and FX 8370 I'm very happy with my RTX 2070 and R7 2700X


I can imagine how happy you are. I upgraded from a Phenom II with an HD 7950 to an R5 1600 paired with a 1060 and im pretty happy. The R5 can even be an upgrade to my intel i7 2700K. Unbelieveable value.

I wish i'll be back in the States for when Navi arrives. Really looking forward to that and Ryzen 3000.


----------



## cowboy44mag

rdr09 said:


> I can imagine how happy you are. I upgraded from a Phenom II with an HD 7950 to an R5 1600 paired with a 1060 and im pretty happy. The R5 can even be an upgrade to my intel i7 2700K. Unbelieveable value.
> 
> I wish i'll be back in the States for when Navi arrives. Really looking forward to that and Ryzen 3000.



I hear you, I am also really looking forward to Ryzen 3000. After dropping $500 on the RTX 2070 I won't be upgrading that anytime soon even if Navi is totally amazing, but I am really looking forward to Zen 2. I am trying to decide if I want to upgrade to a R7 3000 with 12 cores and 24 threads or a R9 3000 with 16 cores and 32 threads-- if the rumors are true that is. Its just so hard to believe that only a few years ago I was drooling over an Intel 6 core 12 thread processor that was way out of my price range for rendering and editing, and now I'm looking at possibly upgrading to a 12 core 24 thread processor that will be in my price range or possibly even stepping up to R9. Just think if Ryzen never came along we would all still be talking about the next quad core flagship processor....


----------



## skordilis

hello guys. i am new with amd family. i get 2700x with msi x470 gaming pro carbon and saphire nitro vega 64. for now i am on default values but if someone help me with some right settings from bios i appreciate it. thank you. i have also ryzen master installed


----------



## MishelLngelo

skordilis said:


> hello guys. i am new with amd family. i get 2700x with msi x470 gaming pro carbon and saphire nitro vega 64. for now i am on default values but if someone help me with some right settings from bios i appreciate it. thank you. i have also ryzen master installed


Hi, for most part only enabling XMP/DOCP to your RAM's best XMP setting is required because that's not going to happen automatically. Depending on when MB was manufactured, I would also check BIOS version and update it to latest one. This platform is relatively new and with upcoming processors, BIOS may change more often. Some parts of BIOS like AGESA code is often updated to reflect changes in memory etc. 
Hope you did a clean install of Windows and all required drivers.
Run some tests and benchmarks and use HWinfo https://www.hwinfo.com/download/ for best amount of data and most accuracy, it's best with AMD.


----------



## skordilis

*skordilis*



MishelLngelo said:


> Hi, for most part only enabling XMP/DOCP to your RAM's best XMP setting is required because that's not going to happen automatically. Depending on when MB was manufactured, I would also check BIOS version and update it to latest one. This platform is relatively new and with upcoming processors, BIOS may change more often. Some parts of BIOS like AGESA code is often updated to reflect changes in memory etc.
> Hope you did a clean install of Windows and all required drivers.
> Run some tests and benchmarks and use HWinfo https://www.hwinfo.com/download/ for best amount of data and most accuracy, it's best with AMD.


yes xmp profile already added to 3200 mhz and ofc clean install of windows. thank you very much


----------



## MishelLngelo

skordilis said:


> yes xmp profile already added to 3200 mhz and ofc clean install of windows. thank you very much


Given right conditions, X models can practically take care of themselves. I never had a CPU that can do it so good and a CPU with less need for OC.


----------



## cssorkinman

Impressed with the 2700/570 rig in BF 5 

Sure gets warm in my mini itx case tho - gonna have to work on something different for cooling.


----------



## nick name

cssorkinman said:


> Impressed with the 2700/570 rig in BF 5
> 
> Sure gets warm in my mini itx case tho - gonna have to work on something different for cooling.


Lol. I briefly thought you were speaking of X570. I'm dumb.


----------



## cssorkinman

nick name said:


> Lol. I briefly thought you were speaking of X570. I'm dumb.


That would be something


----------



## Velheibgnar

Hello guys. 
I just noticed a situation when CPU is 1,43V all core, but with low clocks 2,4 all (single jumping here and there).
Load is like 5% 
Temp is like 36 (normally it's 22 - 42 C in idle).

This situation is called , wait for it... Diablo 2  
Is it still gucci when temp and load is perfect?? I could not replicate it with anything else but diablo 2


----------



## cowboy44mag

Velheibgnar said:


> Hello guys.
> I just noticed a situation when CPU is 1,43V all core, but with low clocks 2,4 all (single jumping here and there).
> Load is like 5%
> Temp is like 36 (normally it's 22 - 42 C in idle).
> 
> This situation is called , wait for it... Diablo 2
> Is it still gucci when temp and load is perfect?? I could not replicate it with anything else but diablo 2





I have a different situation I find a little strange. Using Cinebench R15 when I push the my PBO overclock to 4.3Ghz (4.29Ghz) I am seeing a Vcore of 1.381V (first pic). When I do the same exact run in single core mode I'm seeing Vcore fluctuating between 1.40 and 1.431V (second pic). Every other processor I've ever monitored the Vcore when pushing a high clock on all cores is always more than pushing a high clock on a single core (when using an Vcore voltage offset). I know that the single core is clocking to 4.35Ghz, however when I push all core clock to 4.35Ghz my Vcore is only 1.41V. I find it strange that a single core is bouncing as high as 1.431V


----------



## lightsout

MishelLngelo said:


> Asus prime x470 pro just got a new BIOS with AGESA 0.0.7.2 with new and detailed PBO/XFR settings, things are looking better. Fast benches show performance of about 4.2GHz manual OC. Power saving settings enabled.


Hmmm, I see it for the x470 variant of my board but not the B450. I guess I will wait and see.


----------



## Nick Moiré

Aida64 Played me like a joke.

*First*


vCore 1.2250 (bios) can run Aida64 v.5.99 for 8hrs without error (SoC 0.9750 included)

*Second* :: Memtest5 0.12
It need increase SoC to 1.00000



*Third* :: LinX 0.70, 8GB, 15 times
SoC is required again, 1.02500




*Finally* :: Prime95 v.29 (2Hrs run)
Immense vCore needed!!! from 1.22500 to 1.28750. 





At the same voltage as Aida64, Prime got "2 Threads not running with 2 mins"

Oh, poor Aida64 ruined all my trust.


----------



## rdr09

Nick Moiré said:


> Aida64 Played me like a joke.
> 
> *First*
> 
> 
> vCore 1.2250 (bios) can run Aida64 v.5.99 for 8hrs without error (SoC 0.9750 included)
> 
> *Second* :: Memtest5 0.12
> It need increase SoC to 1.00000
> 
> 
> 
> *Third* :: LinX 0.70, 8GB, 15 times
> SoC is required again, 1.02500
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Finally* :: Prime95 v.29 (2Hrs run)
> Immense vCore needed!!! from 1.22500 to 1.28750.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> At the same voltage as Aida64, Prime got "2 Threads not running with 2 mins"
> 
> Oh, poor Aida64 ruined all my trust.


For as long as i've been in ocn, never heard anyone recommend Aida for system stability testing. Linx to check temps. When temps are good, Prime for 24hrs. Nowadays, i just use my the games i play. I highly recommend testing ram and cpu separately. Test cpu first (linx, Prime), then ram (memtest, hci, etc). Finally, combined test.

Aida is good for checking latency.

BTW, not sure what that component reaching 90c but you might want to check your airflow. Keep all temps below 80c if you can. Keep RAM lower than 45c.


----------



## Kryton

Was finally able to do the deed and grab a 2700X Ryzen - Now I don't feel left out. 
Parts pic and when I did a test setup before placing in the case. 

All AMD build including the GPU being a Radeon VII, loaded up Win 7 and it's working great. 
Have another CPU cooler coming, the Wraith cooler isn't that good and I want temps to be a little better at least before calling it all "Done".


----------



## rdr09

Kryton said:


> Was finally able to do the deed and grab a 2700X Ryzen - Now I don't feel left out.
> Parts pic and when I did a test setup before placing in the case.
> 
> All AMD build including the GPU being a Radeon VII, loaded up Win 7 and it's working great.
> Have another CPU cooler coming, the Wraith cooler isn't that good and I want temps to be a little better at least before calling it all "Done".


Im jelly. Which one are you gonna use? FlareX or Trident? Prolly you gonna test which kit plays better. Why so late when the X570 are almost here?


----------



## Kryton

TBH hadn't paid any attention to that but doesn't matter - This is being used as a daily and my useage isn't too demanding to worry about the newest thing. 

Popped in the Tridents (Royals) and it's doing fine, I did have the Flare's in (Shown in the test pic) and they did well too. I even ordered another set of Flares so I won't get caught short on good B die unlike before. Either set is good for OC'ing but wanted the Flares for OC'ing, the Royals for the daily.


----------



## cowboy44mag

Just noticed that a new bios has posted. Asus bios 4602, AGESA 0072. Has anyone else updated to this bios yet? The last time I updated was from 4207 to 4406 so I'm currently running AGESA 0070, however when I upgraded I initially had a lot of issues and for a short period of time even thought I might have bricked my motherboard. I have seen in several different threads that I lot of people had issues with 4406 and listed it as having a lot of bugs. I was able to get 4406 running really well on my machine, although it took several days to get all the kinks worked out and fully utilize the new bios. I was just wondering if anyone else upgraded to bios 4602 AGESA 0072, and if so what was your experience with it? I don't really want to go through another scare of "did I brick my board" and several days of tinkering with the new bios to get he optimal settings if there isn't any advantage over 4406 AGESA 0070.


----------



## MishelLngelo

cowboy44mag said:


> Just noticed that a new bios has posted. Asus bios 4602, AGESA 0072. Has anyone else updated to this bios yet? The last time I updated was from 4207 to 4406 so I'm currently running AGESA 0070, however when I upgraded I initially had a lot of issues and for a short period of time even thought I might have bricked my motherboard. I have seen in several different threads that I lot of people had issues with 4406 and listed it as having a lot of bugs. I was able to get 4406 running really well on my machine, although it took several days to get all the kinks worked out and fully utilize the new bios. I was just wondering if anyone else upgraded to bios 4602 AGESA 0072, and if so what was your experience with it? I don't really want to go through another scare of "did I brick my board" and several days of tinkering with the new bios to get he optimal settings if there isn't any advantage over 4406 AGESA 0070.


Installed it in my Prime x470 pro. PBO is back with vengeance and works with 10 steps although on auto seems to work best. Also moved to main AiTweaker tab. RAM has lost a bit on latency but is more stable at high speeds. When all on auto, CB20 gained some 10%.


----------



## cowboy44mag

MishelLngelo said:


> Installed it in my Prime x470 pro. PBO is back with vengeance and works with 10 steps although on auto seems to work best. Also moved to main AiTweaker tab. RAM has lost a bit on latency but is more stable at high speeds. When all on auto, CB20 gained some 10%.



Sounds like they improved on stability for some builds and improved the AUTO features for people who just "plug and play". What do you mean by PBO is back? With bios 4406 I still have the option of enabling PBO, and when I load Ryzen Master it shows PBO is enabled, so I would assume PBO has been working, at least for the Strix X470-F with 4406. One feature that I have never seen in bios is the ability to set the PBO scalar, is that what you are referring to by "10 steps"?


Sorry for the questions, I just had a hell of a time after flashing 4406, and feel like I very nearly avoided a bricked motherboard. Therefore before updating to 4602 I just wanted to make sure there is a good reason to update, ie security features, more bios options and control, better RAM performance, ect. With 4406 I gained the ability to use PE3 (PE4 I still can't use as the voltage requirements are just too high), have PBO enabled, and have my RAM running at 3466Mhz CL14 fast timings. When I cold boot into windows I see single to quad core boosts of 4.35Ghz and all core boosts of 4.15Ghz. I can then use Ryzen master to increase the EDC cap and get all core boosts all the way up to 4.35Ghz, although 4.3Ghz all core is the most stable as I can't run Cinebench R20 at 4.35Ghz. For 24/7 use I've been setting the EDC cap accordingly so I can get all core boosts of 4.225Ghz and single/ quad core boosts of 4.35Ghz.



I have always been led to believe that when a new bios update comes out you should flash it as soon as is possible or you risk incompatibility issues and security flaws, performance limitations, stability issues, ect. However it seems that at times flashing the newest bios can not only be risky (as I damn near bricked my board last time and have been doing bios updates for a very long time on many different platforms) but also at times results in loss of some abilities and reduced overall performance. I don't want to remain on 4406 if its going to cause stability, compatibility, or security risks, but I also don't want to end up with reduced performance by going to 4602.


----------



## MishelLngelo

PBO wasn't working at all with 4406, just wasn't doing anything no matter what setting. Now it works fine even on auto, boosting all cores although some to 4.3 and minimum to just under 4.2GHz. Under full load of course. Non working PBO was a cause of most complaints. Ortodox OC was never in question and I can still run stable 4.3 on all cores. 
Memory, yes that improved too, I can set DOCP at 3000 and set RAM at 3600 Cl16 again but that's probably thanks to AGESA code 0072. 
As for flashing newest BIOS as soon as it's out, that shouldn't be necessary unless addresses your problems or needed for another CPU. "Update AGESA 0072 for the upcoming processors" in this case.
All together,it was worth it this time.


----------



## cowboy44mag

MishelLngelo said:


> PBO wasn't working at all with 4406, just wasn't doing anything no matter what setting. Now it works fine even on auto, boosting all cores although some to 4.3 and minimum to just under 4.2GHz. Under full load of course. Non working PBO was a cause of most complaints. Ortodox OC was never in question and I can still run stable 4.3 on all cores.
> Memory, yes that improved too, I can set DOCP at 3000 and set RAM at 3600 Cl16 again but that's probably thanks to AGESA code 0072.
> As for flashing newest BIOS as soon as it's out, that shouldn't be necessary unless addresses your problems or needed for another CPU. "Update AGESA 0072 for the upcoming processors" in this case.
> All together,it was worth it this time.



I totally concur. I just got through flashing the new bios and getting all my settings tweaked. Still have to fully test everything, but everything seems very stable. I see what you meant about PBO not working with 4406. In bios it was enabled, in Windows Ryzen Master showed it enabled, but it wasn't really enabled, it wasn't doing anything. Now on AUTO settings you can definitely see PBO working, whereas before I would have to tweak a bunch of settings to make it seem like it was working properly. Overall I'm getting the same boosts I was able to get with 4406, but with a lot less "hands on" tweaking to get it there.

With the new 4602 I was able to get much faster RAM timings, which I believe is the best asset of the new bios. I was able to get 3600Mhz CL14 tighter timings than fast from Ryzen RAM calculator. I was also able for the first time to get PE4 working, before the best I could do was PE3. With PE4 when I boot into windows I'm by default boosting to 4.35Ghz all core with PBO enabled and am stable at 1.41V. I see no real benefit to running it at that speed all the time though (only run it at 4.35Ghz all core for benchmarking and if I need to get a rendering or editing / converting job done as quickly as is possible), so I use Ryzen Master to adjust the EDC down while in windows and run at 4.25Ghz all core at 1.334V. All in all I am very happy with the new bios, and am really looking forward to seeing what AMD has been able to do with Zen 2 (given the performance boosts of just the new bios for Zen 2).

New RAM profile and benchmark:


----------



## nick name

cowboy44mag said:


> I totally concur. I just got through flashing the new bios and getting all my settings tweaked. Still have to fully test everything, but everything seems very stable. I see what you meant about PBO not working with 4406. In bios it was enabled, in Windows Ryzen Master showed it enabled, but it wasn't really enabled, it wasn't doing anything. Now on AUTO settings you can definitely see PBO working, whereas before I would have to tweak a bunch of settings to make it seem like it was working properly. Overall I'm getting the same boosts I was able to get with 4406, but with a lot less "hands on" tweaking to get it there.
> 
> With the new 4602 I was able to get much faster RAM timings, which I believe is the best asset of the new bios. I was able to get 3600Mhz CL14 tighter timings than fast from Ryzen RAM calculator. I was also able for the first time to get PE4 working, before the best I could do was PE3. With PE4 when I boot into windows I'm by default boosting to 4.35Ghz all core with PBO enabled and am stable at 1.41V. I see no real benefit to running it at that speed all the time though (only run it at 4.35Ghz all core for benchmarking and if I need to get a rendering or editing / converting job done as quickly as is possible), so I use Ryzen Master to adjust the EDC down while in windows and run at 4.25Ghz all core at 1.334V. All in all I am very happy with the new bios, and am really looking forward to seeing what AMD has been able to do with Zen 2.
> 
> New RAM profile and benchmark:



So are you stable with 3600 14-14-14-14?


----------



## cowboy44mag

nick name said:


> So are you stable with 3600 14-14-14-14?



Ran Memtest for 2 hours and have just started the real testing of benchmarks, gaming, video editing/ encoding/ conversion. I would say I'm 90% certain its totally stable, but until I've run it for several days doing my normal work loads, and gaming routine I can't really call it 100% yet.


I have found that even if you can pass tests like Prime 95, Memtest, Aida64, ect, ect... the very best test going for system stability is to just run it as normal and let it pass the test of time.


----------



## bigjdubb

Quick question. Does the 2700x and x470 allow pcie bifurcation? I have been looking into getting an m.2 card for two drives and it appears that this functionality is key to getting it to work.


----------



## smeroni68

bigjdubb said:


> Quick question. Does the 2700x and x470 allow pcie bifurcation? I have been looking into getting an m.2 card for two drives and it appears that this functionality is key to getting it to work.


Most probably there is no HW support for bifurcation on X470 as into X370 boards... but you can evaluate this product:

https://www.amazon.de/gp/product/B0788FZ4XX/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_asin_title_o00_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

http://www.kalea-informatique.com/mag/fr/product-10557235.htm

I bought it on December 2018 and is running fine on my Asus Prime X370 PRO with two M.2 Samsung 970 EVO drives into the second PCIe 16x connector at 8x speed... On first Slot is mounted the Graphic card (that is running at 8x too)... no problem at all.

Under here just to show a picture of my PC with it!!


----------



## rdr09

smeroni68 said:


> Most probably there is no HW support for bifurcation on X470 as into X370 boards... but you can evaluate this product:
> 
> https://www.amazon.de/gp/product/B0788FZ4XX/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_asin_title_o00_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1
> 
> http://www.kalea-informatique.com/mag/fr/product-10557235.htm
> 
> I bought it on December 2018 and is running fine on my Asus Prime X370 PRO with two M.2 Samsung 970 EVO drives into the second PCIe 16x connector at 8x speed... On first Slot is mounted the Graphic card (that is running at 8x too)... no problem at all.
> 
> Under here just to show a picture of my PC with it!!


That's big in price! More expensive than most motherboards. But, i see the convenience. Someday those, too, will get waterblocks.


----------



## smeroni68

rdr09 said:


> That's big in price! More expensive than most motherboards. But, i see the convenience. Someday those, too, will get waterblocks.


Yeah, not really cheap! But anyway to get easyly a couple of M.2 NVMe drives toghetter it's a good item.


----------



## rdr09

I read from another thread that the R7 2700X consumes 150W at 4GHz using XFR. Does that mean 4GHz across all cores? Can you just disable XFR? If you can, what will the clocks be? Thank you kind 2700X owners.


----------



## MishelLngelo

rdr09 said:


> I read from another thread that the R7 2700X consumes 150W at 4GHz using XFR. Does that mean 4GHz across all cores? Can you just disable XFR? If you can, what will the clocks be? Thank you kind 2700X owners.


Most I have seen is 138W at 4.3GHz. and 1.416v max.


----------



## rdr09

MishelLngelo said:


> Most I have seen is 138W at 4.3GHz. and 1.416v max.


So, it does consume 150W when left in auto using XFR and only achieving 4GHz? Pretty much stock setting.

How did you achieve 4.3GHz on all cores, though? Is it using XFR/PBO with an undervolt, and, of course, a good cooler to keep it under 60c, right?


----------



## MishelLngelo

rdr09 said:


> So, it does consume 150W when left in auto using XFR?
> 
> How did you achieve 4.3GHz on all cores, though? Is it using XFR/PBO with an undervolt, and, of course, a good cooler to keep it under 60c, right?


It's probably different amount for different specimens and setups. When I run it overclocked, it's strait OC, with everything on manual. XFR/PBO and power saving options disabled, in my case and with this cooler temps go up to 72-75c which doesn't make it throttle.


----------



## rdr09

MishelLngelo said:


> It's probably different amount for different specimens and setups. When I run it overclocked, it's strait OC, with everything on manual. XFR/PBO and power saving options disabled, in my case and with this cooler temps go up to 72-75c which doesn't make it throttle.


I see. So, you can disable XFR and get rid of the 60c ceiling. And, using manual oc, you'll end up using less power. Thank you again.


At stock settings, when you disable XFR, what would be the 2700X's clocks?


----------



## MishelLngelo

rdr09 said:


> I see. So, you can disable XFR and get rid of the 60c ceiling. And, using manual oc, you'll end up using less power. Thank you again.
> 
> 
> At stock settings, when you disable XFR, what would be the 2700X's clocks?


Yes, no use for any turbo or performance improving modes with straight, old time, manual OC. I have it saved as "Damn the torpedoes" setting and switch to it when needed. 
At stock settings with PBO etc. disabled it runs at 3.7GHz. If Power saving plan in windows is set to minimum CPU 5%, frequency at really quiet times drops to 2.1GHz with voltages less than 1v on most cores. 
With latest BIOS (4602) on this setup, PBO works fine, frequencies fluctuating from 2.1GHz to 4.25 and even 4.3GHz+ on some cores. I think that it's first time in my life I'm not using full possible manual OC all the time.


----------



## cowboy44mag

nick name said:


> So are you stable with 3600 14-14-14-14?



Ok, I've ran my RAM at 3600Mhz CL 14 slightly tighter than fast timings for several days now. I did have to bump up my voltage slightly, now at 1.4V, but it has been totally stable.


----------



## nick name

cowboy44mag said:


> Ok, I've ran my RAM at 3600Mhz CL 14 slightly tighter than fast timings for several days now. I did have to bump up my voltage slightly, now at 1.4V, but it has been totally stable.


Damn, I'm jealous. I have to run much more voltage just for 14-15-14-14 at 3600MHz.


----------



## MishelLngelo

I can't get better than Cl16 when running at 3600MHz but it's very stable. It's still better than anticipated, XMP show Cl18 at that frequency. What's funny is that I tried all kinds of setting and once I set DOCP at 3000 and RAM at 3600 and it actually works. All that effort and it actually works like this !!


----------



## rdr09

cowboy44mag said:


> Ok, I've ran my RAM at 3600Mhz CL 14 slightly tighter than fast timings for several days now. I did have to bump up my voltage slightly, now at 1.4V, but it has been totally stable.


Nice. And at such low voltage, too. Im such as wuss oc'ing ram. Tried auto settings and just set 3466 in the drop down menu - it booted. Only thing i changed other than speed is voltage to 1.43v (set same using calc). Although, using the calc gets a little lower latency than this


----------



## cowboy44mag

nick name said:


> Damn, I'm jealous. I have to run much more voltage just for 14-15-14-14 at 3600MHz.





MishelLngelo said:


> I can't get better than Cl16 when running at 3600MHz but it's very stable. It's still better than anticipated, XMP show Cl18 at that frequency. What's funny is that I tried all kinds of setting and once I set DOCP at 3000 and RAM at 3600 and it actually works. All that effort and it actually works like this !!





rdr09 said:


> Nice. And at such low voltage, too. Im such as wuss oc'ing ram. Tried auto settings and just set 3466 in the drop down menu - it booted. Only thing i changed other than speed is voltage to 1.43v (set same using calc). Although, using the calc gets a little lower latency than this



I Just had a chance to review my post and noticed I did have a slight typo, apparently the second 4 didn't register and I never caught it, I have my RAM voltage at 1.44V. Not quite as good as 1.40V but still well within my "comfort zone" and I'm very happy with the overclock. I have to admit I have had a real love hate relationship with my Strix X470-F motherboard, but with the new bios I've been quite happy with it. With the old bios I could never have tightened the RAM timings this much no matter how much voltage I would have applied. From what I understand with the RAM as long as its below 1.5V and there is adequate cooling you are good to go. My RAM has never exceeded 25C and I won't be pushing anymore voltage than the current 1.44V, all in all I think its a very good overclock.


----------



## nick name

cowboy44mag said:


> I Just had a chance to review my post and noticed I did have a slight typo, apparently the second 4 didn't register and I never caught it, I have my RAM voltage at 1.44V. Not quite as good as 1.40V but still well within my "comfort zone" and I'm very happy with the overclock. I have to admit I have had a real love hate relationship with my Strix X470-F motherboard, but with the new bios I've been quite happy with it. With the old bios I could never have tightened the RAM timings this much no matter how much voltage I would have applied. From what I understand with the RAM as long as its below 1.5V and there is adequate cooling you are good to go. My RAM has never exceeded 25C and I won't be pushing anymore voltage than the current 1.44V, all in all I think its a very good overclock.


Wait, your RAM has never exceeded 25*C? Does that mean you haven't run any RAM tests like TM5, Karhu, or Memtest?


----------



## cowboy44mag

nick name said:


> Wait, your RAM has never exceeded 25*C? Does that mean you haven't run any RAM tests like TM5, Karhu, or Memtest?



I've ran Memtest extensively, as well as Prime 95 blend, Aida64, ect... I've never ran TM5 or Karhu, however I have done several large rendering/ video editing/ video converting projects that require a lot of RAM and tend to really work out any issues quickly. I have my rig cooling set up a little unorthodox, however it is working well for me. I have a total of 6 140MM case fans, five of which are set as intake and only one as exhaust. I have two front intake and 3 top mounted intake fans which pushes a lot of cool air over my VRMs, RAM, hard drives, GPU, basically everything. It's a extreme positive pressure set up that I have found really keeps components as cool as possible. I also have a NH-U14S with 2 140MM fans in a push pull blowing hot air out my only exhaust fan located in the back directly behind the NH-U14S. I know with the extreme positive pressure I've set the normal dust reducing benefits don't really apply, however I blow all the dust out of the system once a week and clean my system filters daily. Most of my components run very cool no matter what stress test I'm punishing my rig with.


I have been using HWiNFo64 to monitor the RAM temperature, as well as all the other motherboard temperature sensors if that makes a difference. I should also mention that in my area we still have cool to cold weather and summer hasn't brought the heat yet. I just did a full video project last night and my monitored high temps were 25.3C one one RAM stick and 25.9C on the other, ambient room temperature was about 68F. I would think that rendering/ editing/ and converting video would pound RAM much harder in real world use than Memtest and the like. In normal use and gaming the temps are usually around the 24C range. I would estimate that once the summer heat really hits I'll probably be around 30C (maybe a bit more), but having cooling intake fans right over the RAM really keeps it cool.


----------



## cowboy44mag

Just wanted to post an update. Last week my motherboard died, I was just using my computer it started running like total garbage and had a very hard time shutting down. Upon trying to restart the system I couldn't even get a post screen, no Qled lights, the motherboard was just plain dead. I've had issues with that motherboard since the very first bios update. I didn't want to wait two weeks for the darn RMA so I bought another X470 board and the system is running great now. I'll have to sell the RMA board when it comes back I guess. I still have to get the system 100% stable and I have been able to get the same RAM settings as before, however with the new board I had to apply 1.46V to get 3600Mhz CL14 as posted above. So far I have been able to reach the same 4.350Ghz across all cores with less voltage than before. It would appear that with this new board I have to apply less Vcore but more voltage to the RAM... 



I haven't had enough time to really stress test and monitor the system but I have a feeling my CPU should run a little cooler and my RAM will now run a little hotter. I'll update my new thermals once I have had enough time to test everything.


----------



## cowboy44mag

Just posting an update after my original motherboard died. I had to apply more voltage to both my SOC and RAM but am now using less Vcore voltage with my new motherboard. I do believe that my previous motherboard was never right out of the box and thus gave me some false temperature readings (probably an early sign the motherboard was defective), but its hard to tell as I am also using more RAM voltage. Overall I am running slightly cooler processor temps which is of course nice, however I am now seeing higher RAM temperatures. So far with testing with Memtest, Aida64, and Prime 95 blend I haven't seen RAM temperatures above 38C, which is still very good and I believe proves the benefit of using the top case fans as intake. Overall I'm seeing scores that are the same as before in Cinebench R15 and R20, as well as Aida64, Performance Test and PCMark and 3DMark benchmarks. I was able to talk Asus into giving me a refund for my RMA motherboard as I submitted proof of buying a new Strix X470-F motherboard (which is why I stayed with the same exact motherboard). Even though I am getting good performance so far with my new Strix board I wouldn't recommend it to anyone looking for a board as I believe that equal priced MSI boards are superior and would have much rather opted for the Hero VII if Asus would have given me credit for the upgrade rather than a replacement.


----------



## MishelLngelo

That setup is a keeper, 4.35GHz and 3600Mhz Cl14 is very good. 4.3 and 3600 Cl16 is best I can do. Did you run CB r20 by any chance ?


----------



## rdr09

MishelLngelo said:


> That setup is a keeper, 4.35GHz and 3600Mhz Cl14 is very good. 4.3 and 3600 Cl16 is best I can do. Did you run CB r20 by any chance ?


It's 3600 CL 14 and i agree! Though, I've been seeing some reaching as high as 4000MHz now.


EDIT: Tested my FlareX 3200 CL14 and compared it to the Ripjaws 3200 CL16 using DOCP setting. The Former is about 50$ more.


----------



## cowboy44mag

MishelLngelo said:


> That setup is a keeper, 4.35GHz and 3600Mhz Cl14 is very good. 4.3 and 3600 Cl16 is best I can do. Did you run CB r20 by any chance ?



Overall I'm very happy with it. The new Strix board is much better than my original. I had strange random issues with that board, like the GPU fragmenting while rendering, sometimes when running games, random BSOD and black screens of death... I haven't had any of those issues since exchanging the board.


To your question I just ran some benchmarks that I'm posting below, but I have a strange issue with Cinebench R20. I have all my settings so PBO will boost to 4.35Ghz however when I run Cinebench R20 it won't boost past 4.30Ghz. I've confirmed this with both Ryzen Master and HWiNFO64 running in the background. My thermals are fine so its not throttling the processor, but for some reason with that one benchmark (and its the only one that does it) it won't boost past 4.30Ghz.


----------



## MishelLngelo

Those are good scores, better than mine by that margin of Cl16 to 14 and some frequency. Yes CB r20 loads core better than r15 but neither can push them to limits. Can see that by checking wattage per core and package.


----------



## Harry604

I have 3570k with gtx 1070... i play on 1440p monitor BFV mostly... would getting a 2700x be a good upgrade.. ? or should i wait for next ryzen... or go 9900k route


----------



## cowboy44mag

MishelLngelo said:


> Those are good scores, better than mine by that margin of Cl16 to 14 and some frequency. Yes CB r20 loads core better than r15 but neither can push them to limits. Can see that by checking wattage per core and package.



I'm happy with my scores and with my rig. I have been trying to figure out why CB20 won't allow me to keep my boost at 4.35Ghz. I understand that CB20 loads the cores better but why would it drop my boost frequency? On my RMAed motherboard when I would try to run CB20 @ 4.35Ghz I would get a black screen of death, with my new board I'm able to run CB20 @ 4.35Ghz settings but the frequency gets dropped to 4.3Ghz. Its not that big of a deal, but its just strange, no other benchmark or stress test does that.


----------



## steadly2004

Harry604 said:


> I have 3570k with gtx 1070... i play on 1440p monitor BFV mostly... would getting a 2700x be a good upgrade.. ? or should i wait for next ryzen... or go 9900k route


Next ryzen is right around the corner isn't it? If you're ok with what you're playing now, then wait.


----------



## cowboy44mag

Harry604 said:


> I have 3570k with gtx 1070... i play on 1440p monitor BFV mostly... would getting a 2700x be a good upgrade.. ? or should i wait for next ryzen... or go 9900k route



The R7 2700X would be a big improvement over your i5 3570K. Your processor is Ivy Bridge and at this point dated and has only 4 cores, 4 threads. The IPC of the R7 2700X is only ~5% behind that of current Intel coffee lake processors like the i9 9900k, and would be a big upgrade over the IPC of Ivy Bridge. The R7 2700X would also give you 8 cores and 16 threads so comparing your current processor to the R7 2700X, the 2700X is ~120% more powerful (conservative estimate). 



With that said, I wouldn't recommend either the 2700X or the i9 9900K right now. I would wait for the Zen 2 processors to release in June or July. The new processors are slated to have a 15% IPC gain over the R7 2700X, which would mean that they will have a ~10% IPC advantage over the i9 9900K. Rumors have it that the new R7 3000 series processor will be 12 cores and 24 threads and there will be a R9 3000 processor with 16 cores and 32 threads, these processors are also rumored to be able to boost up to 5Ghz. If all these rumors are true then the new 3000 series will bring a marked performance advantage over the current 2700X flagship processor and over the i9 9900K as well. 



Depending on your budget a new 3000 series processor would be a huge performance jump over your current i5 3570K. The price of the 2700X should also be slashed after the new 3000 series processors launch. Intel has never been good at slashing their prices (even if they are being out performed) so it is really hard to say if the price of the i9 9900K will be slashed or not. Saying all of this is happening in only 2, 3 months from now I would say you would have many more options to consider in just a short period of time and I would recommend waiting for the Zen 2 release.


----------



## Harry604

cowboy44mag said:


> The R7 2700X would be a big improvement over your i5 3570K. Your processor is Ivy Bridge and at this point dated and has only 4 cores, 4 threads. The IPC of the R7 2700X is only ~5% behind that of current Intel coffee lake processors like the i9 9900k, and would be a big upgrade over the IPC of Ivy Bridge. The R7 2700X would also give you 8 cores and 16 threads so comparing your current processor to the R7 2700X, the 2700X is ~120% more powerful (conservative estimate).
> 
> 
> 
> With that said, I wouldn't recommend either the 2700X or the i9 9900K right now. I would wait for the Zen 2 processors to release in June or July. The new processors are slated to have a 15% IPC gain over the R7 2700X, which would mean that they will have a ~10% IPC advantage over the i9 9900K. Rumors have it that the new R7 3000 series processor will be 12 cores and 24 threads and there will be a R9 3000 processor with 16 cores and 32 threads, these processors are also rumored to be able to boost up to 5Ghz. If all these rumors are true then the new 3000 series will bring a marked performance advantage over the current 2700X flagship processor and over the i9 9900K as well.
> 
> 
> 
> Depending on your budget a new 3000 series processor would be a huge performance jump over your current i5 3570K. The price of the 2700X should also be slashed after the new 3000 series processors launch. Intel has never been good at slashing their prices (even if they are being out performed) so it is really hard to say if the price of the i9 9900K will be slashed or not. Saying all of this is happening in only 2, 3 months from now I would say you would have many more options to consider in just a short period of time and I would recommend waiting for the Zen 2 release.





steadly2004 said:


> Next ryzen is right around the corner isn't it? If you're ok with what you're playing now, then wait.


thanks for the info guys... ill just wait for new ryzen see what happens


----------



## The Sandman

cowboy44mag said:


> I'm happy with my scores and with my rig. I have been trying to figure out why CB20 won't allow me to keep my boost at 4.35Ghz. I understand that CB20 loads the cores better but why would it drop my boost frequency? On my RMAed motherboard when I would try to run CB20 @ 4.35Ghz I would get a black screen of death, with my new board I'm able to run CB20 @ 4.35Ghz settings but the frequency gets dropped to 4.3Ghz. Its not that big of a deal, but its just strange, no other benchmark or stress test does that.



That is odd... I don't see this on CB20 but I went with a PE3/bclk rather than EDC/PBO/PE3.
Mine always hits 4275MHz all core w/101.8 bclk and ALWAYS boots with the x42 multiplier. This is one reason I left PBO behind. Not consistent enough for my taste. Multiplier would sometimes vary driving me crazy.
Posted some results in the C6H thread if interested https://www.overclock.net/forum/27949630-post40454.html


----------



## Jaffi

I recently overclocked my ryzen 2700 to 4 GHz with offset voltage, board is a Asus Prime x470-pro, latest bios, latest chipset drivers from AMD. I enabled the windows balanced plan and checked what voltages and clockspeeds were shown in HWinfo64. When idle, the clockspeeds would get lowered to 1400 MHz, but voltage is pinned at max, which is 1.344v, almost all the time. HWinfo tells me that it had a minimum of 0.744v, which would be about right, but this must have been a very short occurrence.

Whenever I set bios to default values, the voltage behave as expected, which means they are constantly varying with clockspeeds and power states.

So how can I achieve this with an overclock and offset voltage?


----------



## cowboy44mag

Have been further optimizing settings and found something that I think may help a few people here stabilize their RAM overclock, maybe even their CPU overclock. Most every forum out there states that a good point to set your SOC voltage is 1.1V with a max of 1.2V. I have found that decreasing the SOC voltage into 1.03 - 1.05 really helps stability. I'm not sure if its something that hold true for all 2700X processors and all motherboards, however with my particular motherboard, processor, and RAM it has helped a lot. For anyone who is having trouble getting their RAM stable or for anyone trying to push their RAM overclock just a little further I would suggest giving it a shot and seeing if it helps.


New Benchmarks with SOC voltage set to 1.0375V:


----------



## cowboy44mag

Jaffi said:


> I recently overclocked my ryzen 2700 to 4 GHz with offset voltage, board is a Asus Prime x470-pro, latest bios, latest chipset drivers from AMD. I enabled the windows balanced plan and checked what voltages and clockspeeds were shown in HWinfo64. When idle, the clockspeeds would get lowered to 1400 MHz, but voltage is pinned at max, which is 1.344v, almost all the time. HWinfo tells me that it had a minimum of 0.744v, which would be about right, but this must have been a very short occurrence.
> 
> Whenever I set bios to default values, the voltage behave as expected, which means they are constantly varying with clockspeeds and power states.
> 
> So how can I achieve this with an overclock and offset voltage?



Ryzen has some strange voltage behaviors.... I don't have my rig manually overclocked however I do have it overclocked so PBO will boost my all core boost clock speed up to 4.350Ghz. With my "overclock" PBO really does all the "heavy lifting". However I have noticed some strange voltage behaviors that might help and offer some insight into your question.


If you notice below I have two screenshots of my rig running Cinebench R15 just to put load on the system so we can take a look at voltages. In the first pic my rig is set to boost to 4.350Ghz and in the second image its set to boost to my normal 24/7 clock of 4.225Ghz. My "resting" state has my processor at 2170Mhz and 0.831V, so 0.744V @ 1400Mhz is about what you should be seeing. If you will note the max Vcore is 1.437V, however when all cores are loaded my max Vcore for 4.350Ghz is 1.406V and at 4.225Ghz is 1.331V. I have noted that when only 1 to 4 cores are in use my Vcore will range from the 1.3V range all the way up to 1.437V, however when all cores are rendering the voltage is constant (1.406V @ 4.350Ghz and 1.331V @ 4.225Ghz) and doesn't have the high spikes when only 1 - 4 cores are loaded.



I would recommend downloading HWiNFO64 and check your voltages with that, however if your running an app that is only loading 1 - 4 cores then your Vcore is going to have recorded higher voltage spikes than when its loading more cores. I don't know why Ryzen behaves in this manner, its the first system I've had that I've noticed this behavior with, however it could be the way that PBO works on Ryzen and may not directly correlate to pure manual overclocking which I have never attempted on Ryzen (PBO works so well it basically made manual overclocking unnecessary).


----------



## usoldier

Hey guys i have a 2700X and a CH6 if i try to use PE3 the cpu gets locked to 4090mhz while PE2 i get 4350mhz and all core 4175mhz is it my mobo that has a problem or what ? I keep seeing users using PE3 with no issues.


----------



## MishelLngelo

usoldier said:


> Hey guys i have a 2700X and a CH6 if i try to use PE3 the cpu gets locked to 4090mhz while PE2 i get 4350mhz and all core 4175mhz is it my mobo that has a problem or what ? I keep seeing users using PE3 with no issues.


To take full advantage of PBO2 you need MB with 400 series chipset and newest BIOS.


----------



## rdr09

Are you guys and gals gonna use your 300 and 400 motherboards for the new Ryzen 3000 series cpus?

Thinking of getting a 12 core to replace the 2700 on the X470, the 2700 to replace the 1600 on the B350. Buy a cheap ram and motherboard for the 1600 for use as a server.

Wait and see which X570 will perform best.


----------



## MishelLngelo

rdr09 said:


> Are you guys and gals gonna use your 300 and 400 motherboards for the new Ryzen 3000 series cpus?
> 
> Thinking of getting a 12 core to replace the 2700 on the X470, the 2700 to replace the 1600 on the B350. Buy a cheap ram and motherboard for the 1600 for use as a server.
> 
> Wait and see which X570 will perform best.


WQell, still too early to tell. I'm hoping for full support of 3700x on my x470 MB. Question is what x570 chipset may bring because x470 didn't bring much new from x370, it was MB configuration that brought any improvements, not chipset itself. 
I started with 1600x and than 1700x on Asus Prime x370 pro, switched to x470 pro and 2700x. As at one time I had all of them together, installing 2700x into x370 didn't bring any advantage to memory and PBO/XFR to it. Only switching to x470 and that mostly only with latest BIOS made everything work together as it should.


----------



## rdr09

MishelLngelo said:


> WQell, still too early to tell. I'm hoping for full support of 3700x on my x470 MB. Question is what x570 chipset may bring because x470 didn't bring much new from x370, it was MB configuration that brought any improvements, not chipset itself.
> I started with 1600x and than 1700x on Asus Prime x370 pro, switched to x470 pro and 2700x. As at one time I had all of them together, installing 2700x into x370 didn't bring any advantage to memory and PBO/XFR to it. Only switching to x470 and that mostly only with latest BIOS made everything work together as it should.


My B350 can only push my 2700 to 4GHz while the X470 Pro can manage to oc same cpu to 4.1GHz. No surprise really. The next 6-core, though, should be easy to oc higher than 4.3GHz all core on the X470. We will see.


----------



## MishelLngelo

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-ryzen-3000-series-16-core-cpu-specs,39304.html


----------



## rdr09

MishelLngelo said:


> https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-ryzen-3000-series-16-core-cpu-specs,39304.html


Ha! 4800MHz on an 8-core! At under 300$. That is ridiculous if true. No need for faster more expensive RAM - me think.


----------



## MishelLngelo

In reality, I don't need anything better than this 2700x, I bough it just to finish my last ACAD program before finally retiring as my previous FX 8350 even at 4.9GHz was getting long in the teeth. Even my first 1600x beat it 3:0. 
All this 2700x needs is higher frequency and better IPC and IMC and that would be 3600x. According to some benchmarks, my 2700x beats Intel's flagship 9900k up to 4.3GHz which is my best stable OC, another 500MHz and it would be absolute best buy.


----------



## rdr09

MishelLngelo said:


> In reality, I don't need anything better than this 2700x, I bough it just to finish my last ACAD program before finally retiring as my previous FX 8350 even at 4.9GHz was getting long in the teeth. Even my first 1600x beat it 3:0.
> All this 2700x needs is higher frequency and better IPC and IMC and that would be 3600x. According to some benchmarks, my 2700x beats Intel's flagship 9900k up to 4.3GHz which is my best stable OC, another 500MHz and it would be absolute best buy.


Indeed! 

I think the 12 and 16 cores are there for AMD to continue differentiating itself from the competition. If those prices are real - they would be UNREAL. lol

But, I'll get the 12 core for sure.


----------



## MishelLngelo

I'll see yet what pricing would look like but loosing up to 100 Euro in exchange to 3700x shouldn't make me problems.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

I saw somewhere that I can't find right now that my motherboard (TUF B350 plus gaming) would support the new chips... the vrm on it is the same as the TUF x470 plus gaming (I had one of them too) heck even the bios features was the same... this B350 has some things that it shouldn't according to the naming... The VRM's aren't the greatest, but they can hold upwards of 140 watts with no overheating or throttling.... with PBO enabled it will hold 4.2ghz on all cores under most loads only dropping slightly when loaded with "punishment" loads like prime, line-pack, or similar.... The attached image is what PBO and a slight under volt netted me on my 2700x...


I say all that to lead to this... I think most decent B350 boards will be able to handle the 16 core part at stock or even a slight OC at least.... Most X370 boards should be fine and B450/X470's should fall very closely in line.... The real question is "what will the new boards allow that makes it worth the upgrade?", not so much "will my board be compatible?"... unless you have a very low end B350/X370/B450/X470 you should be fine at the very least at stock... and to be honest if you have such a board the 2700x would suffer now anyway.


----------



## cowboy44mag

rdr09 said:


> Are you guys and gals gonna use your 300 and 400 motherboards for the new Ryzen 3000 series cpus?
> 
> Thinking of getting a 12 core to replace the 2700 on the X470, the 2700 to replace the 1600 on the B350. Buy a cheap ram and motherboard for the 1600 for use as a server.
> 
> Wait and see which X570 will perform best.



I've seen some insane "leaks" and some pure crazy speculation regarding the Zen 2 processors. I really do hope that they have a 12 core 24 thread Ryzen 7 processor but some of the leaks out there, if true, would mean that not all Zen 2 processors would be supported by the current boards. I've seen leaks showing the new 3700X (12 core 24 thread) with 4.8Ghz base and over 5Ghz boost clock, and even more unbelievable a 16 core 32 thread processor with a leak of of the same clock speeds which to me is just too good to be true. While I do believe Zen 2 will bring big changes and a very stout performance boost, I can't believe that they would be able to hit those speeds on 12 and 16 cores. If AMD somehow was able to hit those clock speeds I don't believe that the current X470 boards would have capacity to fully support such a processor.


I'm really hoping that there is a Zen 2 12 core 24 thread processor that can hit a 5Ghz boost clock speed and possibly 4.6Ghz all core, however if AMD is able to pull it off I don't see it being fully supported on the current motherboards. I think that the previous AM4 boards will be able to fully support the new Ryzen 5 and Ryzen 3 processors, possibly have partial support (ie lower clock speeds) with the new Ryzen 7 and the only boards that would support a Ryzen 9 with 16 cores and 32 threads would be X570 (or maybe X590).


----------



## ShrimpBrime

R7 2700x and R3 1200. 
Which one is which?


----------



## MishelLngelo

ShrimpBrime said:


> R7 2700x and R3 1200.
> Which one is which?


It's 1400 !!!!


----------



## rdr09

cowboy44mag said:


> I've seen some insane "leaks" and some pure crazy speculation regarding the Zen 2 processors. I really do hope that they have a 12 core 24 thread Ryzen 7 processor but some of the leaks out there, if true, would mean that not all Zen 2 processors would be supported by the current boards. I've seen leaks showing the new 3700X (12 core 24 thread) with 4.8Ghz base and over 5Ghz boost clock, and even more unbelievable a 16 core 32 thread processor with a leak of of the same clock speeds which to me is just too good to be true. While I do believe Zen 2 will bring big changes and a very stout performance boost, I can't believe that they would be able to hit those speeds on 12 and 16 cores. If AMD somehow was able to hit those clock speeds I don't believe that the current X470 boards would have capacity to fully support such a processor.
> 
> 
> I'm really hoping that there is a Zen 2 12 core 24 thread processor that can hit a 5Ghz boost clock speed and possibly 4.6Ghz all core, however if AMD is able to pull it off I don't see it being fully supported on the current motherboards. I think that the previous AM4 boards will be able to fully support the new Ryzen 5 and Ryzen 3 processors, possibly have partial support (ie lower clock speeds) with the new Ryzen 7 and the only boards that would support a Ryzen 9 with 16 cores and 32 threads would be X570 (or maybe X590).


Easy to get carried away by the hype train. Latest i saw the 16 core having similar base and boost clocks as the R7 2700X, which is still incredible. Incredible based on the rumored price. I would not dare OC a 12 core on my X470. I'd be happy to get 4.5GHz at stock clocks.

The other hype train we have not gone aboard are the next gaming laptops bearing Ryzen 3000 series. Paired with at least a 2060 or the next line of Navis. Can't wait.


----------



## mtrai

Hey y'all I just wanted to post some new findings I stumbled across this past weekend. I made a huge boo boo with my win 10 install and needed to do a clean install. So since I knew Win 10 1903 ISO can be had, I decided to install it clean since I already had to do this. Anyhow...as most are aware AMD CPU incur the AMD Penalty. This is highlighted best in Firestrike.

Well after installing Win 10 1903, drivers, etc and 3dmark..and setting my timings on my Vega 64< I was in for a shock with the Physics and Combined scores. It is looking like AMD CPU are now on parity or rather scoreing much more what they really should. I never saw this uplift reported anywhere as I kept up with changes to the insider edition changes. SO I think we will need a lot more testing across the board due to possible Windows 10 scheduling changes?


----------



## MishelLngelo

I get better graphic scores in 1809 than in 1903. 
This is in 1809.


----------



## NightAntilli

cowboy44mag said:


> I've seen some insane "leaks" and some pure crazy speculation regarding the Zen 2 processors. I really do hope that they have a 12 core 24 thread Ryzen 7 processor but some of the leaks out there, if true, would mean that not all Zen 2 processors would be supported by the current boards. * I've seen leaks showing the new 3700X (12 core 24 thread) with 4.8Ghz base and over 5Ghz boost clock, and even more unbelievable a 16 core 32 thread processor with a leak of of the same clock speeds which to me is just too good to be true.* While I do believe Zen 2 will bring big changes and a very stout performance boost, I can't believe that they would be able to hit those speeds on 12 and 16 cores. If AMD somehow was able to hit those clock speeds I don't believe that the current X470 boards would have capacity to fully support such a processor.
> 
> 
> I'm really hoping that there is a Zen 2 12 core 24 thread processor that can hit a 5Ghz boost clock speed and possibly 4.6Ghz all core, however if AMD is able to pull it off I don't see it being fully supported on the current motherboards. I think that the previous AM4 boards will be able to fully support the new Ryzen 5 and Ryzen 3 processors, possibly have partial support (ie lower clock speeds) with the new Ryzen 7 and the only boards that would support a Ryzen 9 with 16 cores and 32 threads would be X570 (or maybe X590).


I don't think it's that implausible to be honest... The 16 core will be made of two chiplets of 8 cores each. So the traditional idea where larger dies can't reach higher clock speeds is no longer true. It's simply about binning the best chiplets and putting them together on the same die. There is no reason to assume that the 8C/16T must have higher clocks than the 16C/32T in this case. And look at the jump from Zen to Zen+, 14nm to 12nm. The jump from 12nm to 7nm should be much bigger... The main thing that is too good to be true is most likely the prices...

Note that the following is pure speculation on my part, and is based on old leaks, which may not be true or may be outdated... This is the ranking in terms of chiplet quality, from best to worst, with why I think they were put there;

Ryzen 9 3850X	16 / 32	-	4.3 / 5.1 GHz (best 8 core chiplets)

Ryzen 7 3700X	12 / 24	-	4.2 / 5.0 GHz (best 6 core chiplets, can probably reach the speeds of the R9 3850X quite easily, if not surpass it. They are basically clocked slightly lower to not incentivize buying the 3700X over the 3850X)

Ryzen 9 3800X	16 / 32	-	3.9 / 4.7 GHz (8 core chiplets that cannot reach 3850X speeds)

Ryzen 5 3600X	8 / 16	-	4.0 / 4.8 GHz (8 core chiplets that weren't good enough for being 3800X in terms of power consumption. They should be able to get close to 3850X speeds at a higher power draw.)

Ryzen 7 3700	12 / 24	-	3.8 / 4.6 GHz (6 core chiplets that can't reach 3700X clocks reliably.)

Ryzen 5 3600	8 / 16	-	3.6 / 4.4 GHz (8 core chiplet incapable of reaching 4.7 GHz reliably)

Ryzen 3 3300X	6 / 12	-	3.5 / 4.3 GHz (6 core chiplet incapable of reaching over 4.5 GHz reliably, or too power hungry to be an R3 3300)

Ryzen 3 3300	6 / 12	-	3.2 / 4.0 GHz (The most power efficient 6 core chiplets, but incapable of reaching R7 3700 speeds)

Ryzen 5 3600G	8 / 16	Navi (20 CU)	3.2 / 4.0 GHz (The slowest 8 core chiplets)

Ryzen 3 3300G	6 / 12	Navi (15 CU)	3.0 / 3.8 GHz (The slowest 6 core chiplets)

Note that there can be more power efficient and/or faster chiplets that will be used for Threadripper or EPYC.


----------



## cowboy44mag

rdr09 said:


> Easy to get carried away by the hype train. Latest i saw the 16 core having similar base and boost clocks as the R7 2700X, which is still incredible. Incredible based on the rumored price. I would not dare OC a 12 core on my X470. I'd be happy to get 4.5GHz at stock clocks.
> 
> The other hype train we have not gone aboard are the next gaming laptops bearing Ryzen 3000 series. Paired with at least a 2060 or the next line of Navis. Can't wait.



The biggest problem is the hype train can be very dangerous. I plan on upgrading to the new Ryzen 7 even if it only has the same base and turbo clock as the 2700X as long as its 12 cores and 24 threads. The 2700X is a gaming beast and the extra cores/ threads will really plow through the productivity work I do with my system. I plan on also upgrading my motherboard as I've had 2 ROG Strix X470-F boards and haven't been overly pleased with them to begin with, so I plan on upgrading to the new X570 Formula or Hero. My current motherboard and processor will be going to my mom and my kids will be thrilled to have it there when visiting grandma.


The dangerous part of the hype train is when people read about huge clock speeds and high core count and then the end product doesn't hit those rumors there are a lot of people who feel let down even though the end product is very good. When the 2700X was nearing release everyone was talking about at least a 4.5Ghz boost clock, and there were a lot of people who felt let down that the boost clock was a "mere" 4.35Ghz. The 2700X is an amazing processor and provides a huge bang for your buck, however there was a general feeling of it wasn't as good as it should have been and they must be holding 4.5Ghz back for the 2800X that would have the best binning. Well there was no 2800X and all the rumors had a general effect of slowing sales at launch. There were a lot of people who were holding back to see how Intel would respond and worse a lot of people who were waiting for the 2800X that was never coming and only rumor. I love AMD, but I dislike AMD or Intel fanboys because with there over hyping products it only ends up hurting the actual product even if it is outstanding on its own.


I think the best approach is to say if I can get the same clocks with higher IPC and more cores at a good price then its a resounding success. That way anything better, like the possibility of a 5Ghz boost clock, is just pure gravy The launch of the new Ryzen 3000 processors should be huge. AMD will be the first to 7nm, have a distinct advantage in IPC for the first time in a decade over Intel, and Intel just handed AMD the best present they could have by admitting they won't have 10nm till the end of the year and most likely won't have it available in a meaningful way will 2020 or first part of 2021. No matter how many cores they pack into 14nm++ it won't be able to compete with 7nm Ryzen given the fact that 12nm Ryzen was only ~5% behind Intel in IPC. It should be a great year for AMD, but over hyping Ryzen 3000 could hurt the initial launch if AMD can't hit these speculated huge clock speeds.


----------



## MishelLngelo

I thought that "chiplets" will be in 4 core config each.


----------



## cowboy44mag

NightAntilli said:


> I don't think it's that implausible to be honest... The 16 core will be made of two chiplets of 8 cores each. So the traditional idea where larger dies can't reach higher clock speeds is no longer true. It's simply about binning the best chiplets and putting them together on the same die. There is no reason to assume that the 8C/16T must have higher clocks than the 16C/32T in this case. And look at the jump from Zen to Zen+, 14nm to 12nm. The jump from 12nm to 7nm should be much bigger... The main thing that is too good to be true is most likely the prices...
> 
> Note that the following is pure speculation on my part, and is based on old leaks, which may not be true or may be outdated... This is the ranking in terms of chiplet quality, from best to worst, with why I think they were put there;
> 
> Ryzen 9 3850X 16 / 32 - 4.3 / 5.1 GHz (best 8 core chiplets)
> 
> Ryzen 7 3700X 12 / 24 - 4.2 / 5.0 GHz (best 6 core chiplets, can probably reach the speeds of the R9 3850X quite easily, if not surpass it. They are basically clocked slightly lower to not incentivize buying the 3700X over the 3850X)
> 
> Ryzen 9 3800X 16 / 32 - 3.9 / 4.7 GHz (8 core chiplets that cannot reach 3850X speeds)
> 
> Ryzen 5 3600X 8 / 16 - 4.0 / 4.8 GHz (8 core chiplets that weren't good enough for being 3800X in terms of power consumption. They should be able to get close to 3850X speeds at a higher power draw.)
> 
> Ryzen 7 3700 12 / 24 - 3.8 / 4.6 GHz (6 core chiplets that can't reach 3700X clocks reliably.)
> 
> Ryzen 5 3600 8 / 16 - 3.6 / 4.4 GHz (8 core chiplet incapable of reaching 4.7 GHz reliably)
> 
> Ryzen 3 3300X 6 / 12 - 3.5 / 4.3 GHz (6 core chiplet incapable of reaching over 4.5 GHz reliably, or too power hungry to be an R3 3300)
> 
> Ryzen 3 3300 6 / 12 - 3.2 / 4.0 GHz (The most power efficient 6 core chiplets, but incapable of reaching R7 3700 speeds)
> 
> Ryzen 5 3600G 8 / 16 Navi (20 CU) 3.2 / 4.0 GHz (The slowest 8 core chiplets)
> 
> Ryzen 3 3300G 6 / 12 Navi (15 CU) 3.0 / 3.8 GHz (The slowest 6 core chiplets)
> 
> Note that there can be more power efficient and/or faster chiplets that will be used for Threadripper or EPYC.



Don't get me wrong, I think that AMD has a very good chance of hitting 5 or 5.1Ghz boost clocks, they have a real winner with the Zen arch and chiplet design. What I am pointing out is 3 things to look at with the new Ryzen 3000 line: 



1. 7nm will bring better IPC, and even at the same clocks of the 2700X the new 3000 series core for core will have better performance. That is a win already. 



2. Ryzen 3000 series processors will be absolutely beastly even if they aren't hitting 5Ghz. The IPC and memory controller improvements of Zen2 will mean that a lower clocked Ryzen processor will be able to edge out an Intel processor @ 5Ghz if its hitting 4.5Ghz in most tasks core for core.



3. If AMD hits the high boost core clocks that are speculated not all of the new processors will be supported by X470. If AMD does of a mainstream 16 core processor, a theoretical chiplet with 2 8 core 16 thead processors in it to make a 16 core 32 thread beast is basically one of the best original Threadripper parts. While I think the die shrink will allow AMD to pack 16 cores on an AM4 platform I don't think the X470 boards are going to have beefy enough power delivery to handle them at there full capacity. At the extreme high end I fully expect the need of buying a new X570 type motherboard. I could be wrong, but I just have a feeling the high end will require the new motherboards to run properly.


----------



## mtrai

MishelLngelo said:


> I get better graphic scores in 1809 than in 1903.
> This is in 1809.


I was pointing out specifically the Physics and Combined tests with 1903.


----------



## The Sandman

ShrimpBrime said:


> R7 2700x and R3 1200.
> Which one is which?


 The one on the right is the 2700x 
How did you make out with em? Temp/voltage diff etc.


----------



## ShrimpBrime

The Sandman said:


> The one on the right is the 2700x
> How did you make out with em? Temp/voltage diff etc.


The 1200 runs so cool, there wasn't really a difference at all. 

The 2700x even lid-less I can still run on air with the plate and TIM. ATM is installed and used daily for folding at home. 3850Mhz Max temp folding 59c average over a 12 hour period. Will hit 70c plus under a stress test.

These temps on air cooling are slightly higher, but manageable. Can leave SenseMi technology enabled (XFR/PBO/CPB) and enjoy it's 4300mhz boost clocks, but I have it set up to run cooler at 3850mhz and 1.264v according to Cpu-z. With SenseMi turned on folding at 4Ghz over 1.4v will fold in the low 70c range and hit 85c during load or long stress tests, lower obviously if I run only Cinebench.

Unlike Phenom II and FX chips, these I can run without Solder. Not sure why they even soldered the low end parts like the 1200.... It's such a low TDP even overclocked.

No issues. Runs daily!


----------



## cssorkinman

4 threads per core on is rumored to be on the way. ( zen 3? )


----------



## ShrimpBrime

cssorkinman said:


> 4 threads per core on is rumored to be on the way. ( zen 3? )


The next Thread Ripper.


----------



## detrophy

ShrimpBrime said:


> The next Thread Ripper.


A black hole for threads. It rips through them until they go into the void.


----------



## VPII

mtrai said:


> I was pointing out specifically the Physics and Combined tests with 1903.


Hi mtrai your finding is in fact true. The physics and combined test in Fire Strike is on parr or even better than in Windows 7. I tested Time Spy and found a massive graphics score jump but drop in physics score.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk


----------



## rdr09

mtrai said:


> I was pointing out specifically the Physics and Combined tests with 1903.


I went ahead and updated to 1903 from 1809 and i did not see any huge increase in combined test in Firestrike. Prolly cos of my low end card. What i noticed is an increase in Physics score with the R7 2700 at stock.


https://www.3dmark.com/compare/fs/19328145/fs/19353995#

At 4GHz before 1903 i recall only getting 20K. This is with 1903.

https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/36178802?


----------



## BeetleatWar1977

My best so far https://www.3dmark.com/fs/19183692

on Ryzen Balanced power plan, this was on a fresh installed 1903, after installing all the software i need, it dropped again https://www.3dmark.com/fs/19348818


----------



## rdr09

BeetleatWar1977 said:


> My best so far https://www.3dmark.com/fs/19183692
> 
> on Ryzen Balanced power plan, this was on a fresh installed 1903, after installing all the software i need, it dropped again https://www.3dmark.com/fs/19348818


In Settings under Power, do you see the slider? I set mine all the way to the right. I think its for laptops but not sure if it affects others. Also, set Minimum processor state around 25%. Does not matter if Balance or High performance.


----------



## cowboy44mag

Was just looking at the new leaks for MSI motherboards on X570. I have been happy with my replacement Strix X470-F board, all the issues I had with my original board are gone and this one is performing well. Looking at the leaks of the MSI X570 boards I just don't know if it will be stout enough to handle the new R7 3700X that I would like to upgrade to. 



If possible I would like to keep my existing motherboard (they are even saying that a bios update may bring PCIe 4.0 support to the Strix board), however the new leaks for the X570 Gaming Pro Carbon show 12 phase VRM and the X570 Gaming Plus has 8 phase VRM and both have active fan cooling on the PCH heatsink. The Strix X470-F is the second best motherboard that Asus offers for the X470 chipset, however it only has 6 phase VRM, if I'm not mistaken. If the new Ryzen R7 is going to require up to 12 phase VRM and active PCH cooling then I doubt how much support even a higher end motherboard will have with the new Ryzen R7 not to mention the new R9 lineup that is expected. Anyone else have any thoughts on this?


----------



## MishelLngelo

cowboy44mag said:


> Was just looking at the new leaks for MSI motherboards on X570. I have been happy with my replacement Strix X470-F board, all the issues I had with my original board are gone and this one is performing well. Looking at the leaks of the MSI X570 boards I just don't know if it will be stout enough to handle the new R7 3700X that I would like to upgrade to.
> 
> 
> 
> If possible I would like to keep my existing motherboard (they are even saying that a bios update may bring PCIe 4.0 support to the Strix board), however the new leaks for the X570 Gaming Pro Carbon show 12 phase VRM and the X570 Gaming Plus has 8 phase VRM and both have active fan cooling on the PCH heatsink. The Strix X470-F is the second best motherboard that Asus offers for the X470 chipset, however it only has 6 phase VRM, if I'm not mistaken. If the new Ryzen R7 is going to require up to 12 phase VRM and active PCH cooling then I doubt how much support even a higher end motherboard will have with the new Ryzen R7 not to mention the new R9 lineup that is expected. Anyone else have any thoughts on this?


That MB looks more like enthusiast grade MB ready to take on R9 but I doubt most would go for R9 anyway. R9 is seriously moving to Threadripper waters and that's whole new ocean. 
I have no doubt that higher range x470 MB will be able to take on any R7.


----------



## cowboy44mag

MishelLngelo said:


> That MB looks more like enthusiast grade MB ready to take on R9 but I doubt most would go for R9 anyway. R9 is seriously moving to Threadripper waters and that's whole new ocean.
> I have no doubt that higher range x470 MB will be able to take on any R7.



That's what I'm hoping for. I was going to upgrade to the X570 Hero or possibly MSI, however it would be much more cost effective to be able to keep my current board. Don't get me wrong, having a high end X570 and pushing the 12 core R7 to its max would be fun, however I also have a wife I have to answer to:buttkick: Somehow she always finds out what I spent on my truck and my computer even though I take extra step to try and hide the purchases....


----------



## Minotaurtoo

cowboy44mag said:


> That's what I'm hoping for. I was going to upgrade to the X570 Hero or possibly MSI, however it would be much more cost effective to be able to keep my current board. Don't get me wrong, having a high end X570 and pushing the 12 core R7 to its max would be fun, however I also have a wife I have to answer to:buttkick: Somehow she always finds out what I spent on my truck and my computer even though I take extra step to try and hide the purchases....


Maybe someone on here sends her messages... :h34r-smi


----------



## rdr09

cowboy44mag said:


> That's what I'm hoping for. I was going to upgrade to the X570 Hero or possibly MSI, however it would be much more cost effective to be able to keep my current board. Don't get me wrong, having a high end X570 and pushing the 12 core R7 to its max would be fun, however I also have a wife I have to answer to:buttkick: Somehow she always finds out what I spent on my truck and my computer even though I take extra step to try and hide the purchases....


You gonna be a good candidate for an early adopter. Someone who is not squeamish and understands the you gonna be part of the initial testers. These companies cannot possible try every scenario. Kinda tough attitude to have especially if you buy the top of the line motherboard or gear. I'll prolly let a few months pass by.

Go pay for the next makeup kit your wife buys.


----------



## Anusha

Are the supported memory speeds shown in BIOS/manual, chipset specific or CPU specific? 

Since the mem controller is in the CPU, I would expect it to be CPU specific. Just wondering if I would be able to use faster RAM if Ryzen 3000 supports them on my MSI B450 board.

On a different note, which Ryzen board has been known for the lowest DPC latencies?


----------



## MishelLngelo

Anusha said:


> Are the supported memory speeds shown in BIOS/manual, chipset specific or CPU specific?
> 
> Since the mem controller is in the CPU, I would expect it to be CPU specific. Just wondering if I would be able to use faster RAM if Ryzen 3000 supports them on my MSI B450 board.
> 
> On a different note, which Ryzen board has been known for the lowest DPC latencies?


i'd say that BIOS and AGESA have largest role to play with memory speed (including frequency). BIOS may be a bit constrained with motherboard configuration of the RAM paths etc. I'm saying that from experience with x370 and x470 variations of almost same MB, Asus Prime x370 and x470 Pro. In later one, there was an improvement in memory paths to CPU and suddenly most memory speed problems were solved, instead of having trouble with memory over 3200MHz and practically needing best b-die to achieve even that. On the new MB that same RAM is now happily ticking at 3600MHz with CL even lower than what XMP shows and lower voltage. That alone gave 2700x quite a boot. It's rated to 2933MHz but can go much higher.


----------



## Anusha

MishelLngelo said:


> i'd say that BIOS and AGESA have largest role to play with memory speed (including frequency). BIOS may be a bit constrained with motherboard configuration of the RAM paths etc. I'm saying that from experience with x370 and x470 variations of almost same MB, Asus Prime x370 and x470 Pro. In later one, there was an improvement in memory paths to CPU and suddenly most memory speed problems were solved, instead of having trouble with memory over 3200MHz and practically needing best b-die to achieve even that. On the new MB that same RAM is now happily ticking at 3600MHz with CL even lower than what XMP shows and lower voltage. That alone gave 2700x quite a boot. It's rated to 2933MHz but can go much higher.


I guess even if the board layout and electronics support faster RAM, MSI (or any board manufacturer for that matter) wouldn't want to "unlock" full potential because they want to sell the newer boards. They'll probably add minimum support for the new CPUs.


----------



## MishelLngelo

Anusha said:


> I guess even if the board layout and electronics support faster RAM, MSI (or any board manufacturer for that matter) wouldn't want to "unlock" full potential because they want to sell the newer boards. They'll probably add minimum support for the new CPUs.


Yep, that's an old story not related to IT only, car manufacturers want to make cars only good enough to be satisfied enough for us to want to get next model from them while they can easily make them last 10 times longer.


----------



## Anusha

MishelLngelo said:


> Yep, that's an old story not related to IT only, car manufacturers want to make cars only good enough to be satisfied enough for us to want to get next model from them while they can easily make them last 10 times longer.


The funny thing is though, if they don't add enough support, I would be moving away from MSI. I don't like that BIOS. But I guess they've made all the money they would make from me.


----------



## MishelLngelo

Anusha said:


> The funny thing is though, if they don't add enough support, I would be moving away from MSI. I don't like that BIOS. But I guess they've made all the money they would make from me.


Yes, BIOS support is essential, can't do much about board itself that's already made but firmware can be developed further as it's never ideal. If they don't want to make an effort, they don't deserve your support.


----------



## rdr09

Our AMD systems, even if they are not vulnerable to most of the exploits, are protected when updates are applied from MS. In other words, our system gets penalized as well.


----------



## MishelLngelo

That doesn't mean patches are applied or to have any detrimental effects, I couldn't detect any.


----------



## rdr09

MishelLngelo said:


> That doesn't mean patches are applied or to have any detrimental effects, I couldn't detect any.


It gets hit, however, minute compared to intel system. This was posted by @AlphaC in another thread.

The issue is why even install the updates on AMD systems if they are not affected in the first place?

https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=mds-zombieload-mit&num=10


----------



## MishelLngelo

That's MS and windows for you, they install what they want. I can't even disable them any more.


----------



## rdr09

MishelLngelo said:


> That's MS and windows for you, they install what they want. I can't even disable them any more.


Believe it or not, that feature of turning off updates in Win10 actually works now. I do manual updates

Anyways, Two more days before Computex. How likely will the R3's be on sale a few days after announcement?


----------



## MishelLngelo

rdr09 said:


> Believe it or not, that feature of turning off updates in Win10 actually works now. I do manual updates
> 
> Anyways, Two more days before Computex. How likely will the R3's be on sale a few days after announcement?


They sneak them in with KBs and don't tell everything. KBs include earlier updates and unless you stop all updates (not advisable) and never do them you'd eventually get them all. 
Last two times new CPUs showed up for sale pretty quick after announcement but in my country that meant about a month after most. Depends on if they will just make definite architecture and models announcements or just start of production. I personally don't expect getting my mitts on it before July. With gen 1 and 2 many online stores had place mats or available for preorder by now.


----------



## NightAntilli

Anusha said:


> I guess even if the board layout and electronics support faster RAM, MSI (or any board manufacturer for that matter) wouldn't want to "unlock" full potential because they want to sell the newer boards. They'll probably add minimum support for the new CPUs.


PCI-E 4.0 has been confirmed to be added to Gigabyte B450 and X470 boards... As long as you use a 3000 series CPU.
https://www.tomshardware.com/news/gigabyte-amd-ryzen-3000-pcie-4.0-x470,39377.html

So... Either X570 has a brand new feature that we haven't heard off, or, the new features are CPU dependent rather than chipset dependent.


----------



## rdr09

MishelLngelo said:


> They sneak them in with KBs and don't tell everything. KBs include earlier updates and unless you stop all updates (not advisable) and never do them you'd eventually get them all.
> Last two times new CPUs showed up for sale pretty quick after announcement but in my country that meant about a month after most. Depends on if they will just make definite architecture and models announcements or just start of production. I personally don't expect getting my mitts on it before July. With gen 1 and 2 many online stores had place mats or available for preorder by now.


Part of Africa were i currently reside, there are hardly any AMD components available. I'll be in Singapore mid June and hoping to buy from there. That country is pretty updated when it comes to electronics. Prolly better than the US.

Pretty sure the stores will run out of these cpus quick.


----------



## cowboy44mag

NightAntilli said:


> PCI-E 4.0 has been confirmed to be added to Gigabyte B450 and X470 boards... As long as you use a 3000 series CPU.
> https://www.tomshardware.com/news/gigabyte-amd-ryzen-3000-pcie-4.0-x470,39377.html
> 
> So... Either X570 has a brand new feature that we haven't heard off, or, the new features are CPU dependent rather than chipset dependent.



I think that most of the motherboard manufactures will have updated bios to support PCI-E 4.0 on their X470 motherboards, kudos for Gigabyte confirming they will also bring it to B450. I think the biggest advantage to the new X570 and possibly even the new "B" boards is going to be VRM phase and for some reason they are including active cooling on the PCH heatsink. With some Zen 3000 processors its possible that the PCH on the older motherboards won't have enough cooling, and some of the new 3000 series processors my not perform at their peak performance considering MSI is including 12 phase VRM on their top of the line board and 8 phase VRM on their Gaming Plus board. That is quite an increase over current X470 boards (my Strix X470-F only has 6 phase VRM).


Its possible that the new X570 boards are a little overkill so they can support the expected R9 16 core 32 thread processor at the extreme high end, but its also possible that the new R7 12 core 24 thread processor may need beefier VRM and active PCH cooling to get optimal performance. So far from the leaks I've seen the new X570 boards are much beefier than the current X470 standard.


----------



## MishelLngelo

I'm a bit concerned about that one x570 MB having two 8pin ATX connectors and that would require special and high end PSU.


----------



## AlphaC

cowboy44mag said:


> I think that most of the motherboard manufactures will have updated bios to support PCI-E 4.0 on their X470 motherboards, kudos for Gigabyte confirming they will also bring it to B450. I think the biggest advantage to the new X570 and possibly even the new "B" boards is going to be VRM phase and for some reason they are including active cooling on the PCH heatsink. With some Zen 3000 processors its possible that the PCH on the older motherboards won't have enough cooling, and some of the new 3000 series processors my not perform at their peak performance considering MSI is including 12 phase VRM on their top of the line board and 8 phase VRM on their Gaming Plus board. That is quite an increase over current X470 boards (my Strix X470-F only has 6 phase VRM).
> 
> 
> Its possible that the new X570 boards are a little overkill so they can support the expected R9 16 core 32 thread processor at the extreme high end, but its also possible that the new R7 12 core 24 thread processor may need beefier VRM and active PCH cooling to get optimal performance. So far from the leaks I've seen the new X570 boards are much beefier than the current X470 standard.


Your STRIX-F is using 60A IR3555 powerstages with built in monitoring for VCORE, so it's as good as any "12 phase" board using ~25A rated weaker Low RDS(on) mosfets such as the X570 ones from MSI. It's certainly on par or better than the MSI X470 Pro Carbon which uses 10 sets of Onsemi powerpaks.
https://www.infineon.com/cms/en/pro...ted-power-stage/ir-mosfet-power-stage/ir3555/

Also if you look at the MSI X570 Pro Carbon mid-level board, its layout is more or less the same as the Z390 one rather than the X470 one ( so likely 10 phase for CPU power with fewer phase for SOC).
https://videocardz.com/80714/msi-mpg-x570-series-leaked-gaming-pro-carbon-gaming-plus


MSI has been known to not use doublers and simply run 2 sets of mosfets off a PWM so I wouldn't expect a drastic change unless you buy top end boards.



MishelLngelo said:


> I'm a bit concerned about that one x570 MB having two 8pin ATX connectors and that would require special and high end PSU.


You don't need to plug in all power connectors other than the 8 pin CPU power connector unless you're pushing over 300W through or have a shoddy PSU. The MSI engineers have put up videos in Chinese suggesting the extra power connectors are because cheap PSUs use thinner wiring and that cheap wiring gets hot.


----


The biggest change from X470 to X570 seems to be more PCIE connectivity (PCIE 4.0)
https://www.techpowerup.com/255729/...-diagram-revealed-chipset-puts-out-pcie-gen-4


----------



## cowboy44mag

AlphaC said:


> Your STRIX-F is using 60A IR3555 powerstages with built in monitoring for VCORE, so it's as good as any "12 phase" board using ~25A rated weaker Low RDS(on) mosfets such as the X570 ones from MSI. It's certainly on par or better than the MSI X470 Pro Carbon which uses 10 sets of Onsemi powerpaks.
> https://www.infineon.com/cms/en/pro...ted-power-stage/ir-mosfet-power-stage/ir3555/
> 
> Also if you look at the MSI X570 Pro Carbon mid-level board, its layout is more or less the same as the Z390 one rather than the X470 one ( so likely 10 phase for CPU power with fewer phase for SOC).
> https://videocardz.com/80714/msi-mpg-x570-series-leaked-gaming-pro-carbon-gaming-plus
> 
> 
> MSI has been known to not use doublers and simply run 2 sets of mosfets off a PWM so I wouldn't expect a drastic change unless you buy top end boards.
> 
> 
> 
> You don't need to plug in all power connectors other than the 8 pin CPU power connector unless you're pushing over 300W through or have a shoddy PSU. The MSI engineers have put up videos in Chinese suggesting the extra power connectors are because cheap PSUs use thinner wiring and that cheap wiring gets hot.
> 
> 
> ----
> 
> 
> The biggest change from X470 to X570 seems to be more PCIE connectivity (PCIE 4.0)
> https://www.techpowerup.com/255729/...-diagram-revealed-chipset-puts-out-pcie-gen-4
> View attachment 270562



I'm actually really glad to hear that. I would much rather just upgrade the processor than processor and motherboard. I'm glad that the Strix board is more "stout" than I thought it was:thumb:


----------



## rdr09

How much are you people willing to pay for a Ryzen 12 core? Assuming it does an all core boost of 4.5GHz.

Cos right now, the 2700X sits at 280$. 

400$?

EDIT: Wait, how much was the R7 1800X when it came out? It was 500$.


----------



## Anusha

rdr09 said:


> How much are you people willing to pay for a Ryzen 12 core? Assuming it does an all core boost of 4.5GHz.
> 
> Cos right now, the 2700X sits at 280$.
> 
> 400$?
> 
> EDIT: Wait, how much was the R7 1800X when it came out? It was 500$.


I bet
8 core $329
12 core $499
16 core $799


----------



## rdr09

Anusha said:


> I bet
> 8 core $329
> 12 core $499
> 16 core $799


That would be excellent price for a 12 core. Another 50$ won't hurt either. Unless the clocks and ipc are lackluster.


These are the 12 cores currently. The i9 10 cores are all above 800$. Not sure if the comparisons even make sense.

Oh man that 16 core might be too cheap. I'm not saying I can easily afford it just relatively speaking.


----------



## cowboy44mag

rdr09 said:


> How much are you people willing to pay for a Ryzen 12 core? Assuming it does an all core boost of 4.5GHz.
> 
> Cos right now, the 2700X sits at 280$.
> 
> 400$?
> 
> EDIT: Wait, how much was the R7 1800X when it came out? It was 500$.



I'm personally expecting the 12 core to be between $350 and $400. AMD has always undercut the competition and I think they will be chomping at the bit to release a 12 core 24 thread processor that completely and totally destroys the i9 9900K "the most powerful gaming processor ever". At $400 they would undercut the 9900K by $100 while straight out dominating its performance. AMD is looking to gain market share and this is the best chance they have ever had to really stick it to Intel and gain as much of the market as they possibly can while Intel is scrambling to catch up.


----------



## nick name

cowboy44mag said:


> I'm personally expecting the 12 core to be between $350 and $400. AMD has always undercut the competition and I think they will be chomping at the bit to release a 12 core 24 thread processor that completely and totally destroys the i9 9900K "the most powerful gaming processor ever". At $400 they would undercut the 9900K by $100 while straight out dominating its performance. AMD is looking to gain market share and this is the best chance they have ever had to really stick it to Intel and gain as much of the market as they possibly can while Intel is scrambling to catch up.


You're really gonna have to know how tall the product stack is to really guess at pricing. They can't undercut their own new CPUs so they will have to differentiate the pricing enough which may mean some higher than anticipated prices.


----------



## VeritronX

mtrai said:


> Hey y'all I just wanted to post some new findings I stumbled across this past weekend. I made a huge boo boo with my win 10 install and needed to do a clean install. So since I knew Win 10 1903 ISO can be had, I decided to install it clean since I already had to do this. Anyhow...as most are aware AMD CPU incur the AMD Penalty. This is highlighted best in Firestrike.
> 
> Well after installing Win 10 1903, drivers, etc and 3dmark..and setting my timings on my Vega 64< I was in for a shock with the Physics and Combined scores. It is looking like AMD CPU are now on parity or rather scoreing much more what they really should. I never saw this uplift reported anywhere as I kept up with changes to the insider edition changes. SO I think we will need a lot more testing across the board due to possible Windows 10 scheduling changes?


Sounds like they've tuned their core parking / scheduling a bit then, I managed to get a similar boost in firestrike two years ago (win10 1706 iirc) by messing with core parking settings in power profiles following suggestions from a reddit post, but I didn't keep it because it made games like GTA5 unhappy (hitching etc).

Edit: found vids of it on my yt:

With High Performance Profile


Spoiler











With Custom Core Parking Profile


Spoiler


----------



## rdr09

cowboy44mag said:


> I'm personally expecting the 12 core to be between $350 and $400. AMD has always undercut the competition and I think they will be chomping at the bit to release a 12 core 24 thread processor that completely and totally destroys the i9 9900K "the most powerful gaming processor ever". At $400 they would undercut the 9900K by $100 while straight out dominating its performance. AMD is looking to gain market share and this is the best chance they have ever had to really stick it to Intel and gain as much of the market as they possibly can while Intel is scrambling to catch up.


Yah, 400 - 450$ for the 12 core. Anything higher might lean me going for 8 core. This gen may be a good reason to go back to watercooling, not just the cpu, but the rest of the components. im sure ek and others will come up with blocks for the motherboard.


----------



## cowboy44mag

rdr09 said:


> Yah, 400 - 450$ for the 12 core. Anything higher might lean me going for 8 core. This gen may be a good reason to go back to watercooling, not just the cpu, but the rest of the components. im sure ek and others will come up with blocks for the motherboard.



I can't imagine them charging much more than $400 for the new R7 12 core. If they were in Intel's spot I would expect higher pricing, however AMD has too much market share yet to reclaim to charge a true premium price. They are going to want to undercut Intel enough to really compel people to go AMD and that means not only having the fastest and best gaming and workstation processor but also undercutting the competition. In all reality I believe that the new R7 12 core, if its as great as the leaks are saying, is definitely worth $550 to $600 however AMD just has too much ground to make up and this is their best chance they have ever had to gain market parity or even gain the upper hand.


So far I'm having great success with the NH-U14S and two 140mm fans in push pull to cool my R7 2700X, and I'm hoping it will be enough for the new R7 3700X. I really like knowing I don't have to worry about pumps and leaks with being on air cooling. Granted I'm sure its cooler overall here in Ohio than in Africa


----------



## MishelLngelo

Looks like we'll know more May 27th but if it's anywhere like this https://wccftech.com/amd-zen-2-5ghz-12-core-4-3ghz-16-core-cpus-leaked-benchmarked/ it's gonna be more than good.


----------



## Anusha

MishelLngelo said:


> I'm a bit concerned about that one x570 MB having two 8pin ATX connectors and that would require special and high end PSU.


Even their B450 Gaming Pro Carbon AC board has a 8-pin and a 4-pin CPU power socket. I have the board. Seems to run without the 4-pin cable plugged in.



MishelLngelo said:


> Looks like we'll know more May 27th but if it's anywhere like this https://wccftech.com/amd-zen-2-5ghz-12-core-4-3ghz-16-core-cpus-leaked-benchmarked/ it's gonna be more than good.


Seems too good to be true. You know how the saying goes: if it's too good to be true, it probably is.


----------



## cowboy44mag

MishelLngelo said:


> Looks like we'll know more May 27th but if it's anywhere like this https://wccftech.com/amd-zen-2-5ghz-12-core-4-3ghz-16-core-cpus-leaked-benchmarked/ it's gonna be more than good.



Just read an article saying MSI is releasing a Godlike X570 motherboard. MSI releasing such a high end "overkill" motherboard for the upcoming third generation Ryzen processors would tend to lend more credibility to a 5Ghz boost clock R7 12 core and a 16 core R9 monster.... If Zen 2 delivers like most people are thinking AMD is in a perfect spot to really light up the processor market. Intel is still stuck on 14nm++ refreshes and will really have no answer to Zen 2.


----------



## rdr09

Anusha said:


> Even their B450 Gaming Pro Carbon AC board has a 8-pin and a 4-pin CPU power socket. I have the board. Seems to run without the 4-pin cable plugged in.
> 
> 
> Seems too good to be true. You know how the saying goes: if it's too good to be true, it probably is.


I think it's probable. I get 1900 at 4.1GHz. Double that, 4.2GHz, and some IPC increase - Boom. There goes your B350.


----------



## MishelLngelo

Indubitably MB manufacturers are working feverishly on new MBs, with 500 series chipsets but they are not about the let the rabbit out of hat until absolutely necessary. Asus has released a BIOS for next gen Ryzen couple month ago. I'm not sure that the leak about MSI's new MB is actually accidental, more like about getting a jump for attention.


----------



## rdr09

MishelLngelo said:


> Indubitably MB manufacturers are working feverishly on new MBs, with 500 series chipsets but they are not about the let the rabbit out of hat until absolutely necessary. Asus has released a BIOS for next gen Ryzen couple month ago. I'm not sure that the leak about MSI's new MB is actually accidental, more like about getting a jump for attention.


A excerpt from a resident expert who is currently testing a Ryzen 3000 series. I erased the name cos not sure if he wants to be id'ed.


----------



## MishelLngelo

As soon as I got hang of overclocking my 2700x, I asked a friend with 9900k to set it to my best stable OC of 4.3GHz and 2700x beat it handily in several benchmarks. All we need is higher frequency as it is.


----------



## mtrai

MishelLngelo said:


> As soon as I got hang of overclocking my 2700x, I asked a friend with 9900k to set it to my best stable OC of 4.3GHz and 2700x beat it handily in several benchmarks. All we need is higher frequency as it is.


You mean like this: https://valid.x86.fr/u95kha While not beating the 9900K is close enough.


----------



## MishelLngelo

mtrai said:


> You mean like this: https://valid.x86.fr/u95kha While not beating the 9900K is close enough.


His 9900k was locked at 4.3GHz, same as my 2700x.


----------



## cowboy44mag

MishelLngelo said:


> His 9900k was locked at 4.3GHz, same as my 2700x.



It all depends on the benchmark/ task that you are testing with Zen+ (ie R7 2700X). While Intel still holds a very slight IPC advantage (under 5%) that IPC advantage does edge out the current R7 2700X in tasks like Adobe, gaming, ect... The difference is very minimal, but it does exist. Where the R7 2700X will hands down beat the i9 9900K (at the same frequencies) is when multiple cores can be brought to bear such as in Cinebench, general rendering and editing (with the big exception of Adobe). Hell my R7 2700X matches the performance of the i9 9900K (at stock) with a score of 2025 in Cinebench R15 @ 4.35Ghz. We all know that "at stock" for the i9 9900K is a loaded term as most every motherboard out there by default overclockes it to 4.8 - 5.0Ghz so basically a 2700X can match the i9 9900K @ 4.8Ghz when its running at 4.35Ghz in these heavily multi threaded applications.



Taking that into account, if AMD pulls off an IPC gain of 5% or more they will outperform all current Intel processors. The gain will be even greater with applications that can truly leverage multiple cores as AMD's Infinity Fabric is far superior to Intel's interconnect when multiple cores are engaged and AMD has actually made improvements to its Infinity Fabric for the 3000 series. Realistically AMD doesn't have to hit 10, or even 16% IPC gains (that have been "leaked") to outperform the current generation of Intel processors, a much more modest IPC gain of 6% will hands down beat what Intel currently has.



To sum it all up the Zen 2 release is going to be huge and Intel who is stuck in the 14nm++ quagmire is in real trouble.


----------



## MishelLngelo

At same time that same reason for Intel's advantage is creating security holes which if completely plugged up would lower it's performance by a good margin.


----------



## mtrai

MishelLngelo said:


> At same time that same reason for Intel's advantage is creating security holes which if completely plugged up would lower it's performance by a good margin.


Have a quick read of this. ZombieLoad Mitigation Costs For Intel Haswell Xeon, Plus Overall Mitigation Impact. The testing was done on Linux. 



> When looking at the current costs of all mitigations to date combined, that's a 13% hit using the same set of benchmarks carried out for the recent Xeon/EPYC comparison a few days back. If also disabling Hyper Threading, it equates to about a 19% hit.


 https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Haswell-Xeon-Zombie-Load-Ref


----------



## nanotm

mtrai said:


> Have a quick read of this. ZombieLoad Mitigation Costs For Intel Haswell Xeon, Plus Overall Mitigation Impact. The testing was done on Linux.
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Haswell-Xeon-Zombie-Load-Ref


and rumour has it the same problems will still be part of the 10th gen cpu's as well (what with not having had enough life cycle time to figure out how to remove them aside from disabling half the cpu) 

not that I care intel cpu's are too expensive for me (and it seems like AMD ones are fast approaching the same status) 

and yes I would prefer it if I could clock my 2700x past 4.3ghz on all cores (even my ancient fx8350 was capable of 24/7 all cores @4.4) but you cant have everything I guess...

also folks are pointing out that a lot of games are unaffected by disabling certain "features" on intel cpu's, curious then why "gaming cpu's" even had those "features" since in many cases they actively detract from performance...

hopefully intel will adjust its pricing to be more realistic (rather than price gouging the consumers) whilst they struggle to overcome the current hurdle rather than attempting to bull there way through with dodgy practices and ending up defunct (because adversity is good for innovation which means you need competition, not just a fat wallet and low moral standards to succeed and be the best, soemthing intel seemed to forget for a few years)


----------



## cowboy44mag

nanotm said:


> and rumour has it the same problems will still be part of the 10th gen cpu's as well (what with not having had enough life cycle time to figure out how to remove them aside from disabling half the cpu)
> 
> not that I care intel cpu's are too expensive for me (and it seems like AMD ones are fast approaching the same status)
> 
> and yes I would prefer it if I could clock my 2700x past 4.3ghz on all cores (even my ancient fx8350 was capable of 24/7 all cores @4.4) but you cant have everything I guess...
> 
> also folks are pointing out that a lot of games are unaffected by disabling certain "features" on intel cpu's, curious then why "gaming cpu's" even had those "features" since in many cases they actively detract from performance...
> 
> hopefully intel will adjust its pricing to be more realistic (rather than price gouging the consumers) whilst they struggle to overcome the current hurdle rather than attempting to bull there way through with dodgy practices and ending up defunct (because adversity is good for innovation which means you need competition, not just a fat wallet and low moral standards to succeed and be the best, soemthing intel seemed to forget for a few years)





Intel's security flaws (as I understand them) all seem to be speculative execution flaws and are based around Intel's version of SMT called hyperthreading. Hyperthreading does the same thing as SMT, it enables each core to have two threads which at the most basic way of explaining them are virtual cores. In this way a 4 core system with hyperthreading enabled can act like an 8 core processor. Intel didn't encrypt parts of its processors and left backdoor entry points with its speculative executions which can be exploited to gain access to passwords or in the worst case can enable remote execution of the compromised computer. Apple and some other vendors are actually telling people at this point that the only way their Intel powered system is secure is to disable hyperthreading thus basically cutting its performance in some applications by half.


Some "gaming computers" won't be effected much by this as if you have a four, six or eight core system disabling hyperthreading won't effect gaming performance much especially if your overclocked. While some games can utilize up to eight cores the performance hit of running them on a overclocked quad core typically isn't extreme. Games tend to like high clocked single core execution. So disabling hyperthreding won't ruin most people's gaming experience (unless they are running a dual core hyperthreaded PC and are suddenly reduced to 2 threads). However if you do rendering work or video/ picture editing suddenly loosing half of your threads is going to have a significant hit to your performance. Intel also sells its hyperthreaded processors for a premium which now people who paid that premium are looking foolish as they could have bought the non hyperthreaded model for much less and now with disabling hyperthreading they have the same exact processor but paid more for them.


So far AMD has avoided the security exploits for the most part because SMT, while using speculative execution, has more security features and encryption. Basically Intel did everything they could to just get raw speed and performance while not having any regard for security. They did that for years putting millions of computers at risk of exploit because it was easier and produced a faster product. Now they, and their unwitting consumers are paying the price. Intel did what compares to making a battleship without any armor plating- its fast, and packs a punch but it can't take an attack and is therefore fundamentally flawed. 



I personally haven't trusted Intel since their "cripple AMD" compiler B.S. and have built AMD systems ever since. What is really funny is how Piledriver suddenly stacks up pretty good against Ivy Bridge, and even Haswell of the same era once the mitigations are applied to "patch" the flaws. The only true way to stop the flaws is to disable hyperthreading which makes old Piledriver processors look even better by comparison.


----------



## rdr09

Will this work on current motherboards with updated bios and take advantage of 5000 MB/s speeds? Or, will that speed only attainable on the new chipset?

https://www.techpowerup.com/255907/...-up-to-5000-mb-s-other-computex-announcements

Assuming we upgrade the cpu alone.


----------



## cowboy44mag

I think I summed up the hardware vulnerabilities fairly well, but this article may shed addition light, and it shows just how much performance processors up to the i7 8700K are going to loose:


https://www.techspot.com/article/1850-how-screwed-is-intel-no-hyper-threading/









As anyone can see with these glaring vulnerabilities the new Ryzen processors suddenly stack very well vs the "performance kings" and even older piledriver processors suddenly don't look as bad as they once did. Its also important to note that even when bios updates come to "patch" the problems with software, its just a software patch and very vulnerable to hack. The only real way to stop these vulnerabilities is at the hardware level which Intel may do when they launch 10nm in 2020, or 2021, maybe 2022.... Until then the only way to stop the vulnerabilities without leaving yourself open to hacking the upcoming bios software "patches" is by disabling hyper-threading and taking a sizeable performance hit (Apple is already telling its consumers to disable hyper-threading to protect themselves from lawsuit).


The truly chilling part of all this is that major governments in the "free world" have always turned to Intel processors to power their government issued PCs, as well as most every major hospital, insurance providers, banks, ect... Now hacking you or me won't net much for a professional or even government employed hacker, but hacking government officials, or banking institutions are very worth their time and effort. Intel through their gross negligence has not only put normal consumers at risk but major corporations, banks, insurance providers, hospitals, and yes even entire governments. These vulnerabilities have been around since Sandy Bridge but were only brought to light a short time ago. Its too early to tell exactly what kind of damage has been wrought by criminals and rival governments utilizing these hardware vulnerabilities over such a vast time period. Its doubtful that Intel will ever be held accountable for this negligence but it should be.


----------



## cowboy44mag

Looks like we are going to have to wait a little longer before finding out about the new Ryzen 3000 series. Apparently at Computex AMD is doing their X570 launch, the 3000 series won't be launched till June 10th, the performance embargo will end July 7th and they will launch and be available for purchase. I was really hoping they would be available in June, however if AMD needs a little more time to perfect them that's better than an earlier launch....


----------



## MishelLngelo

Interesting, tnx for sharing. Anyway, July is fine with me but it got me thinking about chipset.


----------



## rdr09

105 TDP FOR 12 CORE

Its 50$ more than my budget but i"ll go for it and use my prime pro for now.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

it may be some time, but I think I want that new 12 core chip.... thought about the 16 core they didn't show, but was actually seen and benched there... but that's too much... that 12 core though is within the tdp of this board given that it's not having any trouble with the 2700x... assuming support, I'll likely upgrade sometime before fall.


----------



## nick name

rdr09 said:


> 105 TDP FOR 12 CORE
> 
> Its 50$ more than my budget but i"ll go for it and use my prime pro for now.


You're gonna wanna blow on the VRMs on that Prime Pro after you upgrade.


----------



## umeng2002

It's the same TDP as the 2700X.


----------



## cowboy44mag

I'm wary of running the 12 core on the existing X470 boards... I have a high end board, but looking at the new X570 boards Asus is listing... Lets just say they make the existing high end X470 boards look underwhelming... They are boasting huge heat sinks and even active cooling via fans in the heat sinks... The TDP is the same as the 2700X but they are building these boards extremely beefy for a reason... I would also like to go for the R9 3900X, however I may end up "settling" for the R7 3800X, depending on how far you can overclock that 8 core component. I won't make my final decision until the actual reviews comes out, but I am seriously wondering if the X470 boards will be enough to fully support the R9 3900X..












I mean look at this beast and then look at your current X370 or X470 board..


----------



## cowboy44mag

At any rate a 15% IPC uplift is amazing and the new 3000 series is going to really put Intel on their heels, if not their butts...


----------



## MishelLngelo

cowboy44mag said:


> At any rate a 15% IPC uplift is amazing and the new 3000 series is going to really put Intel on their heels, if not their butts...


For next couple of years, all Intel can do is to counter attack by fixing manufacturing process and binning to pick and choose best specimens, give them better IHS heat transfer and designate them for higher frequency. The very fabric in architecture that made it such high performance is holding present architecture by being a security hole and nightmare. That's why they are so feverishly working on changing micro code and at same time trying to attenuate it's bad effects on performance by OS patches.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

I keep seeing people saying that the 12 core will blow x470 boards... I remember seeing things about the 2700x blowing B350 boards too... but it seems to have worked out just fine... if the 12 core is indeed 105 watt tdp, then it will likely be fine in any board that the 2700x is currently running. Keep in mind that these new chips are on a new much more efficient process and the new 3700x is supposed to be better than current 2700x with only 65w tdp.


----------



## nanotm

MishelLngelo said:


> For next couple of years, all Intel can do is to counter attack by fixing manufacturing process and binning to pick and choose best specimens, give them better IHS heat transfer and designate them for higher frequency. The very fabric in architecture that made it such high performance is holding present architecture by being a security hole and nightmare. That's why they are so feverishly working on changing micro code and at same time trying to attenuate it's bad effects on performance by OS patches.


thats going to hurt them a lot given that they still have wafer production problems, that low yield is going to seriously undercut their bottom line, add that to the mounting number of security flaws within the processor lineup and there going to be suffering until they get a major generation change (already they pushed back the generation change twice and rumour has it the 10th gen will just be the same again with a few tweaks as problems continue) coupled together they will need to reduce prices and make massive operating losses just to try and stay competitive, I hope they survive but given all the problems that isnt necessarily a given...


----------



## MishelLngelo

Minotaurtoo said:


> I keep seeing people saying that the 12 core will blow x470 boards... I remember seeing things about the 2700x blowing B350 boards too... but it seems to have worked out just fine... if the 12 core is indeed 105 watt tdp, then it will likely be fine in any board that the 2700x is currently running. Keep in mind that these new chips are on a new much more efficient process and the new 3700x is supposed to be better than current 2700x with only 65w tdp.


If 8 core like 2700x doesn't "blow up" MBs with a320 chipsert, why would a 12 core damage or severely restrict x370/470 MBs ? TDP may not be exact scaling with power requirements and delivery but is a good enough indicator to be able to judge VRM potential. 
Those projected and announced x570 MBs are obviously high end and overbuilt in expectation of 16 core CPUs but also for stronger PCIe functions. I wouldn't mind have in of them right now but this MB is not a bottleneck for very good and stable 4.3GHz overclock and able to push PBO to it's limits so why not a new CPU with same TDP.


----------



## MishelLngelo

Minotaurtoo said:


> I keep seeing people saying that the 12 core will blow x470 boards... I remember seeing things about the 2700x blowing B350 boards too... but it seems to have worked out just fine... if the 12 core is indeed 105 watt tdp, then it will likely be fine in any board that the 2700x is currently running. Keep in mind that these new chips are on a new much more efficient process and the new 3700x is supposed to be better than current 2700x with only 65w tdp.





nanotm said:


> thats going to hurt them a lot given that they still have wafer production problems, that low yield is going to seriously undercut their bottom line, add that to the mounting number of security flaws within the processor lineup and there going to be suffering until they get a major generation change (already they pushed back the generation change twice and rumour has it the 10th gen will just be the same again with a few tweaks as problems continue) coupled together they will need to reduce prices and make massive operating losses just to try and stay competitive, I hope they survive but given all the problems that isnt necessarily a given...


By patenting and restricting and not licensing or sharing that same technology that gave them the edge, Intel has made own bad, cooked their own goose, and now it's harvesting what they fave sown. At this time, AMD can just keep on developing what they started. I'm expecting things like R7 3720/50 or 80 processors pretty soon. After all, it's just a beginning of new process on higher level than 1st gen to 2nd gen was. That's whole point. MB manufacturers are obviously counting on that too.


----------



## cowboy44mag

MishelLngelo said:


> If 8 core like 2700x doesn't "blow up" MBs with a320 chipsert, why would a 12 core damage or severely restrict x370/470 MBs ? TDP may not be exact scaling with power requirements and delivery but is a good enough indicator to be able to judge VRM potential.
> Those projected and announced x570 MBs are obviously high end and overbuilt in expectation of 16 core CPUs but also for stronger PCIe functions. I wouldn't mind have in of them right now but this MB is not a bottleneck for very good and stable 4.3GHz overclock and able to push PBO to it's limits so why not a new CPU with same TDP.



I have no doubt that the new 8 core processors will be fine, I am just wondering if the boards will be fine with the new 12 and 16 core R9 processors. Even though the TDP is 105W like the R7 2700X it would almost have to consume more power under load, especially if you "overclock" it at all. I'm also wondering how well the new 12 core components will handle gaming. While I do use my PC for work and do rendering/ editing with it I also game on it whenever I can. It may turn out that like with the Threadripper line its great for productivity but not so good with gaming while the 2700X was a better all around processor that did both good enough. It may end up being that the best all around option again is the R7 8 core line because they have better gaming performance while still providing good productivity performance. Looking at the R7 3700X with its low TDP it may just end up being an overclocking beast. I'm really looking forward to the reviews of these new processors but will definitely be getting either one of the new R7s or the 12 core R9 (I think the 16 core may be overkill for what I need). Can't wait for the embargo to lift on these awesome processors


----------



## cowboy44mag

MishelLngelo said:


> By patenting and restricting and not licensing or sharing that same technology that gave them the edge, Intel has made own bad, cooked their own goose, and now it's harvesting what they fave sown. At this time, AMD can just keep on developing what they started. I'm expecting things like R7 3720/50 or 80 processors pretty soon. After all, it's just a beginning of new process on higher level than 1st gen to 2nd gen was. That's whole point. MB manufacturers are obviously counting on that too.



Make no mistake, Intel won't suffer for its mistakes, they will do something dirty or underhanded and still end up "smelling like a rose" when its all said and done. Look what happened when the old Athlon processors were flat out outperforming their then top of the line Pentium processors. They just nicely made a compiler that it turns out almost everyone used in most applications (including the very performance benchmarks we rely on) to make themselves look better via a "cripple AMD" code. If the chip wasn't read as being "genuine Intel" then it was given the worst possible compute path and if it was genuine Intel then it was given the best. They made the whole industry think they had the better processors when in fact they didn't. They gained the vast majority of the market share and by the time the truth came out their penalty was paying AMD pennies on the dollar for what they made bilking everyone. They built the lopsided market share that they hold to this very day. They cheated and their penalty was a joke, so they learned that they get ahead by cheating and will get away with it. They will find someway of skewing the charts and holding their thumb on the scale to ensure that even if they are outperformed they are still considered the "best". They have the money and the shady marketing department to pull it off.


----------



## MishelLngelo

As it's definitely prudent to wait for at least first tests and reports of performance and since none of that will be sure until at least July 7, I will rethink all more according to pricing first and number of cores second. 
Gaming wise, somehow I don't see how much difference few core above 8 would help, it's still IPC territory.


----------



## cowboy44mag

MishelLngelo said:


> As it's definitely prudent to wait for at least first tests and reports of performance and since none of that will be sure until at least July 7, I will rethink all more according to pricing first and number of cores second.
> Gaming wise, somehow I don't see how much difference few core above 8 would help, it's still IPC territory.



I'm thinking that as long as gaming isn't hindered for whatever reason with the new 12 core that's probably what I'm going to get. A lot of the decision too will come down to "overclockability". Can't wait to see the independent reviews, for one I really want to see how much wattage the new i9 3900X actually consumes, that should answer a lot of questions as well...


----------



## cowboy44mag

Minotaurtoo said:


> I keep seeing people saying that the 12 core will blow x470 boards... I remember seeing things about the 2700x blowing B350 boards too... but it seems to have worked out just fine... if the 12 core is indeed 105 watt tdp, then it will likely be fine in any board that the 2700x is currently running. Keep in mind that these new chips are on a new much more efficient process and the new 3700x is supposed to be better than current 2700x with only 65w tdp.





Here's some bad news, doesn't exactly hit the X470 motherboards but this is what people have been worrying about with the new high performance Ryzen 3000 processors:








While this appears to only effect 300 series motherboards who's to say that the X470 will fully support the high end R9 3000 processors.


----------



## NightAntilli

cowboy44mag said:


> Here's some bad news, doesn't exactly hit the X470 motherboards but this is what people have been worrying about with the new high performance Ryzen 3000 processors:
> 
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bhz7C4WGos0
> 
> 
> While this appears to only effect 300 series motherboards who's to say that the X470 will fully support the high end R9 3000 processors.


That video is from over a month ago. It is outdated information. MSI released another statement at the time, stating that the information provided by the customer service worker was incorrect.


----------



## cowboy44mag

NightAntilli said:


> That video is from over a month ago. It is outdated information. MSI released another statement at the time, stating that the information provided by the customer service worker was incorrect.
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_oK4CteTQ44



didn't catch that, good to know... for some reason that came up as a new video, Google is letting me down...



I think that some of the VRM on the new X570 boards is overkill and in anticipation of overclocking the 16 core R9, I'm just hoping the the 12 core doesn't need the high VRM phase that the X570 is boasting. The bigger heat sinks and active fan cooling are to keep faster PCI-E support cool, and that makes perfect sense. I'm just really hoping the the current X470 boards can fully support the R9 3900X (12 core) and get a bios update for PCI-E 4.0 support on one slot. There would be greater overclocking potential on the new X570 boards but the X470 boards would still be good options. 



I really want one of those new 12 core CPUs, want to keep costs down, but don't want to blow up another motherboard (of course the first one was due to factory defect).


----------



## cowboy44mag

Ok, I am really confused now... Linus Tech Tips just posted this video yesterday:








In it he says that MSI will not support Ryzen 3000 series processors on its first gen motherboards, and doesn't recommend it on the second gen boards. That would rule out the 300 and 400 series motherboards for Ryzen 3000 processors. Now I'm not sure if its all the 3000 series processors or just the R9 3000 processors or just the 16 core upcoming processor, I'm hoping he was talking about just the 16 core R9 processor... It looks like compatibility is going to become very dicey with the new Ryzen 3000 processors. 12 cores and up may indeed to be too much even for the existing X470 motherboards, and I am now hoping that the R7 3000 series will at least be fully supported by the X470 motherboards... $400 or $500 isn't too bad for an upgrade, but I for one will have a hard time sinking $800 to $1000 for a Zen 2 upgrade if we have to update to X570 motherboards as well...


Of course AMD published this:


https://community.amd.com/community...4-platform-longevity-getting-ryzen-3000-ready


So according to that X470 and B450 motherboards will be compatible... There is a reason why there is confusion here, we have conflicting information from the motherboard vendors (that Linus interviewed) and from AMD themselves... Would be nice to know now though as I have a couple X470 boards I was going to use to make Ryzen 3000 builds on, however if they won't be fully supported I would like to sell them now before their value plummets with the release of Ryzen 3000 and X570 in early July...


----------



## TristanL

cowboy44mag said:


> Ok, I am really confused now... Linus Tech Tips just posted this video yesterday:
> 
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v7hofCnniJE
> 
> 
> In it he says that MSI will not support Ryzen 3000 series processors on its first gen motherboards, and doesn't recommend it on the second gen boards. That would rule out the 300 and 400 series motherboards for Ryzen 3000 processors. Now I'm not sure if its all the 3000 series processors or just the R9 3000 processors or just the 16 core upcoming processor, I'm hoping he was talking about just the 16 core R9 processor... It looks like compatibility is going to become very dicey with the new Ryzen 3000 processors. 12 cores and up may indeed to be too much even for the existing X470 motherboards, and I am now hoping that the R7 3000 series will at least be fully supported by the X470 motherboards... $400 or $500 isn't too bad for an upgrade, but I for one will have a hard time sinking $800 to $1000 for a Zen 2 upgrade if we have to update to X570 motherboards as well...
> 
> 
> Of course AMD published this:
> 
> 
> https://community.amd.com/community...4-platform-longevity-getting-ryzen-3000-ready
> 
> 
> So according to that X470 and B450 motherboards will be compatible... There is a reason why there is confusion here, we have conflicting information from the motherboard vendors (that Linus interviewed) and from AMD themselves... Would be nice to know now though as I have a couple X470 boards I was going to use to make Ryzen 3000 builds on, however if they won't be fully supported I would like to sell them now before their value plummets with the release of Ryzen 3000 and X570 in early July...


Buildzoid made a video about this:


----------



## Minotaurtoo

I forget which youtuber it was, but there was a video up that showed a list of supported boards and my B350 was on the list... but they only showed ASUS boards... this was back when MSI support was suspect.... Linus, I think, missed the bit where one of the other guys directly asked MSI reps and they said support would be there with a bios update... I really should start sharing videos here before I forget which one was which lol...


----------



## cowboy44mag

TristanL said:


> Buildzoid made a video about this:
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qn3rd6N9vGM





Thank you, that does answer some questions. I have a feeling my biggest question of will my Strix X470-F be able to handle the R9 3900X will be up in the air until independent testing and reviews... Looking at the over the top design of the new X570 motherboards I question if the 6+4 phase VRM of the Strix will be enough for the 12 core 3900X. I have a feeling the R7 processors will be fine, but that 12 core may need more. My original plan was to just get a high end X570 and then pick up the 12 core processor, but the processor is $100 more than I was figuring, and looking at the X570 motherboards... they are going to be more expensive than the X470 top tier motherboards were at launch.


I wonder if it will even matter though, as we don't know how that 12 core 3900X will actually perform. Don't get me wrong, its going to crush the competition in workstation related tasks, but I wonder how well it will be able to game. Remember that the Infinity Fabric interconnect with the first and second generation Threadripper processors caused latency issues that effected gaming performance. The only way to mitigate this issue was "gaming mode" which basically cuts the processor in half and with the Threadripper would turn the 16 core into 8 core so it could run games without the Infinity Fabric latency problems. If that is still an issue with the high core count processors and we still have to utilize "gaming mode" the 3900X would only run on 6 cores for gaming. That would mean that the best gaming processor would be the R7 3800X, and it may indeed end up being the best all around processor as you wouldn't have to switch between "modes" for gaming and rendering/ editing...


I know that AMD made improvements to its ground breaking Infinity Fabric interconnect, its just going to be interesting to see the benchmark results...


----------



## cowboy44mag

Minotaurtoo said:


> I forget which youtuber it was, but there was a video up that showed a list of supported boards and my B350 was on the list... but they only showed ASUS boards... this was back when MSI support was suspect.... Linus, I think, missed the bit where one of the other guys directly asked MSI reps and they said support would be there with a bios update... I really should start sharing videos here before I forget which one was which lol...





Tried to find that video by searching Youtube, but couldn't find it... Would have been nice as it dealt with Asus boards specifically...


----------



## Anusha

Anusha said:


> I bet
> 8 core $329
> 12 core $499
> 16 core $799


I guess I was kinda spot on?


----------



## Minotaurtoo

cowboy44mag said:


> Tried to find that video by searching Youtube, but couldn't find it... Would have been nice as it dealt with Asus boards specifically...


I think it might have gotten taken down since the MSI story turned out to be false... all I can find now is a hardware unboxed video where they list some of the MSI boards that already have confirmed support....but that's an old video so the list may be inaccurate... I do know I saw the video though because my modest little board was on the list... wish I had linked the video now.


----------



## cowboy44mag

https://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-3000-zen-2-cpu-5-ghz-overclock-4-5-ghz-all-core-boost/


With the overclocking I'm assuming they are talking about either the R7 3700X or R7 3800X as they are directly comparing it to the i9 9900K, which would also be 8 cores and 16 threads. The new Ryzen R7 processors then outperform a i9 9900K @ 5Ghz when they are clocked at 4.4Ghz and can hit 4.8Ghz all core. That is simply amazing!!! The new processors can hit 4.5Ghz all core @ 1.35V...


Put very simply Intel is in trouble and releasing the i9 9900KS @ 5Ghz out of the box isn't going to save them from Zen 2.


----------



## nanotm

cowboy44mag said:


> https://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-3000-zen-2-cpu-5-ghz-overclock-4-5-ghz-all-core-boost/
> 
> 
> With the overclocking I'm assuming they are talking about either the R7 3700X or R7 3800X as they are directly comparing it to the i9 9900K, which would also be 8 cores and 16 threads. The new Ryzen R7 processors then outperform a i9 9900K @ 5Ghz when they are clocked at 4.4Ghz and can hit 4.8Ghz all core. That is simply amazing!!! The new processors can hit 4.5Ghz all core @ 1.35V...
> 
> 
> Put very simply Intel is in trouble and releasing the i9 9900KS @ 5Ghz out of the box isn't going to save them from Zen 2.


give it a few weeks and the relevant software companies will produce updates that fix the performance issues for intel and the AMD live show results will be considered as "tweaked for effect" and everything will go back to "herp derp intel is king" just like it normally does...


----------



## cowboy44mag

https://www.techspot.com/news/80333-amd-assures-ryzen-3000-perform-equally-across-b450.html


I guess AMD has answered the question... Of course the R9 16 core may be a different beast that requires more than the X470 boards can handle.


If this indeed is true then the only real reason to get a X570 board is for PCIe 4.0, and that may not be a good reason to upgrade. While PCIe 4.0 will help with M.2 SSDs, it won't do much for anyone with a high end RTX GPU. PCIe 4.0 won't help anyone with a RTX GPU because NVIDIA chose to give these chips a PCI-Express 3.0 x16 bus interface, even though the PCI-Express gen 4.0 specification was expected. AMD's new GPUs will take advantage of PCIe 4.0, but thus far AMD seems to be targeting the RTX 2070 and will doubtfully have anything that can compete with the RTX 2080Ti. So basically its looking like if you want the best GPU available (RTX 2080Ti) it won't support PCIe 4.0. 



If the new 3000 series processors perform just as good on X470 as they do on X570 and the only advantage to X570 comes down to faster M.2 SSD transfer rate, I'm just not seeing that as a reason to either upgrade to X570 or pay a premium for the new X570 boards. One can expect that by the time Nvidia rolls out its successor to the RTX 2000 line that they will also be on PCIe 4.0, however by then we will more than likely be awaiting the release of the even better, more refined X670 motherboards and Zen 2+.


----------



## nick name

cowboy44mag said:


> https://www.techspot.com/news/80333-amd-assures-ryzen-3000-perform-equally-across-b450.html
> 
> 
> I guess AMD has answered the question... Of course the R9 16 core may be a different beast that requires more than the X470 boards can handle.
> 
> 
> If this indeed is true then the only real reason to get a X570 board is for PCIe 4.0, and that may not be a good reason to upgrade. While PCIe 4.0 will help with M.2 SSDs, it won't do much for anyone with a high end RTX GPU. PCIe 4.0 won't help anyone with a RTX GPU because NVIDIA chose to give these chips a PCI-Express 3.0 x16 bus interface, even though the PCI-Express gen 4.0 specification was expected. AMD's new GPUs will take advantage of PCIe 4.0, but thus far AMD seems to be targeting the RTX 2070 and will doubtfully have anything that can compete with the RTX 2080Ti. So basically its looking like if you want the best GPU available (RTX 2080Ti) it won't support PCIe 4.0.
> 
> 
> 
> If the new 3000 series processors perform just as good on X470 as they do on X570 and the only advantage to X570 comes down to faster M.2 SSD transfer rate, I'm just not seeing that as a reason to either upgrade to X570 or pay a premium for the new X570 boards. One can expect that by the time Nvidia rolls out its successor to the RTX 2000 line that they will also be on PCIe 4.0, however by then we will more than likely be awaiting the release of the even better, more refined X670 motherboards and Zen 2+.



The new X570 boards are likely to be far superior in terms of RAM topology. So higher overclocking potential can be expected.


----------



## umeng2002

nick name said:


> The new X570 boards are likely to be far superior in terms of RAM topology. So higher overclocking potential can be expected.



I'm guessing 90% of the RAM speed gains will come from the better memory controller in the Ryzen 3000 chips.


----------



## cowboy44mag

umeng2002 said:


> I'm guessing 90% of the RAM speed gains will come from the better memory controller in the Ryzen 3000 chips.



I agree, plus on my current X470 motherboard I'm already pushing 3200Mhz Samsung B die to 3600Mhz CL14 with fast sub-timings. I really doubt I could push this RAM much further with a new Ryzen 3000 chip on a X570 motherboard. I would have to buy faster RAM to take advantage of higher overclocking with Ryzen 3000 and X570 and the quality 4000Mhz RAM kits are pricey. I don't plan on upgrading my RAM till Zen 2+ and X670 motherboards. I'll upgrade to either the R7 3800X or the R9 3900X (if it doesn't suffer a latency penalty), but I'm planning to do so on my existing motherboard and RAM.


----------



## umeng2002

cowboy44mag said:


> I agree, plus on my current X470 motherboard I'm already pushing 3200Mhz Samsung B die to 3600Mhz CL14 with fast sub-timings. I really doubt I could push this RAM much further with a new Ryzen 3000 chip on a X570 motherboard. I would have to buy faster RAM to take advantage of higher overclocking with Ryzen 3000 and X570 and the quality 4000Mhz RAM kits are pricey. I don't plan on upgrading my RAM till Zen 2+ and X670 motherboards. I'll upgrade to either the R7 3800X or the R9 3900X (if it doesn't suffer a latency penalty), but I'm planning to do so on my existing motherboard and RAM.


Is that with Gear Down on or off?


----------



## Minotaurtoo

I know I've seen this before, but can't find it right now... anyone running Cas 12, trcd 13, trp 13, tras 22, trc 36 timings? My board (a B350) doesn't deal well with high ram speeds, but seems happy with tight timings... 3200mhz at xmp timings isn't even stable all the time... for some reason it will "flake out" even though the day before it passed hours of memtest... no idea why, I just attribute it to being a B350 and not supporting any ram greater than 2933 officially... but at speeds of 3066 and below I can seriously tighten timings with seemingly no issues and consistently passes tests...


----------



## MishelLngelo

Flaky memory handling is main reason for 400 series chipset and MBs with it. Did you try settings according to Ryzen DRAM calculator ?


----------



## Minotaurtoo

MishelLngelo said:


> Flaky memory handling is main reason for 400 series chipset and MBs with it. Did you try settings according to Ryzen DRAM calculator ?


yes I did : ) and I just downloaded the latest version... didn't know it had been revised, may try again for 3200 with stock timings... It's just interesting to me how well this does with really tight timings...but fails completely with higher speeds


----------



## Hale59

RAM-OC on AMD Ryzen in test: Flare X & Trident Z Royal with optimized clock rates and timings.

https://www.computerbase.de/2019-06/ryzen-ram-gskill-flare-x-trident-z-royal-test/


----------



## ShrimpBrime

Minotaurtoo said:


> yes I did : ) and I just downloaded the latest version... didn't know it had been revised, may try again for 3200 with stock timings... It's just interesting to me how well this does with really tight timings...but fails completely with higher speeds


I has the same issue. Loves tighter timings at lower speeds and seems to fair well. The Cpu OCs very well otherwise. 
To bump your memory speeds, actively cool the memory and try 1.400v @ 3000 and higher.. I run mine no less than 1.35v at 2933 and higher.


----------



## os2wiz

There is more reason than pciE 4.0 to upgrade to X570 there are a few more lanes open for m.2 pciE slots . So now you should be able to use at least 2 or 3 of these slots for pciE 3.0 or 4.0 drives. That alone is a significant improvement over X470.




cowboy44mag said:


> https://www.techspot.com/news/80333-amd-assures-ryzen-3000-perform-equally-across-b450.html
> 
> 
> I guess AMD has answered the question... Of course the R9 16 core may be a different beast that requires more than the X470 boards can handle.
> 
> 
> If this indeed is true then the only real reason to get a X570 board is for PCIe 4.0, and that may not be a good reason to upgrade. While PCIe 4.0 will help with M.2 SSDs, it won't do much for anyone with a high end RTX GPU. PCIe 4.0 won't help anyone with a RTX GPU because NVIDIA chose to give these chips a PCI-Express 3.0 x16 bus interface, even though the PCI-Express gen 4.0 specification was expected. AMD's new GPUs will take advantage of PCIe 4.0, but thus far AMD seems to be targeting the RTX 2070 and will doubtfully have anything that can compete with the RTX 2080Ti. So basically its looking like if you want the best GPU available (RTX 2080Ti) it won't support PCIe 4.0.
> 
> 
> 
> If the new 3000 series processors perform just as good on X470 as they do on X570 and the only advantage to X570 comes down to faster M.2 SSD transfer rate, I'm just not seeing that as a reason to either upgrade to X570 or pay a premium for the new X570 boards. One can expect that by the time Nvidia rolls out its successor to the RTX 2000 line that they will also be on PCIe 4.0, however by then we will more than likely be awaiting the release of the even better, more refined X670 motherboards and Zen 2+.


----------



## Tiago Fontes

*Ryzen 7 2700X Setup*

Hello all, 

This my first AMD system, everything is new not sure if good or bad yet 


First thing warning me is under idle cpu voltage is very high and under load on cinebench it goes down? I'm using mainboard oc.
https://imgur.com/a/QV9nC1E


Also my memory says it works at 3600 but the max i can stable is 3400Mhz manually set at 1.350v and 3400Mhz. I'm a missing something here?

here's my system:
Mainboard: Asus x470 prime pro bios 4602
Cpu: Ryzen 2700X (cooler be quiet dark pro 4)
Memory Gskill DDR4 3600 F4-3600C18D-16GTZRX
GPU: RTX 2080 
HDD: Samsung 970 pro 

Thanks in advance


----------



## MishelLngelo

Tiago Fontes said:


> Hello all,
> 
> This my first AMD system, everything is new not sure if good or bad yet
> 
> 
> First thing warning me is under idle cpu voltage is very high and under load on cinebench it goes down? I'm using mainboard oc.
> https://imgur.com/a/QV9nC1E
> 
> 
> Also my memory says it works at 3600 but the max i can stable is 3400Mhz manually set at 1.350v and 3400Mhz. I'm a missing something here?
> 
> here's my system:
> Mainboard: Asus x470 prime pro bios 4602
> Cpu: Ryzen 2700X (cooler be quiet dark pro 4)
> Memory Gskill DDR4 3600 F4-3600C18D-16GTZRX
> GPU: RTX 2080
> HDD: Samsung 970 pro
> 
> Thanks in advance


I set my RAM at 3600MHz and DOCP at 3000 and it stays stable at Cl16 (XMP says it should be Cl18) I also flashed 4804 but it's same. Try that,it should work.


----------



## Tiago Fontes

Just flashed for 4804 jsut to try but the same happens.


What do you mean set ram at 3600 and DOCP at 3000?
I only have 1 DOCP option which is the 3600, system boots and everything ok but testing ram gives lot's of errors. 

So i manually have to change to 3400 without DOCP and voltage at 1.3500 and then it becomes stable and no memory erros.


----------



## MishelLngelo

My BIOS shows 2 DOCP settings, 3000 and 3600, probably because of two XMP settings in RAM. Memory frequency is increments of 66Mhz from 1333 to 4200MHz. Funny thing is that DOCP doesn't really follow XMP but sets some own values which are working fine.


----------



## Tiago Fontes

Thx MishelLngelo, mine only have one.

Just downloaded that tool to check the diferrences, I really don't know what this data mean but the values clearly changed. 

I bought this memorys based on board QVL list, just want to make sure I'm not missing anything or doing anything wrong before goin to buy a new set of ram and be in the same position.
QVL: https://imgur.com/Ia8SOry

This is the values with DOCP profile:
https://imgur.com/4NDnsb5

This is set manual to [email protected]:
https://imgur.com/BhA2OTL

Memspec:
https://imgur.com/WDlH18z


----------



## MishelLngelo

http://www.softnology.biz/files.html would give you more details about you RAM. Also what does https://www.techpowerup.com/download/ryzen-dram-calculator/ suggests ?


----------



## Tiago Fontes

Ok, got into bios and setup DOCP profile, then run the two tools. 
https://imgur.com/a/Cq1p5Ea

Not sure about how to use it, but read xmp and then calculated safe, I have no idea about the values beside the voltage it sugests i should increase voltage to 1.38v. Should i?


----------



## MishelLngelo

Tiago Fontes said:


> Ok, got into bios and setup DOCP profile, then run the two tools.
> https://imgur.com/a/Cq1p5Ea
> 
> Not sure about how to use it, but read xmp and then calculated safe, I have no idea about the values beside the voltage it sugests i should increase voltage to 1.38v. Should i?


If needed for stability, yes.


----------



## cowboy44mag

umeng2002 said:


> Is that with Gear Down on or off?



I can run stable with either setting, however have found that I get slightly better benchmarks with it enabled, so that it where I have left it set.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

well... the 1903 update finally came through for me... here is the difference... same settings on both cpu and gpu (except on system memory)... although due to the nature of how amd determines clocks they appear to be set different... 

https://www.3dmark.com/compare/fs/19535559/fs/17449903#


edit: changed the gpu memory to match old result... still clocks varied, but they were set the same in wattman


----------



## Hwgeek

I see Gigabyte listed the new upcoming Chipset driver- can any one test it with Win 1903?
https://www.gigabyte.com/Motherboard/X570-AORUS-XTREME-rev-10#support-dl-driver-chipset


----------



## cowboy44mag

Hwgeek said:


> I see Gigabyte listed the new upcoming Chipset driver- can any one test it with Win 1903?
> https://www.gigabyte.com/Motherboard/X570-AORUS-XTREME-rev-10#support-dl-driver-chipset



The Windows 1903 update doesn't seem to effect current Ryzen processors much if at all. I guess that the improvements in 1903 will optimize the upcoming Ryzen 3000 processors but have little effect on current processors.


----------



## Rusakova

Hwgeek said:


> I see Gigabyte listed the new upcoming Chipset driver- can any one test it with Win 1903?
> https://www.gigabyte.com/Motherboard/X570-AORUS-XTREME-rev-10#support-dl-driver-chipset


I tried it, didn't make any difference at all.


----------



## MishelLngelo

Same here, I don't know where that guy found some improvement, I surely didn't, As an insider I had 1903 for some time before others and any difference was in order of statistical error, few points up or down depending on background "noise". Both of my W10 installations (one regular and other one Insider fast/skip ahead each on own SSD) are clean and well maintained with all drivers up to date. So is Mint 18.3 (also own SSD). Only decreasing benchmark are for 2D graphics but I'm not sure if it's because of drivers or windows. Only thing changed in last 6 month is GPU from Rx 460 to Rx 570.


----------



## Martin778

Guys, does R7 PRO 2700 (the OEM one) support PBO/XFR2? They say it's 3.2 base / 4.1 boost but no idea under what circumstances. 
We want to go 2700 route instead of i5 8th gen for productivity stuff and possible upgradeability.


----------



## MishelLngelo

All Ryzen CPUs support XFR and PBO on compatible MBs. There are some differences in it's level with different models and subject to BIOS enabling them.


----------



## VPII

cowboy44mag said:


> The Windows 1903 update doesn't seem to effect current Ryzen processors much if at all. I guess that the improvements in 1903 will optimize the upcoming Ryzen 3000 processors but have little effect on current processors.
> 
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5XMWS0_9gNo


Look I bench most of the time and an increase Ive seen was running 3d Mark Firestrike where the physics and combined test increase alot. My result is almost similar to when I had the Ryzen 7 2700X under Dice at 4.86ghz with the cpu running 4.24ghz. So I'd say yes an improvement. 

But as I stated I run benchmarks a lot and saw the chsnge in some benchmarks.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk


----------



## MishelLngelo

VPII said:


> Look I bench most of the time and an increase Ive seen was running 3d Mark Firestrike where the physics and combined test increase alot. My result is almost similar to when I had the Ryzen 7 2700X under Dice at 4.86ghz with the cpu running 4.24ghz. So I'd say yes an improvement.
> 
> But as I stated I run benchmarks a lot and saw the chsnge in some benchmarks.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk


That would require more in depth study, just what is optimized so it may produce different results in different benchmarks as it would also make difference in SW. Speaking of Firestrike, I can never get consistent scores, they vary quite a bit even with fresh reboot for every test. I don't do clean BOOT but test at settings for everyday use. Just how much is Firestrike dependent on CPU comparing to let's say Time spy ?


----------



## nick name

The topology awareness in 1903 is supposed to keep scheduling on a CCX to reduce latency. So on workloads that are running all cores or I'm guessing on 5+ cores there shouldn't be any change. But with loads running on single or 4 and less cores it should keep the scheduler from moving across CCXs which increases latency.


----------



## Hale59

Some data you might be interested to check.

"Does Windows 1903 update really improve performance?"
"Optimized thread management for Rizen CCX architecture"
https://quasarzone.co.kr/bbs/board.php?bo_table=qc_qsz&wr_id=260194

*Additional:
Windows 1903 Update Part 2: Ryzen Micro Break Analysis
https://quasarzone.co.kr/bbs/board.php?bo_table=qc_qsz&wr_id=261391

**EDIT:In order to make it broadly visible, a new thread created here:
https://www.overclock.net/forum/13-...-really-improve-performance.html#post28010378


----------



## Minotaurtoo

well.. I discovered a downside to PBO... 



This may not happen on all boards, but it happened on mine... for a long time now I've been using PBO and a voltage offset of -.1, well this week I started noticing a stability issue that I didn't have originally... couldn't figure out what was going on... anyway, I opened HWinfo and saw my cpu was staying clocked at 4.2+ with voltages hitting 1.48v and not dropping below 1.45.... needless to say I knew what was happening right away... degradation... 



When I first started using PBO it would boost up and drop back down at idle... so what was going on? Turns out, it was me... I installed a program that I had once before, but had stopped working with a windows update, but a new release had fixed it... I was originally using the program when I had my R7 1700 and it was set to a locked 3.8ghz clock... That same program tricked PBO into thinking the cpu was under load and caused it to stay at boost clocks... on all cores... 



The program? Deskscapes... animated backdrops... only use a small bit of cpu resource, but enough to trigger boost clocks... oh well... my once "golden" cpu that was stable a full 100 mv under stock voltage is now only stable at 75 mv under.... oh well... I disabled PBO and set a - 50 mv offset to ensure stability just in case it degraded further.... good thing I am planning on moving on to gen 3 soon I suppose.

I have no affiliation with Stardock (the makers of the Deskscapes), but if you like something other than a boring static desktop experience, it's a pretty good way to get it.... just don't use PBO lol


----------



## umeng2002

It's not *just* voltage. It's voltage, current, and temp. So if your light current loads are making PBO boost to 4.2+ over 1.45v and your temps are low, I don't think degradation will be an issue.

But in the end, AMD isn't really quoting numbers so...


----------



## puts

The 2700x still shows 10-20C higher temps or they fixed that nonsense?


----------



## azanimefan

puts said:


> The 2700x still shows 10-20C higher temps or they fixed that nonsense?


mine shows good temps

asus fixed the temp issue with its latest bios update


----------



## The Sandman

azanimefan said:


> mine shows good temps
> 
> asus fixed the temp issue with its latest bios update


Same here I've never had any temp issues on my C6H.
It's been a while since I've heard of any members in the C6H thread discussing questions relating to Sense MI Skew, temps etc.
I'm thinking maybe back a year or so since Bios update cured these types of issues.




puts said:


> The 2700x still shows 10-20C higher temps or they fixed that nonsense?


Run HWinfo and be sure to read "CPU Tdie", *not* "CPU Tctl" for proper value.


----------



## puts

The Sandman said:


> Same here I've never had any temp issues on my C6H.
> It's been a while since I've heard of any members in the C6H thread discussing questions relating to Sense MI Skew, temps etc.
> I'm thinking maybe back a year or so since Bios update cured these types of issues.
> 
> 
> 
> Run HWinfo and be sure to read "CPU Tdie", *not* "CPU Tctl" for proper value.


I don't have the 2700x. I'm planning to buy a 2700 or a 2700x but if AMD still uses that stupid temp compensating thing with the X chips then I will buy a non X 2700 and overclock it.


----------



## The Sandman

puts said:


> I don't have the 2700x. I'm planning to buy a 2700 or a 2700x but if AMD still uses that stupid temp compensating thing with the X chips then I will buy a non X 2700 and overclock it.


Just an FYI, IIRC I don't think the non x version can take advantage of the "Performance Enhancer" settings on Asus mobo's (PE 1 - 4).
Might not be important at this point but something to consider if you plan to OC.
I run a PE3 w/101.8 bclk = 4275MHz all core @ 1.35v and multi/single runs 4428MHz, memory @3466MHz C14 very stable. Average temp stressing with P95 after 90 minutes with 90% memory usage I see 61c.


----------



## puts

The Sandman said:


> Just an FYI, IIRC I don't think the non x version can take advantage of the "Performance Enhancer" settings on Asus mobo's (PE 1 - 4).
> Might not be important at this point but something to consider if you plan to OC.
> I run a PE3 w/101.8 bclk = 4275MHz all core @ 1.35v and multi/single runs 4428MHz, memory @3466MHz C14 very stable. Average temp stressing with P95 after 90 minutes with 90% memory usage I see 61c.


That sounds pretty interesting. What clock speeds you get in games?


----------



## candasulas

I overclocked my Ryzen 7 2700 processor.

CPU Core Voltage 1.35v
LLC Level 3
I set the processor frequency to 4.1 ghz.

I am sometimes crashing while getting rendered.
The system sometimes crashes when the workload is loaded.

Which voltage range and values for my Ryzen 2700 (non-x) processor do I need to use?

My motherboard is Asus Strix B450-E Gaming.

I would be glad if you help.


----------



## smeroni68

candasulas said:


> I overclocked my Ryzen 7 2700 processor.
> 
> 
> 
> CPU Core Voltage 1.35v
> 
> LLC Level 3
> 
> I set the processor frequency to 4.1 ghz.
> 
> 
> 
> I am sometimes crashing while getting rendered.
> 
> The system sometimes crashes when the workload is loaded.
> 
> 
> 
> Which voltage range and values for my Ryzen 2700 (non-x) processor do I need to use?
> 
> 
> 
> My motherboard is Asus Strix B450-E Gaming.
> 
> 
> 
> I would be glad if you help.


Add some voltage more... 1.375mV would be fine for 4.1GHz fixed frequency.

Inviato dal mio MI 9 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## candasulas

smeroni68 said:


> Add some voltage more... 1.375mV would be fine for 4.1GHz fixed frequency.
> 
> Inviato dal mio MI 9 utilizzando Tapatalk


The Precision Boost Overdrive setting will be off, right?
How many should I make the value of LLC?
LLC 3 Is the profile enough?

I asked a lot of questions not to make mistakes.


----------



## smeroni68

candasulas said:


> The Precision Boost Overdrive setting will be off, right?
> 
> How many should I make the value of LLC?
> 
> LLC 3 Is the profile enough?
> 
> 
> 
> I asked a lot of questions not to make mistakes.


Leave the settings as they are and higher the voltage. Search the full stability first.

Inviato dal mio MI 9 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## candasulas

smeroni68 said:


> Leave the settings as they are and higher the voltage. Search the full stability first.
> 
> Inviato dal mio MI 9 utilizzando Tapatalk


I'll do like this;

Processor voltage of 1,375V
Processor speed 4.1Ghz

I will set.
I will leave all other settings as auto.
I will leave the LLC Level as Auto.


----------



## minal

I just encountered this non-fatal MCE hardware error. Any ideas what it could be or if it's cause for concern? At least I did not notice any problem, and the log says no action required. Running kernel 5.2.17.



> The kernel log indicates that hardware errors were detected.
> This is most likely not a software problem.
> 
> mce: [Hardware Error]: Machine check events logged





> kernel: [Hardware Error]: Corrected error, no action required.
> kernel: [Hardware Error]: CPU:5 (17:8:2) MC0_STATUS[Over|CE|MiscV|AddrV|-|-|SyndV|CECC|-|-|-]: 0xdc204000000d0175
> kernel: [Hardware Error]: Error Addr: 0x00000005607b8aac
> kernel: [Hardware Error]: IPID: 0x000000b000000000, Syndrome: 0x0000002f1a1b2a06
> kernel: [Hardware Error]: Load Store Unit Ext. Error Code: 13, DC Data error type 2.
> kernel: [Hardware Error]: cache level: L1, tx: DATA, mem-tx: EV
> kernel: [Hardware Error]: Corrected error, no action required.
> kernel: [Hardware Error]: CPU:13 (17:8:2) MC0_STATUS[-|CE|MiscV|AddrV|-|-|SyndV|CECC|-|-|-]: 0x9c204000000c0135
> kernel: [Hardware Error]: Error Addr: 0x00000006743a9cce
> kernel: [Hardware Error]: IPID: 0x000000b000000000, Syndrome: 0x000000081a1b3306
> kernel: [Hardware Error]: Load Store Unit Ext. Error Code: 12, DC Data error type 1 and poison consumption.
> kernel: [Hardware Error]: cache level: L1, tx: DATA, mem-tx: DRD
> abrt-notification[9772]: System encountered a non-fatal error in ??()


----------



## Hokies83

Just snagged a 2700x for $125, that’s only been OC in POB, I’ll be manually overclocking, max temp and bolts about the same as the 1700x?
I ran my 1700x at 1.4v


----------



## Minotaurtoo

Hokies83 said:


> Just snagged a 2700x for $125, that’s only been OC in POB, I’ll be manually overclocking, max temp and bolts about the same as the 1700x?
> I ran my 1700x at 1.4v


 Max temps are about the same, as for volts, judging on how stock clocks work I'd say you'd be fine there so long as you can keep it cool... I had PBO running on mine and under nearly any light load it spent the majority of it's time over 4.2ghz with voltages ranging from 1.45 to 1.55... the 1.55 was only when boosting to the 4.3-4.35 range and short lived, but either AMD or ASUS seems to think that 1.45 for hours at a time is ok.... Personally, I didn't like it so I turned off PBO and watched average voltage drop back to 1.38 according to Hwinfo... 



To be honest, if I were overclocking one of these, I'd just turn on PBO and work on adjusting an undervolt in... on low thread count loads you'll be better off there and you won't lose much on the full load either.


----------



## Hokies83

Minotaurtoo said:


> Hokies83 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Just snagged a 2700x for $125, thatâ€™️s only been OC in POB, Iâ€™️ll be manually overclocking, max temp and bolts about the same as the 1700x?
> I ran my 1700x at 1.4v
> 
> 
> 
> Max temps are about the same, as for volts, judging on how stock clocks work I'd say you'd be fine there so long as you can keep it cool... I had PBO running on mine and under nearly any light load it spent the majority of it's time over 4.2ghz with voltages ranging from 1.45 to 1.55... the 1.55 was only when boosting to the 4.3-4.35 range and short lived, but either AMD or ASUS seems to think that 1.45 for hours at a time is ok.... Personally, I didn't like it so I turned off PBO and watched average voltage drop back to 1.38 according to Hwinfo...
> 
> 
> 
> To be honest, if I were overclocking one of these, I'd just turn on PBO and work on adjusting an undervolt in... on low thread count loads you'll be better off there and you won't lose much on the full load either.
Click to expand...

The PBO OC only boosts a single core to 4.2ghz tho right? I’d like to get all 8 to 4.2-4.4 😉


----------



## The Sandman

Hokies83 said:


> The PBO OC only boosts a single core to 4.2ghz tho right? I’d like to get all 8 to 4.2-4.4 😉


No idea what you plan to run for mobo/cooling solution but just as an FYI, on my C6H (in rig sig) I run PE3 (Performance Enhancer Level 3) with Vcore and LLC on Auto with SOC manually entered.
All core is a constant 4200MHz @ 1.256v under load with P95 running a "Custom" setting using 90% memory for 5 hrs. Snip below. Single/multi core hits 4350MHz with no crazy 1.5v at any time for me.
PE might be another option if your on a ROG.


Edit: My current OC is PE3 with a 101.8 Bclk which is closer to what you mentioned looks like this voltage wise (2nd snip) 4275MHz all core 4428MHz single/multi.


----------



## Hokies83

The Sandman said:


> Hokies83 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The PBO OC only boosts a single core to 4.2ghz tho right? Iâ€™️d like to get all 8 to 4.2-4.4 😉
> 
> 
> 
> No idea what you plan to run for mobo/cooling solution but just as an FYI, on my C6H (in rig sig) I run PE3 (Performance Enhancer Level 3) with Vcore and LLC on Auto with SOC manually entered.
> All core is a constant 4200MHz @ 1.256v under load with P95 running a "Custom" setting using 90% memory for 5 hrs. Snip below. Single/multi core hits 4350MHz with no crazy 1.5v at any time for me.
> PE might be another option if your on a ROG.
> 
> 
> Edit: My current OC is PE3 with a 101.8 Bclk which is closer to what you mentioned looks like this voltage wise (2nd snip) 4275MHz all core 4428MHz single/multi.
Click to expand...

I like your numbers!
The whole PB is a tad confusing, I want the max performance but do like it to idle at a lower Vcore.
I’m using a Gigabyte x470 gaming 7 + Corsair h100i platinum inside a well cooled lian Li dynamic, my 1700x with 1.4v and cooler in quiet mode doesn’t really see much over 60c


----------



## Minotaurtoo

Hokies83 said:


> The PBO OC only boosts a single core to 4.2ghz tho right? I’d like to get all 8 to 4.2-4.4 😉


actually it will hold 4.2 on all cores as long as power limits aren't exceeded... but as mention in the post by Sandman, it's highly board dependent... with my board, it likes to send voltage and clocks pretty high.. I see single core clocks hitting 4.35 with PBO on, but only 4.3 with it off... with PBO on it will hold 4.15ghz even under very heavy loads... and under moderate loads will hold 4.25 on nearly constantly.... with it off it will only hold around 4.2 under moderate loads and 4ghz under heavy loads, again, it's governed by power limits... which PBO on this board is defined as using "board" limits... which to me translates into, burn baby burn mode... basically it's only when the power limits of my board are hit that it downclocks the cpu... at first I didn't think this B350 was all that beefy, but it's really impressed me with just how much power those 4+2 vrm's can actually deliver...


----------



## Hokies83

I’ve also read Agesa 1.0.0.3ABBA gives some better POB performance increases, I’m still on the previous Agesa 1.0.0.3AB so I’ll flash the bios tonight.

I honestly didn’t plan on upgrading till Ryzen 4xxx but $125 for a 2700x was just to temping and almost a free side grade 😉


----------



## Minotaurtoo

Hokies83 said:


> I’ve also read Agesa 1.0.0.3ABBA gives some better POB performance increases, I’m still on the previous Agesa 1.0.0.3AB so I’ll flash the bios tonight.
> 
> I honestly didn’t plan on upgrading till Ryzen 4xxx but $125 for a 2700x was just to temping and almost a free side grade 😉


I just hope that ASUS releases a bios for this board that doesn't try to kill the chip with voltage... when PBO first came to this board it wasn't so aggressive with voltage and a simple undervolt/PBO enable was better than manual all core overclock in all instances... now I can get a slightly better manual all core overclock but then single core performance suffers a little... I can manually overclock to 4.25 ghz pretty easy with this board and chip... no lottery winner here either.... 4.15 @ 1.35v is as high as I would be comfortable leaving it for all use cases, like folding and such... but for normal/gaming uses 4.25 is ok, but takes 1.45v to get it prime 95 stable... for simple benchmarks like cinebench, I can get away with significantly less voltage.


Come to think of it, my chip, not being a lottery winner, might just be the reason why the bios is giving it so much voltage... it might need it lol....


----------



## Hokies83

With my 1700x I wasn’t able to upgrade to X570,
I’ve been eying the Asus x570 Strix-E for months lol


----------



## Hokies83

I was able to get 4.3ghz with 1.45v stable manual OC.

But with PBO and some blk adjustments got 4.4ghz max boost. Will drop under load tho even if it stays under 70C not sure where to go from there.

2700x is a hot power hungry sucker when compared to the 1700x and seems to like temp spikes goes from 43c then 50c then back down then spikes to 50c again.

PBO is bouncing back 1.45v 1.5v which looks scary to me, but if it’s doing it then AMD must think it’s ok.


----------



## Wuest3nFuchs

Hi ,

i got my 2700x @4GHz with 1.265v if i remember correctly.
Paste in some pics later today. 
I also got my WC parts, not all but a few so i could run the 2700x on it.

So far it seems stable but needs more stability tested to be Sure its rockstable.










Did 4x30min on occt, played bfv, pubg, chernobylite.No issues so far,only sometimes windows wont start the audioservice, but i believe its just windows.

Prime95 Tests scheduled for the Weekend.

Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk


----------



## Nassenoff

*My 2700x*

Just completed my custom watercooled X470/2700x build and used that Asus/Ryzen buyback campaign.
X470 Crosshair Hero VII Wi-fi (BIOS 2801)
Ryzen 2700x
G.SKill Trident Z 2x16GB 3600MHz CL 16 kit
360+240 EK SE radiators
Kept my Fury X, for now

Have not done extensive memory testing on it and planning to run memTest86.
D.O.C.P set to 3603 16-19-19-39. No stability issues yet in the few hours of game I have tried.
Any suggestion to which tests I should run?

I though I knew what I needed to know about Ryzen+, but understood that some things was still unexpected.
Got stressed over the rapid temperature spikes, though I did something wrong with the waterblock mounting.
But It seems this is normal based on all the post I have found.

So my understanding from the world of internet is that Ryzen+ do have Precision Boost 2 and XFR, which both are not consider as overclocks.
Precision Boost Overdrive (PBO) is

My main concern are all the conflicting information/opinions about the Vcore, but for manual overclock the main majority consider 1,35-1,4 Vcore as "safe" for all core overclock.
I tried PBO and did not like it. I got quite high voltage spikes 1,55< Vcore and temperatures was also high.
After rewatching der8auer review of this board which I have seen before, I now noticed that he states that "Perfomance enhancer" is XFR and therefore not consider as overclock?




This seems to be stated in the BIOS as well since ASUS only states "(OC)" on level 3 and 4.

So i got really good results on OC2, peaking on 4,340 Ghz on 2 cores. All core loads during Cinebench was hovering around 4,24-4,27 Ghz.
But also peaked 1,525 Vcore one core 
I do believe I actually scored lower with PBO and the voltages and temps were higher.

So if Performance Enhancer really is XFR and not overclock, shouldn't I trust somewhat that AMD/ASUS do know what they are doing? I am on a fairly mature BIOS.
The voltage seems to stay around 1,4-1,45 even idle
The Vcore on OC1 are about 0,1V lower.


----------



## MishelLngelo

Typical overclock is on all cores running full time, no idea why would anybody define a boost on one or more cores as an overclock when it's just a case of meeting CPU's top clock frequency. 
Same goes for using XMP for RAM, it can't be overclock if you only set XMP to it's highest setting, the frequency RAM is made to run and is tested at. Only above XMP settings could be called overclock. 
As for voltages at PBO/XFR, that's BIOS's job and many versions pushes to or above AMD defined high end of 1.5v with an excuse for "stability", most of times controllable by negative offset to lower that maximum or plus offset to get higher voltage when needed.


----------



## Nassenoff

MishelLngelo said:


> Typical overclock is on all cores running full time, no idea why would anybody define a boost on one or more cores as an overclock when it's just a case of meeting CPU's top clock frequency.
> Same goes for using XMP for RAM, it can't be overclock if you only set XMP to it's highest setting, the frequency RAM is made to run and is tested at. Only above XMP settings could be called overclock.
> As for voltages at PBO/XFR, that's BIOS's job and many versions pushes to or above AMD defined high end of 1.5v with an excuse for "stability", most of times controllable by negative offset to lower that maximum or plus offset to get higher voltage when needed.


I don't know either, but maybe this is partly AMD/ASUS/other MB vendors fault to some extend. If XFR had been named XFR in the BIOS I probably wouldn't question it. And there so many post on people being concerned about the "high" Vcore.
I'm coming from 8 years on an Intel platform, so maybe it is just my head who is used to work on "old" accepted Vcore and old fashion all core OC

It is only when OC2 is enabled I reach the advertised boost speed of 4.35 GHz.
So I will keep OC2 on assuming this is just XFR and the processor is working as intended.

Also found this post on the AMD forum where they quote Robert Hallock about the Vcore boost.
https://community.amd.com/thread/232990


----------



## gupsterg

@Nassenoff

Performance Enhancer on the Extreme Tweaker page is presets of Precision Boost Override/Precision Boost Overdrive, all in fact are OC.

I have not updated OP here in a while but a lot is still correct, link.

In regard to high voltage on low loads/core count that's normal and is not an issue as current draw would be low. You are best of referencing OP this thread and then this post.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

gupsterg said:


> @*Nassenoff*
> 
> Performance Enhancer on the Extreme Tweaker page is presets of Precision Boost Override/Precision Boost Overdrive, all in fact are OC.
> 
> I have not updated OP here in a while but a lot is still correct, link.
> 
> In regard to high voltage on low loads/core count that's normal and is not an issue as current draw would be low. You are best of referencing OP this thread and then this post.



I'm going to link this in the OP... probably should have way back...

on another topic... has anyone else noticed better all core OC stability on latest bios revisions or is it just on my board.... I can now use slightly less voltages than before... and funny thing is, just a few weeks ago on another bios release I actually had the opposite problem and thought my cpu was degrading...


edit: had to go back to look, but seems like before it was taking 1.35 v to achieve the same clocks I'm now getting at 1.30 (1.25ish under full load)... nothing major, just noticeable...


----------



## Bruizer

Minotaurtoo said:


> I'm going to link this in the OP... probably should have way back...
> 
> on another topic... has anyone else noticed better all core OC stability on latest bios revisions or is it just on my board.... I can now use slightly less voltages than before... and funny thing is, just a few weeks ago on another bios release I actually had the opposite problem and thought my cpu was degrading...
> 
> 
> edit: had to go back to look, but seems like before it was taking 1.35 v to achieve the same clocks I'm now getting at 1.30 (1.25ish under full load)... nothing major, just noticeable...



This would be great news. Hope it's true. At least for my board, Asus ROG Strix X470-F, all recent bios revisions seem to have catered more toward the 3000 series and lead to reduced performance/stability for the 2000 series.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

Bruizer said:


> This would be great news. Hope it's true. At least for my board, Asus ROG Strix X470-F, all recent bios revisions seem to have catered more toward the 3000 series and lead to reduced performance/stability for the 2000 series.


I wouldn't get too excited, could be down to just something they fixed in my board... always seemed to take more voltage on my board clock per clock compared with other people... but so far been folding all morning and no issues running 4.066 ghz with 1.3v set in bios... vdroop bringing it down to 1.263 folding... under avx stress tests it dropped down to 1.25v and still passed.... I'm thinking of trying for an even 4.1ghz at the same voltage... although it would end up being more like 4.091 or so due to the bclk being off just a bit.... I set the all core clocks to keep precision boost from going crazy though... was constantly hitting 1.45v holding 4.2ghz + when not really needed.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

Bruizer said:


> This would be great news. Hope it's true. At least for my board, Asus ROG Strix X470-F, all recent bios revisions seem to have catered more toward the 3000 series and lead to reduced performance/stability for the 2000 series.


Ok, now I know somethings up... just took the time to do a dirty stability test on 4.1 (4.0913 actually) at the same 1.3v setting in bios... stable... will see if it holds for long term, but I know for a fact I used to have to set voltage up to 1.35+ with much higher LLC setting to get it stable before... unless I'm getting THAT old lol... and yeah, vdroop still dropped to 1.25v during the test... even at desktop it never hit the set 1.3v... usually around 1.275 at desktop.


----------



## destiNATION1337

Hi,
Can someone maybe help me to improve my PBO Settings?
Right now i have some "issues" with very high Voltage (>1,45V most of and sometimes peaks to 1,48V) while running the following Settings:

Board: Asus x470 Prime Pro (newest Bios)
CPU: Ryzen 2700x
Cooling: Dark Rock Pro 4
RAM: 3200 CL14 Samsung B-Die
GPU: GTX 1080
Ryzen Balanced Energy Plan + newest Chipset Drivers

Current Bios Settings:
XMP Profile loaded + manual Timings (fast preset)
Voltage Offset -0,75mV
PBO Enabled
Scalar 10x
+200mhz
LLC 3 (useful to Limit Voltage?)

Before activating PBO i had about 3,8 Ghz all Core while Gaming or CB and now after activating PBO its about 4,1 GhZ (@a bit under 70°C while Gaming over an Hour).
My only Problem is, that the Voltage gets really high sometimes and i thought it would be way lower (given I use a negative Offset).

EDC was the ONLY Limit i reached before activating PBO and had 10% or more left before reaching other Limits. This is the reason i tried PBO, cause in my eyes there is enough "free power" left in my Computer/CPU, just my VRMs may suck.

Are there any Settings you suggest i should change? (like Scalar for example?)

Thanks


----------



## Minotaurtoo

destiNATION1337 said:


> Hi,
> Can someone maybe help me to improve my PBO Settings?
> Right now i have some "issues" with very high Voltage (>1,45V most of and sometimes peaks to 1,48V) while running the following Settings:
> 
> Board: Asus x470 Prime Pro (newest Bios)
> CPU: Ryzen 2700x
> Cooling: Dark Rock Pro 4
> RAM: 3200 CL14 Samsung B-Die
> GPU: GTX 1080
> Ryzen Balanced Energy Plan + newest Chipset Drivers
> 
> Current Bios Settings:
> XMP Profile loaded + manual Timings (fast preset)
> Voltage Offset -0,75mV
> PBO Enabled
> Scalar 10x
> +200mhz
> LLC 3 (useful to Limit Voltage?)
> 
> Before activating PBO i had about 3,8 Ghz all Core while Gaming or CB and now after activating PBO its about 4,1 GhZ (@a bit under 70°C while Gaming over an Hour).
> My only Problem is, that the Voltage gets really high sometimes and i thought it would be way lower (given I use a negative Offset).
> 
> EDC was the ONLY Limit i reached before activating PBO and had 10% or more left before reaching other Limits. This is the reason i tried PBO, cause in my eyes there is enough "free power" left in my Computer/CPU, just my VRMs may suck.
> 
> Are there any Settings you suggest i should change? (like Scalar for example?)
> 
> Thanks


 strange thing about Ryzen, those voltages are pretty normal... not sure why so high, but I've been through the same thing... mines even worse, possibly due to my custom loop keeping it below 60C most of the time... I'll tell you like I've been told, it'll be fine... heck I even thought mine had degraded for a while, turned out to be a bunged bios and the latest release brought me back to where I used to be or a little better as far as clocks @ volts go.


----------



## Nassenoff

gupsterg said:


> @Nassenoff
> 
> Performance Enhancer on the Extreme Tweaker page is presets of Precision Boost Override/Precision Boost Overdrive, all in fact are OC.
> 
> I have not updated OP here in a while but a lot is still correct, link.
> 
> In regard to high voltage on low loads/core count that's normal and is not an issue as current draw would be low. You are best of referencing OP this thread and then this post.


I will read through the posts you have linked.
But if Performacne enhancer level 2 is OC, then my processor do not boost to advertised clock speeds.
The only thing I have changed in my BIOS were DOCP 3600 MHz and Performance enhancer to OC 2. I have not found any other options that would indicate XFR on/off.
If performance enhancer is off, it would only boost to 4,091 GHz.
If i am setting this level 2 I am hitting 4,35 GHz on two cores, which is what AMD state it should do.

If all 4 levels are OC, why did ASUS only add "(OC)" on level 3 and 4 in the UEFI?


----------



## korzychxp

Very good CPU with 4.2-4.3Ghz all core o/c + 3600Mhz CL14/16 RAM.


----------



## Nassenoff

Nassenoff said:


> gupsterg said:
> 
> 
> 
> @Nassenoff
> 
> Performance Enhancer on the Extreme Tweaker page is presets of Precision Boost Override/Precision Boost Overdrive, all in fact are OC.
> 
> I have not updated OP here in a while but a lot is still correct, link.
> 
> In regard to high voltage on low loads/core count that's normal and is not an issue as current draw would be low. You are best of referencing OP this thread and then this post.
> 
> 
> 
> I will read through the posts you have linked.
> But if Performacne enhancer level 2 is OC, then my processor do not boost to advertised clock speeds.
> The only thing I have changed in my BIOS were DOCP 3600 MHz and Performance enhancer to OC 2. I have not found any other options that would indicate XFR on/off.
> If performance enhancer is off, it would only boost to 4,091 GHz.
> If i am setting this level 2 I am hitting 4,35 GHz on two cores, which is what AMD state it should do.
> 
> If all 4 levels are OC, why did ASUS only add "(OC)" on level 3 and 4 in the UEFI?
Click to expand...

So based on the links I see that it is not AMD XFR and that the boost clocks are only applicable for the best 2 cores.

But I sent a question to ASUS and ask to explain why level 1&2 were not marked "(OC)"

This was there response:
"Yes, higher steps of performance boost will overclock with ASUS presets instead of AMD XFR functions.
Using the BIOS presets will not void product warranty. Preset values are set within AMD specification"

So OC with warranty I guess

With that said, I blue screened yesterday.
So I put it back to stock, need to test to see if was OC of CPU or memory clock causing the issue.


----------



## gupsterg

Nassenoff said:


> I will read through the posts you have linked.
> But if Performacne enhancer level 2 is OC, then my processor do not boost to advertised clock speeds.
> The only thing I have changed in my BIOS were DOCP 3600 MHz and Performance enhancer to OC 2. I have not found any other options that would indicate XFR on/off.
> If performance enhancer is off, it would only boost to 4,091 GHz.
> If i am setting this level 2 I am hitting 4,35 GHz on two cores, which is what AMD state it should do.
> 
> If all 4 levels are OC, why did ASUS only add "(OC)" on level 3 and 4 in the UEFI?


Core Performance Boost is "XFR", [Auto] defaults to [Enabled] unless you do manual Core Ratio OC or say a PState 0 OC.

Performance Enhancer [Default] results in PPT/TDC/EDC/Scalar as it should be for CPU SKU in use, "ie Stock", if you set it disabled you will not get stock boost behaviour.

I do not not know why ASUS do not place (OC) by all 4 PE levels.



Nassenoff said:


> So based on the links I see that it is not AMD XFR and that the boost clocks are only applicable for the best 2 cores.
> 
> But I sent a question to ASUS and ask to explain why level 1&2 were not marked "(OC)"
> 
> This was there response:
> "Yes, higher steps of performance boost will overclock with ASUS presets instead of AMD XFR functions.
> Using the BIOS presets will not void product warranty. Preset values are set within AMD specification"
> 
> So OC with warranty I guess
> 
> With that said, I blue screened yesterday.
> So I put it back to stock, need to test to see if was OC of CPU or memory clock causing the issue.


ASUS will not give you a new CPU.

When they say "Preset values are set within AMD specification" what that means is PPT/TDC/EDC is set to within the max AMD allow.

Now if you reference Ryzen Master users guide pdf on AMD site you will see when you increase PPT/TDC/EDC higher than stock you are OC'ing.

For your 2700X:-



> On SKUs belonging to the 105W TDP infrastructure group, the default limiters are following: PPT 141.75W, TDC 95A, EDC 140A and tJMax of 85°C (absolute, excl. offset).


Performance Enhancer [Default] will use those values.

Now for a moment hold your thoughts on Performance Enhancer menu, let's just think it's on [Default]. On Advanced page, within AMD CBS > NBIO Common Options > XFR Enhancement you used to be able to set it to Precision Boost Override [Enabled], I can't check as don't have a 2700X to hand. As that menu is from AMD AGESA it will use what AMD would deem is right in the context of an OC (still voids warranty in their eyes), it would use below when set to [Enabled]:-



> When "Precision Boost Override" mode is enabled (AGESA default), PPT becomes essentially unrestricted (1000W), TDC is set to 114A and EDC to 168A. These limits can be customized by the ODM so that the new limits will comply with the electrical characteristics of the motherboard design in question.


Performance Enhancer level 1 is close to the AMD Precision Boost Override [Enabled] setup, but does increase Scalar.


----------



## Nassenoff

gupsterg said:


> Core Performance Boost is "XFR", [Auto] defaults to [Enabled] unless you do manual Core Ratio OC or say a PState 0 OC.
> 
> Performance Enhancer [Default] results in PPT/TDC/EDC/Scalar as it should be for CPU SKU in use, "ie Stock", if you set it disabled you will not get stock boost behaviour.
> 
> I do not not know why ASUS do not place (OC) by all 4 PE levels.
> 
> 
> 
> ASUS will not give you a new CPU.
> 
> When they say "Preset values are set within AMD specification" what that means is PPT/TDC/EDC is set to within the max AMD allow.
> 
> Now if you reference Ryzen Master users guide pdf on AMD site you will see when you increase PPT/TDC/EDC higher than stock you are OC'ing.
> 
> For your 2700X:-
> 
> 
> 
> Performance Enhancer [Default] will use those values.
> 
> Now for a moment hold your thoughts on Performance Enhancer menu, let's just think it's on [Default]. On Advanced page, within AMD CBS > NBIO Common Options > XFR Enhancement you used to be able to set it to Precision Boost Override [Enabled], I can't check as don't have a 2700X to hand. As that menu is from AMD AGESA it will use what AMD would deem is right in the context of an OC (still voids warranty in their eyes), it would use below when set to [Enabled]:-
> 
> 
> 
> Performance Enhancer level 1 is close to the AMD Precision Boost Override [Enabled] setup, but does increase Scalar.


It can be debated whether or not they meant the motherboard and and also the CPU, but I have written confirmation from them that it does not void warranty.
And it is no where near PBO on level 1, not in regards to voltages anyway. I was getting higher clocks and voltages on PBO than PE level 2 on my MB.


----------



## Rayleighzero

hello there guys.. how are we doing in the AGESA department.. i have been using my setup for a year now constantly updating the bios.. 

2700X 
XFR: Enabled PBO: Auto
X470 PRIME PRO
4x8GB G skill Flare X (XMP) CL 14 - 14 - 14 - 34 - 48 (74 now) after last couple AGESA 1002 / 1003 ABBA / now 1004 B

I intend to push it now for a extra bit of performance but just making it work on the XMP make it spit errors like a machine gun some times.. so i wonder what are your results at 4 Dimms config Single Rank B dies which agesas u using etc


----------



## deepor

Rayleighzero said:


> hello there guys.. how are we doing in the AGESA department.. i have been using my setup for a year now constantly updating the bios..
> 
> 2700X
> XFR: Enabled PBO: Auto
> X470 PRIME PRO
> 4x8GB G skill Flare X (XMP) CL 14 - 14 - 14 - 34 - 48 (74 now) after last couple AGESA 1002 / 1003 ABBA / now 1004 B
> 
> I intend to push it now for a extra bit of performance but just making it work on the XMP make it spit errors like a machine gun some times.. so i wonder what are your results at 4 Dimms config Single Rank B dies which agesas u using etc



I also have a problematic situation here, but for me it's dual-rank 2x16GB dimms, not four single-rank dimms. I hit a wall after 3000MHz. I can't get errors to go away completely for 3200MHz.

All of the different "Combo-AM4" AGESA versions didn't help with my problem. Currently I'm back on an old BIOS from a year ago. It is using a "PinnaclePI-AM4" 1.0.0.6 AGESA. That AGESA was the final version intended purely for 1000 and 2000 series Ryzen. I saw someone write that that's the best for 2700X but I couldn't really see a difference for my dual-rank 3200MHz RAM problem.


----------



## lightsout

I am having stability issues with a 2600x, B450-I Strix, and 16gb of 3200c14 Flares. 

I updated the bios after not doing it for a long time. I have always ran this board at PBO level 2. All of a sudden I have some bsod's, but now I am dealing with the system hanging, the whole thing will just lock up while sitting idle or browsing the web.

I dropped to stock and still have the issue. Yesterday I did some testing and got what I thought was PBO level 2 stable with safe settings at 3200 c14 on my ram. Was able to run Prime blend for 10 hours.

This morning it locked up again so I ran the memtest option in the dram calculator, about half way through the system rebooted.

I recently swapped from nvidia to a RX 5700, thats when this all started, and why I updated my bios to alleviate some issues. Not sure if it is the culprit but it is gaming great ow with no issues (at first was getting lock ups in game).

Looking for any advice.


----------



## Rayleighzero

deepor said:


> I also have a problematic situation here, but for me it's dual-rank 2x16GB dimms, not four single-rank dimms. I hit a wall after 3000MHz. I can't get errors to go away completely for 3200MHz.
> 
> All of the different "Combo-AM4" AGESA versions didn't help with my problem. Currently I'm back on an old BIOS from a year ago. It is using a "PinnaclePI-AM4" 1.0.0.6 AGESA. That AGESA was the final version intended purely for 1000 and 2000 series Ryzen. I saw someone write that that's the best for 2700X but I couldn't really see a difference for my dual-rank 3200MHz RAM problem.


How did u go back to that BIOS version i have been looking for a way for around 6 months now EZ flash doesnt let me get anything below 4406 Which is Combo AGESA 0.0.7.0A

Also Give me more details on your timings and Dimms i had that wall at some point


----------



## deepor

Rayleighzero said:


> How did u go back to that BIOS version i have been looking for a way for around 6 months now EZ flash doesnt let me get anything below 4406 Which is Combo AGESA 0.0.7.0A
> 
> Also Give me more details on your timings and Dimms i had that wall at some point



For my ASRock X470 Taichi board, someone prepared a special BIOS for going back to old versions. I had to first flash that special BIOS and then the flash feature in that BIOS allowed going back to the old BIOS version.

I don't know any method that works with all boards. Maybe @1usmus has an idea, he has a thread about BIOS modding here:

https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...yzen-bios-mods-how-update-bios-correctly.html

About that special BIOS for my X470 Taichi, it's shared in this blog post here:

https://shop.jzelectronic.de/news.php?id=1574938860&sw=

At the end of that post, there's a pull-down box with the files for download. The special BIOS is the X470 Taichi version "3.60a".

That said... I'm right now back to the newest BIOS with AGESA 1.0.0.4B and I think this time I will stay with the new BIOS. I can't find a difference in performance to the old BIOS. My experimental settings for 3200MHz seem to boot fine.

Maybe that "wall" at 3200 was really a mistake. Right now I'm trying RTT nom, wr, park = 120, 120, 240 and that seems to boot 100% of the time. I had never tried RTTnom 120 before because I've never seen anyone use it with dual-rank.

About my Dimms, they are two sticks of this weird server/workstation memory here:

https://i.imgur.com/LLW2J18.png

I can't take screenshots right now but I have a text file with my timings for 3000MHz:



Spoiler



3000MHz:

ProcODT: 68.6 Ohm
RTT: 34, 80, 240
CAD: 20, 24, 40, 30

GearDownMode: enabled
Command Rate: 1

stable when cold, but errors at 50°C:
- -
CL 16
RCDWR 16
RCDRD 16
RP 16
RAS 32
RC 48
RRDS 4
RRDL 6
FAW 16
WTRS 4
WTRL 12
WR 12
RDRDSCL 3
WRWRSCL 3
RFC 420
CWL 16
RTP 6
RDWR 6
WRRD 3
WRWRSC 1
WRWRSD 7
WRWRDD 7
RDRDSC 1
RDRDSD 5
RDRDDD 5
CKE 1

stable at 50°C:
- -
CL 16
RCDWR 16
RCDRD 16
RP 16
RAS 32
RC 48
RRDS 6
RRDL 8
FAW 24
WTRS 4
WTRL 12
WR 12
RDRDSCL 5
WRWRSCL 5
RFC 420
CWL 16
RTP 8
RDWR 8
WRRD 4
WRWRSC 1
WRWRSD 7
WRWRDD 7
RDRDSC 1
RDRDSD 5
RDRDDD 5
CKE 1



About my 3200MHz problem, now that it seems to boot fine, maybe the problem is just that one of the timings is too tight. While playing around, I got the feeling that the errors don't immediately happen when I'm starting a stress test, only after a while when the Dimms are warm.


----------



## lightsout

deepor said:


> For my ASRock X470 Taichi board, someone prepared a special BIOS for going back to old versions. I had to first flash that special BIOS and then the flash feature in that BIOS allowed going back to the old BIOS version.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know any method that works with all boards. Maybe @1usmus has an idea, he has a thread about BIOS modding here:
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...yzen-bios-mods-how-update-bios-correctly.html
> 
> 
> 
> About that special BIOS for my X470 Taichi, it's shared in this blog post here:
> 
> 
> 
> https://shop.jzelectronic.de/news.php?id=1574938860&sw=
> 
> 
> 
> At the end of that post, there's a pull-down box with the files for download. The special BIOS is the X470 Taichi version "3.60a".
> 
> 
> 
> That said... I'm right now back to the newest BIOS with AGESA 1.0.0.4B and I think this time I will stay with the new BIOS. I can't find a difference in performance to the old BIOS. My experimental settings for 3200MHz seem to boot fine.
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe that "wall" at 3200 was really a mistake. Right now I'm trying RTT nom, wr, park = 120, 120, 240 and that seems to boot 100% of the time. I had never tried RTTnom 120 before because I've never seen anyone use it with dual-rank.
> 
> 
> 
> About my Dimms, they are two sticks of this weird server/workstation memory here:
> 
> 
> 
> https://i.imgur.com/LLW2J18.png
> 
> 
> 
> I can't take screenshots right now but I have a text file with my timings for 3000MHz:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 3000MHz:
> 
> 
> 
> ProcODT: 68.6 Ohm
> 
> RTT: 34, 80, 240
> 
> CAD: 20, 24, 40, 30
> 
> 
> 
> GearDownMode: enabled
> 
> Command Rate: 1
> 
> 
> 
> stable when cold, but errors at 50°C:
> 
> - -
> 
> CL 16
> 
> RCDWR 16
> 
> RCDRD 16
> 
> RP 16
> 
> RAS 32
> 
> RC 48
> 
> RRDS 4
> 
> RRDL 6
> 
> FAW 16
> 
> WTRS 4
> 
> WTRL 12
> 
> WR 12
> 
> RDRDSCL 3
> 
> WRWRSCL 3
> 
> RFC 420
> 
> CWL 16
> 
> RTP 6
> 
> RDWR 6
> 
> WRRD 3
> 
> WRWRSC 1
> 
> WRWRSD 7
> 
> WRWRDD 7
> 
> RDRDSC 1
> 
> RDRDSD 5
> 
> RDRDDD 5
> 
> CKE 1
> 
> 
> 
> stable at 50°C:
> 
> - -
> 
> CL 16
> 
> RCDWR 16
> 
> RCDRD 16
> 
> RP 16
> 
> RAS 32
> 
> RC 48
> 
> RRDS 6
> 
> RRDL 8
> 
> FAW 24
> 
> WTRS 4
> 
> WTRL 12
> 
> WR 12
> 
> RDRDSCL 5
> 
> WRWRSCL 5
> 
> RFC 420
> 
> CWL 16
> 
> RTP 8
> 
> RDWR 8
> 
> WRRD 4
> 
> WRWRSC 1
> 
> WRWRSD 7
> 
> WRWRDD 7
> 
> RDRDSC 1
> 
> RDRDSD 5
> 
> RDRDDD 5
> 
> CKE 1
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> About my 3200MHz problem, now that it seems to boot fine, maybe the problem is just that one of the timings is too tight. While playing around, I got the feeling that the errors don't immediately happen when I'm starting a stress test, only after a while when the Dimms are warm.




What stress test are you running to see those errors?


----------



## deepor

lightsout said:


> What stress test are you running to see those errors?


I start with memtest86 test #8 to check if my settings are good enough to not crash Windows. Then in Windows I use the membench feature in the Ryzen Dram Calculator program.

For that thing where I check if timings don't work with 50°C hot memory, I stuff a cloth around the memory sticks to block airflow. HWINFO shows the temperature of the Dimms in its sensor window somewhere.

About those problems you described earlier, I thought about that a good bit, but I can't decide what a likely reason could be. I'm afraid you might have to test everything about your PC. If you think the problem is your memory, perhaps you should test with memtest86 outside of Windows so that the graphics driver and such can't be the reason for the computer crashing. If you want to try memtest86, I would recommend to disable all of its tests except for #5 and #7 and #8. Those three tests are the only ones that are good, the other ones don't stress and are slow and just waste time.


----------



## lightsout

deepor said:


> I start with memtest86 test #8 to check if my settings are good enough to not crash Windows. Then in Windows I use the membench feature in the Ryzen Dram Calculator program.
> 
> 
> 
> For that thing where I check if timings don't work with 50°C hot memory, I stuff a cloth around the memory sticks to block airflow. HWINFO shows the temperature of the Dimms in its sensor window somewhere.
> 
> 
> 
> About those problems you described earlier, I thought about that a good bit, but I can't decide what a likely reason could be. I'm afraid you might have to test everything about your PC. If you think the problem is your memory, perhaps you should test with memtest86 outside of Windows so that the graphics driver and such can't be the reason for the computer crashing. If you want to try memtest86, I would recommend to disable all of its tests except for #5 and #7 and #8. Those three tests are the only ones that are good, the other ones don't stress and are slow and just waste time.




Thanks for the info. Yeah it's an odd situation and I hate these ones that are difficult to track down.

I haven't had any issues for a couple days. So we'll see if it holds up.


----------



## Captain Mayhem

My motherboard is here; ROG x-570-i mini ITX. Going to put all together today.


----------



## hazium233

I recently picked up a 2700X to replace my 1600. Haven't tried running anything but more or less default settings, and haven't yet tried to replicate my little ram OC to 3200C14.

I have an X370-F and I had left bios on 4012 (Pinnacle 1.0.0.2a). I did notice that this bios has some PBO options, although I backed out so this should be off currently.

Anybody else running this board with this CPU? I am wondering if any of the later bios versions may be worth it. Impressions briefly from what I read:

4207 - Good for ram overclocking and compatibility, but PBO is removed.

4603 - PBO was brought back, but it seemed like ram compatibility and stability might have been a mixed bag.

5009 - Mixed bag. I had a B350-F previously and the corresponding bios on it was not so great with my 1600.

5220 - Haven't seen too much about it with a 2700X / Zen+.

This board never got the "Performance Enhancement" presets, correct? Any input is appreciated. For the time being I will probably be cautious and stick with 4012 and see if my combo will do 3466 or higher with the ram (it is Micron D).


----------



## JackCY

What's up with the UEFI issues and PBO removal on some boards? Or all boards? Affects only 2000 series?


----------



## hazium233

^ For X370 or other first gen, I think it was because PBO wasn't officially supported on those chipsets. But I am not sure if that was the real reason, of it it was just an error with some of Asus's releases.


----------



## liszt17

Hi! I hope you guys can answer some of my questions, please.
So I recently updated my rig with a r7 2700, upgraded from r5 1600 allcore oc 3.7ghz.
But Im not perfectly satisfied...
My mobo are the asus prime x370 pro, 5220 bios, only AiOverclock option is the d.o.c.p for the memory (corsair 3000cl15 kit, runs perfectly fine at 2999/cl16 ever since I use it in this mobo). Every other setting are on stock. 
My problem is that this cpu NEVER truly boosts to 4.1ghz singlecore. I"m monitoring it with hwinfo, it technically "boosts" to 4.1, but only for a second or less. On multicore it NEVER runs higher than 3350 allcore. I tested it with cinebench, low gaming load,valley bench, never reached higher than even ~3.5ghz. And because of this, it is now SLOWER than the r5 1600. On reviews, this processor reached ~165 cb in r15 single, mine only reached 147cb because the 3.5 max boost. Max multicore 1503cb in r15.
My stock temps are perfectly fine, not even reaching 50°C. 
So this is a motherboard problem, or my cpu are dumb? 
Chipset driver installed, windows updated.
I tried to oc it, 4ghz/1.3v in ryzen master seems stable, but almost instatly fail on ibt max or prime 95. Even on 1.35 volt. So im kinda stuck. Any help? If I can "fix" the boost to do its proper job, Im satisfied.


----------



## deepor

There's no way to fix the boosting on the 2700 from what I could find. The 2700 is only good for manual overclocking. It drops to a very low speed when more than a single core is in use. The high single core speed, you'll never really see because there's always a bit of background work that wakes up a second core.

The 2700X is very different at stock settings. It will use high clock speeds with multiple cores. Only that one is good without manual overclocking.


----------



## liszt17

deepor said:


> There's no way to fix the boosting on the 2700 from what I could find. The 2700 is only good for manual overclocking. It drops to a very low speed when more than a single core is in use. The high single core speed, you'll never really see because there's always a bit of background work that wakes up a second core.
> 
> The 2700X is very different at stock settings. It will use high clock speeds with multiple cores. Only that one is good without manual overclocking.


Really?
Its unfortunate. I already tried 4ghz/offset 1.35 with llc3/5, ryzenmaster 4ghz/1.3-1.35, even 1.42, Ibt max killed both under 20 sec. Then I tried my old ryzen 1600 settings (1.256/3.7 on ryzen master) with IBT STANDARD,the cpu still cannot hold it...Am I degraded it, or just very unlucky, or the IBT is a nonsense overkill test?


----------



## deepor

What are your CPU temperatures like? That's what caused issues with overclocking here for me. I got the impression that things get unstable after 80°C.

My problem is that there's something wrong with the contact between my 2700X and the cooler. I can only keep 1.2V below 80°C, making manual overclocking really boring here for me.

About IBT, I think it's fine on Zen/Zen+. I mostly used prime95 small fft when experimenting which seemed to be similarly aggressive.


----------



## liszt17

deepor said:


> What are your CPU temperatures like? That's what caused issues with overclocking here for me. I got the impression that things get unstable after 80°C.
> 
> My problem is that there's something wrong with the contact between my 2700X and the cooler. I can only keep 1.2V below 80°C, making manual overclocking really boring here for me.
> 
> About IBT, I think it's fine on Zen/Zen+. I mostly used prime95 small fft when experimenting which seemed to be similarly aggressive.


Minor update: after I switched off the Avast security, Argus monitor, HwInfo and the Hard disk sentinel, the ryzen 2700 suddenly did its job: finally reached 165 cb in cinebench r15 single, which means the cpu boosted to 4.1 singlecore more than 5 sec! 
I still not figured out what casues the high background load what messes the single core boost, because I only had 10 mins for this short test. Now I begin the new testing.


----------



## liszt17

Okay,my cpu has something SERIOUS problem: 1.3v/llc5 (prime x370 pro), only 3.3 ghz, freezes on even ibt standart or p95 small fft. Is it damaged? It whistanded 1.5 hours of aidacpu+fpu+cashe on 4gz/same settings, 80 °c average and 88 peak °c.
Is it overheated, degraded, or what?


----------



## deepor

liszt17 said:


> Okay,my cpu has something SERIOUS problem: 1.3v/llc5 (prime x370 pro), only 3.3 ghz, freezes on even ibt standart or p95 small fft. Is it damaged? It whistanded 1.5 hours of aidacpu+fpu+cashe on 4gz/same settings, 80 °c average and 88 peak °c.
> Is it overheated, degraded, or what?



Try using just one single program running that's accessing sensors. For example do not run CPU-Z and HWINFO at the same time, or do not run HWINFO and any motherboard software at the same time. Are the freezes gone if you have only HWINFO running and nothing else? I've seen people say that this is the reason for the strange freezing.

About your 4GHz at 1.3V experiment... did you already try a lower voltage? My 2700X seems to do 4GHz fine with 1.2V (but I didn't test this a lot).


----------



## liszt17

deepor said:


> Try using just one single program running that's accessing sensors. For example do not run CPU-Z and HWINFO at the same time, or do not run HWINFO and any motherboard software at the same time. Are the freezes gone if you have only HWINFO running and nothing else? I've seen people say that this is the reason for the strange freezing.
> 
> About your 4GHz at 1.3V experiment... did you already try a lower voltage? My 2700X seems to do 4GHz fine with 1.2V (but I didn't test this a lot).


Unfortunately, the freeze caused by the famous corsair CMK16GX4M2B3000C15 ram. It was perfectly stable with ryzen 1600, but my 2700's memory controller maybe are WAY worse, because the smallest "non stock" setup (i.e 3.3ghz/1.3v!) are freezing on even the lovest ibt/prime settings. I reseted the d.o.c.p to auto, now the ram on 2133, and now it survived ibt standard, I take it as a guideline.
Second unfortunate thing: your 2700x are surely better overclocker than any "non x" 2700. Also, every 2700x are better owerclocking than any 2700, becauyse theyy are better binned chips. Te better 2700 cpus topping 4.1 or 4.2 ghz max, with "not so" high voltages (1.35, 1.42, this one are high). The 2700x do it on 1.2, 1.25 volt even, also can be pushed higher.


----------



## Spawne32

I just picked one of these up during a holiday sale, any particular reason this thing NEVER idles at 3.7ghz. It's either at 4ghz or higher, or it drops individual cores down to about 2.7ghz.


----------



## rdr09

Spawne32 said:


> I just picked one of these up during a holiday sale, any particular reason this thing NEVER idles at 3.7ghz. It's either at 4ghz or higher, or it drops individual cores down to about 2.7ghz.


Set Windows power at whaterever setting you prefer but set minimum processor state to 5% under Advance options. 

Not sure if Ryzen power options do it automatically. I use either Balance or High.


----------



## deepor

Spawne32 said:


> I just picked one of these up during a holiday sale, any particular reason this thing NEVER idles at 3.7ghz. It's either at 4ghz or higher, or it drops individual cores down to about 2.7ghz.



Yeah, the 2700X literally never uses its 3.7GHz base clock when it is in its normal power state. It will always try to work itself upwards with the MHz until it hits one of its different limits (power or voltage or temperature). Then next, when Windows decides to use one of the lower power states of the CPU instead of the normal one, those states are 3.2GHz and 2.2GHz from what I could find. It can do those 2GHz and 3GHz speeds at very low voltages, and I guess that's why it doesn't have super low speed steps like those 800MHz that Intel has.

The end result is then that it's always either running at around 4GHz or running much lower. This should also depend on what the monitoring software you are using is doing. If the software calculates average MHz over the last second, it will show any kind of speed as a result.

I don't know what happens if something is broken about the cooling and the CPU overheats. Maybe that's when it will run at 3.7GHz?

The 2700 (without X) is somewhat different. It seems to have an artificial drop in speed after more than two cores are in use. Its base clock is 3.4GHz and it will drop pretty close to that speed.

There's also a setting somewhere in the BIOS menus to disable "CPB = core performance boost". I guess that will lead to a fixed 3.7GHz speed. Now that I think about it, an Intel CPU has the same behavior. It will also never use its base clock speed if Turbo Boost is enabled.


----------



## rdr09

liszt17 said:


> Okay,my cpu has something SERIOUS problem: 1.3v/llc5 (prime x370 pro), only 3.3 ghz, freezes on even ibt standart or p95 small fft. Is it damaged? It whistanded 1.5 hours of aidacpu+fpu+cashe on 4gz/same settings, 80 °c average and 88 peak °c.
> Is it overheated, degraded, or what?


What cooler do you have?

Can you run P95 at optimized default? CPU temp using HWINFO64 (use this one) should not go higher than 70c even with the Spire cooler. Sucks the 2700 comes with the Stealth, which is weaker.

We have same cpu but my board is the Prime X470 Pro and i see at least 3 cores boosting to 4.1GHz at idle. Once in a while 4 cores boost to 4.1GHz using the latest BIOS, chipset driver, and Win10 1909.

At stock, it is normal for all cores to run even below 3.5GHz. If your tasks are composed mostly of multi-threaded tasks, then yah, an all core oc is a must. But, your cooling seems inadequate or there is really something wrong with your cpu and needs RMA. Heard good things with AMD's RMA service.


----------



## liszt17

rdr09 said:


> What cooler do you have?
> 
> Can you run P95 at optimized default? CPU temp using HWINFO64 (use this one) should not go higher than 70c even with the Spire cooler. Sucks the 2700 comes with the Stealth, which is weaker.
> 
> We have same cpu but my board is the Prime X470 Pro and i see at least 3 cores boosting to 4.1GHz at idle. Once in a while 4 cores boost to 4.1GHz using the latest BIOS, chipset driver, and Win10 1909.
> 
> At stock, it is normal for all cores to run even below 3.5GHz. If your tasks are composed mostly of multi-threaded tasks, then yah, an all core oc is a must. But, your cooling seems inadequate or there is really something wrong with your cpu and needs RMA. Heard good things with AMD's RMA service.


On stock, the brocken 2 was totally enough. Maximum temp was around 62-63 °C. My problem was the instability even on the lowest oc, but it was caused by not only the cpu, but the ram. It was totally stable on stock cpu+d.o.c.p, but on nothing else, so I replaced it with a r5 3600.


----------



## FlashFir

Is there no spreadsheet here?  OP said they'll try and get it together but nothing eh... Just switched from a 1700 because a friend needed a build and a cheaper processor to squeeze in a 5700.


----------



## deepor

There's a Google Docs spreadsheet with Zen+ CPU and RAM overclock sheets:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1dsu9K1Nt_7apHBdiy0MWVPcYjf6nOlr9CtkkfN78tSo/

I found that through a German forum, no idea who exactly started it.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

FlashFir said:


> Is there no spreadsheet here?  OP said they'll try and get it together but nothing eh... Just switched from a 1700 because a friend needed a build and a cheaper processor to squeeze in a 5700.


I was actually told that we couldn't set one up since the switch to VS from the old format... and honestly... never thought about it again... know how to set up one that people can add their names to and it show up in the OP?


----------



## LtAldoRaine

Hi am Kristofer from Poland i want join to Club . Welcome ! 
How good is my Batch Number UA 1908 SUS ?


----------



## williamcll

2700X @ 4.2Ghz here, I could use some help in setting up overclock because right now mine is running at 1.45V


----------



## The Sandman

williamcll said:


> 2700X @ 4.2Ghz here, I could use some help in setting up overclock because right now mine is running at 1.45V


 You might consider filling out your rig sig to help those trying to help you  
Saves a lot of time.

What have you tried and where are settings at? Bios text file maybe?
This is what my 2700x looks like at 4.2 all core.



Spoiler



36 complete.PNG


----------



## Leonard_video

Hi guys!
I'm a little worried about my temps with my 2700x, for exporting from Adobe premiere i get an average of 66c and max 70c but the cpu hovers around 90% usage.
I did a short aida64 stress test and it went to 80c in less than a minute and i stopped.
Before i had a 1800x and that cpu was around 54c in Adobe premiere when exporting.
Cooler is a Thermalright True Spirit 140 with push pull fans, thermal paste MX-4, open case, ambient 22c, cpu is with PBO enabled and offset of -0.05
Should i lapp the cpu and go liquid metal ?

LE 
30 seconds aida64


----------



## Minotaurtoo

doesn't seem to be thermal throttling, but if mine was getting that hot I'd try a remount just to see if it got better.


----------



## Leonard_video

And this is without PBO enabled.
I'll try a remount and if all fail i will lapp and liquid metal, i really don't look forward spending hours getting this cpu properly cooled, that's why i was interested is if this is normal, what you guys get ?
The strange thing is when i installed the cpu i felt like the surface was very uneven, part of the cpu edges where raised and middle of cpu was lower, when i remount i will put a razor blade to see how big the defect is.


----------



## Leonard_video

remount and put an X of paste, still temps high and it's winter, *** i'm i going to do in the summer, this thing will throttle a lot.


----------



## deepor

@Leonard_video:

I got the best results with my NH-D14 and 2700X by spreading the paste myself in a thin layer. I had also tried one large dot, and five smaller dots, and a line in the middle plus small dots. I'm thinking for me here the mounting pressure isn't good enough and that's why manual spreading worked better.

I tried lapping the NH-D14 base, and I think that helped a bit with the temperatures but it wasn't an impressive change in the numbers. The picture the paste makes now after I had worked on the cooler's base is better than before: previously I could see that it only made good contact somewhere around the middle of the CPU, but now basically the whole surface of the CPU looks like it has the same amount of contact, the paste seems to spread well over the whole surface. About lapping the CPU IHS, I didn't try that because I don't want to change the CPU's resale value.

I have experience with liquid metal on an LGA1155 socket CPU, and that wasn't good. The temperature improvement was minimal, perhaps just a degree or two over normal paste. The liquid metal can't solve actual temperature problems. I regretted using it on top of the IHS because it permanently changes the surface of the IHS and cooler base. Another interesting thing that happened was, after around four to five years of not moving the cooler, the temperatures started getting bad. When I removed the cooler, the liquid metal had changed into a sort of metal crystals and was completely dry.

About the temperatures you shared here, I think the stock settings should show better temperatures than what you are seeing.

Your PBO temperature is kind of impossible to judge because the CPU will go a bit crazy with the voltage and power usage if you enable PBO. It will limit itself with regards to voltage/power when it hits 85°C Tdie. When you improve your cooling it will start using higher voltage/power and you'll still be at 85°C in tests like prime95.

About PBO, you can manually tweak the different settings that it unlocks. You can customize it to something that isn't too much for your cooling. The things to tweak are "TDC" and "EDC" and maybe the overall power limit. "TDC" will change the max power usage you'll see, you can use it to limit what's happening with the all-core boost. "EDC" will change the voltage that's used, and will lower the boost and the temperatures for both single-core and all-core tests. The "EDC" setting is what's limiting everything when you use stock settings, it's what causing stock to use low voltage. You can get numbers to try by looking in Ryzen Master while you run stress tests. It will show how much of the EDC and TDC limit is currently used at the top.

Another thing you can/should tweak is, you can set a negative offset for Vcore. On my 2700X I can go the max -0.1V that my board's BIOS allows without the CPU getting unstable.


----------



## Leonard_video

Thank you for advice on liquid metal, i have bought some thermalgrizzly LM a year ago but never bothered to use it because i had a 1800x that didn't boost over 3.7 no matter the temps.
My motherboard might be at fault too, it's an asrock x370 taichi with bios 5.1, i have no control for TDC and EDC in BIOS, it's just Enable PBO and offset in another menu.
My chip is average, first time i went -0.1 with offset and was unstable, first i blame it on memory but it wasn't the memory, it was the cpu, now at -0.05 100% stable.
It's fortunate that not many apps use all 8 cores to the max to ever hit 80-90c, Adobe suite hovers around 80-90%.
Performance seems fine.


----------



## Leonard_video

here what ryzen master says when i start aida64 stress test


----------



## hazium233

Leonard_video said:


> And this is without PBO enabled.
> I'll try a remount and if all fail i will lapp and liquid metal, i really don't look forward spending hours getting this cpu properly cooled, that's why i was interested is if this is normal, what you guys get ?
> The strange thing is when i installed the cpu i felt like the surface was very uneven, part of the cpu edges where raised and middle of cpu was lower, when i remount i will put a razor blade to see how big the defect is.


Which version of the True Spirit 140 are you using?

I still have the Prism on my 2700X. Case is a Meshify C with 2x140mm SW3's as intake. Cores clock is set to default, voltage to default, LLC default. I am pretty sure PBO is off by default on my board (X370-F), and I declined it when I went to the warning screen.

I ran AIDA64 for two minutes with CPU, FPU, Cache, and Memory checked. Highest Tdie was 81.4C, the "CPU" temp hit max of 61C. Ambient is probably ~22C. Tdie jumped towards 80C relatively early, partly because of lag in the fan curve since I don't have the Prism getting near 3000RPM until "CPU" is ~60C, although I have minimum raised to smooth low load oscillations. I find it somewhat annoying Tdie separates from CPU this much under high load, at low load and temps they are practically identical. Yours seems a good deal warmer than mine is, at least if air temp into the cooler is anywhere the same.

I haven't owned more than my current sample. Have read about IHS shape being a problem for some people, and that might be the issue here. I did not look into this until I had installed mine, or else I might have checked the flatness before it went in. I want to get an aftermarket cooler soon, don't know if it is worth pulling the Prism to check that beforehand.

Mine is a 1922PGT, no idea if production date matters.


----------



## Leonard_video

Motherboard bios might be at fault, i disabled core performance boost or something like this in the bios and the cpu in aida64 stayed at 47C, cpu was locked at 3700mhz.
My cooler is this - http://www.thermalright.de/en/archive/21/true-spirit-140-bw?c=16#prettyPhoto with the default fan and another 140mm mounted on the back of the cooler, 2x120mm fans on the top of the case and 1x90mm fan in the back of the case, this is around the cpu, rest of the case has a front 1x200MM fan, power supply at the bottom of the case and video card.
What Bios/AGESA is recommended for this CPU ? i have a x370 taichi
hazium233, what is your score in cinebench r15 ?


----------



## deepor

Leonard_video said:


> Motherboard bios might be at fault, i disabled core performance boost or something like this in the bios and the cpu in aida64 stayed at 47C, cpu was locked at 3700mhz.
> My cooler is this - http://www.thermalright.de/en/archive/21/true-spirit-140-bw?c=16#prettyPhoto with the default fan and another 140mm mounted on the back of the cooler, 2x120mm fans on the top of the case and 1x90mm fan in the back of the case, this is around the cpu, rest of the case has a front 1x200MM fan, power supply at the bottom of the case and video card.
> What Bios/AGESA is recommended for this CPU ? i have a x370 taichi
> hazium233, what is your score in cinebench r15 ?



There is an X370 Taichi thread here, maybe ask the people in that thread what version of the BIOS they use:

https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...7-asrock-x370-taichi-overclocking-thread.html

I have an X470 Taichi which is supposedly the same hardware as the X370 Taichi, but the two boards don't use the same BIOS. For me here with the X470 Taichi and a 2700X, I can use the newest Beta BIOS and it works fine. It didn't break anything about my (bad) memory overclock for example.

Updating the BIOS is dangerous because you will not be able to go back to your old BIOS that has the AGESA that's purely for Zen and Zen+. You will be stuck with the BIOS versions that have the new "Combo-AM4" AGESA that's for Zen 2.


----------



## Leonard_video

deepor said:


> Updating the BIOS is dangerous because you will not be able to go back to your old BIOS that has the AGESA that's purely for Zen and Zen+. You will be stuck with the BIOS versions that have the new "Combo-AM4" AGESA that's for Zen 2.


That's one reason, the other is there is no way to recover if you updated with an unstable system or something happens when you flash, you brick the board, that's why i stayed with bios 5.1.
I'll ask there for advice.
Thank you!


----------



## hazium233

Leonard_video said:


> hazium233, what is your score in cinebench r15 ?


I have not run R15, just R20.

In CB R20, my best multi score is 3996, and best single core is 430. This is with my ram at 14-18/16-16-36 3200MT/s. I assume ambient and processes can affect this a bit, and since I am using the Prism, an aggressive fan curve seems to boost it a little. There is variance, I think the lowest I had with 2666 ram was only 3948 or something.

I am using bios 4012, which is Pinnacle 1.0.0.2a. I have not bothered to update the bios. If I did it might be to modded 4207 which is Pinnacle 1.0.0.6, but that official release doesn't have PBO apparently. I didn't want to bother with PBO on the stock cooler though.


----------



## man from atlantis

Cinebench R20
4350MHz [email protected]
MT 4502
ST 450








103MHz PBO(4480MHz max boost) [email protected]
MT 4259
ST 455


----------



## Leonard_video

attached screenshot with score, while running temps where averaging 70-71C.
I have to finish 2 projects but after that i will lapp the shi..t out of this cpu.


----------



## Leonard_video

turned up a fan a bit and scores got a little better


----------



## hazium233

Nice.

Now I officially have the slowest 2700X, ha.


----------



## Leonard_video

hazium233 said:


> Nice.
> 
> Now I officially have the slowest 2700X, ha.


It's fine, slap a better cooler and get the same results.

I have a question, what are the consequences of lowering SOC voltage ? i looked on youtube and others and found that SOC voltage was default at 0.8 to 1.0, unless they put more to get memory stable, the motherboard decided that voltage.
When i looked at mine it was 1.08, default, so i lowered it to 0.9, tested with testmem and i see no errors.
As i understand SOC deals with everything, sata, memory, usb, am i in danger to copy something of a memory stick and get it corrupted ? that is in the case of not being stable.


----------



## deepor

Leonard_video said:


> It's fine, slap a better cooler and get the same results.
> 
> I have a question, what are the consequences of lowering SOC voltage ? i looked on youtube and others and found that SOC voltage was default at 0.8 to 1.0, unless they put more to get memory stable, the motherboard decided that voltage.
> When i looked at mine it was 1.08, default, so i lowered it to 0.9, tested with testmem and i see no errors.
> As i understand SOC deals with everything, sata, memory, usb, am i in danger to copy something of a memory stick and get it corrupted ? that is in the case of not being stable.



I don't think SOC voltage deals with everything. It might be just the voltage for the parts of the CPU that are connected to the memory sticks? Things like SATA and USB are in the chipset.

I'm not totally sure, but I think I need 0.975 V here to get my crappy 2400MHz memory to run at 3133MHz. I think I had errors when using 0.95 V. I'm not sure about this because I might have made mistakes about where exactly my memory instability came from while I was tweaking things.


----------



## hazium233

Leonard_video said:


> It's fine, slap a better cooler and get the same results.
> 
> I have a question, what are the consequences of lowering SOC voltage ? i looked on youtube and others and found that SOC voltage was default at 0.8 to 1.0, unless they put more to get memory stable, the motherboard decided that voltage.
> When i looked at mine it was 1.08, default, so i lowered it to 0.9, tested with testmem and i see no errors.
> As i understand SOC deals with everything, sata, memory, usb, am i in danger to copy something of a memory stick and get it corrupted ? that is in the case of not being stable.


My X370-F wanted to use 1.05V for my 2700X at 2666MT/s, which I thought was strange. So I changed it to 0.950V, and then also used that value when I tested 3200MT/s, and am still running it.

I think that was partly due to the difference in AI Overclock tuner on this board versus my old B350-F, since on that board it would use 0.950V on my 1600 for 2666MT/s, but then go to 1.1V for 3000MT/s or greater. But when I put the 1600 on this board, it used 1.05V at 2666MT/s. It must like that value.

You can get cache errors if it is too low, besides memory errors. If you change core voltage or clocks, you can affect the SOC voltage you need for whatever ram speed. From other threads, dialing in best ProcODT and CLDO_VDDP might let you go lower on it for a given speed.


----------



## Leonard_video

I lowered it so i get a cooler chip, don't know if it did much.
It's just strange how my motherboard pumps so much voltage in this chip, i got it somewhat cooler but PBO on this motherboard is very aggressive and not efficient. 
Everything on the x370 taichi is a bit overvolted by default, ram should be 1.350 and it's 1.365.
I think a properly done manual overclock to 4.150 or 4.200 will give me better results and better temps, single core doesn't boost to 4350, it goes to 4150 to 4250 in cinebench single core test, so nothing will be missed.


----------



## hazium233

Installed a True Spirit 140 Power the other day. Interestingly, the very first run of CBR20 matched the best Prism score I had of 3996, although at lower noise, ambient wasn't great although it was ~4C or so lower Tdie than the 3995 run I did before I pulled the Prism. Ran it again this morning and it is up to 4013 (was not running monitoring). Single core was 429, which I don't think is really thermally affected so much. On the Prism it always seemed to score 429 or 430 with this ram speed, or 417-418 with 2666MT/s.

PBO is disabled. Multiplier, voltage offset, etc on Auto. Performance Bias disabled/none. SOC manually 0.950v. 2x8GB at 3200MT/s 14-18/16-16-36-56 but tRFC is default 350ns. Sub timings aren't very radical. I did not change priority.

Have two questions. I had run CPO Test a while back just as something to do. Is there a real interpretation for the actual voltages shown, or is the voltage difference between best and worst core more important? Or is it just interesting information without a lot of practical application?

Other than that, am I going to have to install Ryzen Master if I want to look at PPT, TDC, EDC limits and see what is really going on? Or is this buried somewhere in hwinfo64 config?


----------



## darkling333

*R7 2700X Manual Offset Not Working*

Good morning, i came around this thread about R7 2700X and wanted to ask some advice. I know this is a 2nd gen processor but i recently purchased one on a very good deal so bare with me. At the moment i have the stock cooler Wraith Prism installed but i am expecting an Arctic Freezer 34 Duo. 

The specs are R7 2700X on a Asus Prime x470-Pro with 16GB 3600Mhz G.Skill rams. Booting for the first time i flashed the bios to the latest version and just selected the D.O.C. profile of my ram, everything else left on default - auto. After booting to Windows, to my surprise the CPU Vcore reported in all monitoring tools (HW, Cpu-Z etc.) was REALLY high like close to 1.486 - 1.5 and on full load tests like Cinebench R15 all the cores settled around 3.899ghz which is really low comparing with other posts - videos etc. 

So i tried to ditch the default settings and try for a static OC of 4.1ghz on all cores using Ryzen Master just to get the lowest stable cpu vcore. This resulted running 4.1ghz on all cores with 1.3 Cpu Vcore. Anything above 4.1ghz even 4.12 needed more than 1.45v to be stable. So i decided to do the same OC but in the bios level so i don't have to load Ryzen Master every time. I set the multiplier to 41 and since the VCore reported in BIOS was 1.414v i used the minus offset to remove volts so i get to the 1.3v area which i was stable right? No, it didn't post. 

After the 3 failed attempts of boot power cycle i entered F1 on bios and the VCore was 1.212. So my question is: how can i use the offset so that the volts also lower on idle and not only the multiplier? How come in one case the BIOS loads with 1.4v Vcore and the next time it shows 1.2v? Of course applying an offset on a Vcore of 1.2v will not boot but i want to apply an offset to the actual Vcore used while on Auto setting which was ridiculously high. Any advice is welcome thanks, because at the moment the only thing that worked is to manually dial in the 1.3V Vcore in the Bios but that is constant volt and i want it to idle too.


----------



## rdr09

darkling333 said:


> Good morning, i came around this thread about R7 2700X and wanted to ask some advice. I know this is a 2nd gen processor but i recently purchased one on a very good deal so bare with me. At the moment i have the stock cooler Wraith Prism installed but i am expecting an Arctic Freezer 34 Duo. The specs are R7 2700X on a Asus Prime x470-Pro with 16GB 3600Mhz G.Skill rams. Booting for the first time i flashed the bios to the latest version and just selected the D.O.C. profile of my ram, everything else left on default - auto. After booting to Windows, to my surprise the CPU Vcore reported in all monitoring tools (HW, Cpu-Z etc.) was REALLY high like close to 1.486 - 1.5 and on full load tests like Cinebench R15 all the cores settled around 3.899ghz which is really low comparing with other posts - videos etc. So i tried to ditch the default settings and try for a static OC of 4.1ghz on all cores using Ryzen Master just to get the lowest stable cpu vcore. This resulted running 4.1ghz on all cores with 1.3 Cpu Vcore. Anything above 4.1ghz even 4.12 needed more than 1.45v to be stable. So i decided to do the same OC but in the bios level so i don't have to load Ryzen Master every time. I set the multiplier to 41 and since the VCore reported in BIOS was 1.414v i used the minus offset to remove volts so i get to the 1.3v area which i was stable right? No, it didn't post. After the 3 failed attempts of boot power cycle i entered F1 on bios and the VCore was 1.212. So my question is: how can i use the offset so that the volts also lower on idle and not only the multiplier? How come in one case the BIOS loads with 1.4v Vcore and the next time it shows 1.2v? Of course applying an offset on a Vcore of 1.2v will not boot but i want to apply an offset to the actual Vcore used while on Auto setting which was ridiculously high. Any advice is welcome thanks, because at the moment the only thing that worked is to manually dial in the 1.3V Vcore in the Bios but that is constant volt and i want it to idle too.


Did you replace the stock paste? The Wraith is good for stock only. That all core is a little low, me thinks, but should be more like closer to 4 GHz if the cpu is cooled better. Cine can heat up the cpu fast. Anyways, maybe some else with same cpu will chime in and agree that you'd be better off with a negative offset at stock with that cooler. Target 1.42v, so it won't be jumping 1.5v. Every cpu is different, so you might want to gauge yours. Based in on the Standard Vcore in BIOS. You'd see it down in the lower left corner.

On my R7 2700, i apply a negative voltage of 0.03v.


----------



## darkling333

rdr09 said:


> Did you replace the stock paste? The Wraith is good for stock only. That all core is a little low, me thinks, but should be more like closer to 4 GHz if the cpu is cooled better. Cine can heat up the cpu fast. Anyways, maybe some else with same cpu will chime in and agree that you'd be better off with a negative offset at stock with that cooler. Target 1.42v, so it won't be jumping 1.5v. Every cpu is different, so you might want to gauge yours. Based in on the Standard Vcore in BIOS. You'd see it down in the lower left corner.
> 
> On my R7 2700, i apply a negative voltage of 0.03v.


No stock paste to replace, the Wraith Prism has a pre-applied thermal compound. I never saw anyone saying that i need to remove and apply something else.

Yes i would agree, after seeing the AMD video about how XFR2 and PBO works that it needs better temp headroom in order for it to boost. I'll probably need to replace the stock cooler, run everything again in Auto and see how the all core OC from the XFR2 - PBO is operating with better headroom (assuming that AUTO means actually ENABLED in bios, i need a confirmation from someone too)

The question was mainly about why does the CPU Vcore changes from 1.4 to 1.2 in BIOS and i cannot successfully apply an offset.


----------



## rdr09

darkling333 said:


> No stock paste to replace, the Wraith Prism has a pre-applied thermal compound. I never saw anyone saying that i need to remove and apply something else.
> 
> Yes i would agree, after seeing the AMD video about how XFR2 and PBO works that it needs better temp headroom in order for it to boost. I'll probably need to replace the stock cooler, run everything again in Auto and see how the all core OC from the XFR2 - PBO is operating with better headroom (assuming that AUTO means actually ENABLED in bios, i need a confirmation from someone too)
> 
> The question was mainly about why does the CPU Vcore changes from 1.4 to 1.2 in BIOS and i cannot successfully apply an offset.


The Prism is a good cooler. The paste sucks. Be careful when you replace that cooler as the stock paste is sticky and the cpu might come off with it. 

Not sure about the X version but on my 2700 i use a negative offset. At stock, the vcore jumps to 1.48-1.5v like yours, so i just subtract 0.03v on mine and it settles to around 1.45v max. Anymore then the cpu boost lower than 4.1GHz. This is from Optimal Default and all other settings are default/auto. No PBO for the X version. Also, i use Win10 Balance Power with the Minimum Processor State at 5% in Advance settings. Minimum vcore goes all the way down to 0.5v. Temp is better, too.
For the 2700X, yah, you do need a better cooler.

Edit: This how my BIOS look like with changes. Also, if you put the Custom CPU Ratio to Manual, the BLCK sets to 100. Second screenshot is how HWINFO reads the vcore (SVI2). AC if off and im using the Spire cooler.


----------



## deepor

@darkling333:

Here's how I like to do things on my 2700X, I just tweak the normal boost a little:

First find out what negative offset works for you. Then next, play around with the PBO values to make the CPU boost higher to things like 4GHz all-core Cinebench. PBO plays together with the offset voltage: the lower voltage from the offset cools things down and the CPU will then in turn be able to ask for more voltage and will boost higher.

For the offset voltage, just try a value and see what happens. Look out for WHEA warnings getting logged in the Windows Event Viewer, run Cinebench and some light stress test like a memory test tool, and play some games that you know normally don't crash. On my 2700X here, I can use -0.100 V offset and it runs fine. That's the lowest setting that my BIOS allows, I can't go lower.

About PBO, you could just enable it and use its Auto values. Personally I don't like that the CPU then hits 85°C for stress tests so I limit things by using manual PBO values. AMD's defaults for the 2700X are:

PPT = 141
TDC = 95
EDC = 140

That's the values that are used at stock settings, when PBO is disabled. With these defaults, the "EDC" value is the one that limits everything. If you increase it, the CPU will start boosting higher. After increasing it enough, you will then start getting limited by TDC instead (if your cooling is strong enough).

What I like to do is increase EDC, then lower TDC to limit things to something where my cooler and normal fan speed setup can still keep things below 80°C.

You can use AMD's "Ryzen Master" software to check on the EDC, TDC, PPT limits. That Ryzen Master tool will show how close the CPU is to the limits.

There's also another limit for the temperature. When boosting, the CPU will try to stay below 85°C. It will limit the boost when you hit that temperature. That's why when your goal is to find the limit you want to use for EDC and TDC, make sure you are still below 85°C while you experiment with stress tests. This 85°C temperature can also be customized somewhere in the BIOS if you want, on my board it's one of the options on the "NBIO" page of the "AMD CBS" section.

About that thermal paste and stock cooler thing, is this your first AMD CPU? If that's the case, make sure you rotate and wiggle the cooler around a little before you try lifting it. If you immediately start pulling upwards, you will rip the CPU out of the socket. That's dangerous for the CPU pins. Also perhaps warm things up by running prime95 for a while so that hopefully the paste gets a bit softer.


----------



## darkling333

deepor said:


> @darkling333:
> 
> Here's how I like to do things on my 2700X, I just tweak the normal boost a little:
> 
> First find out what negative offset works for you. Then next, play around with the PBO values to make the CPU boost higher to things like 4GHz all-core Cinebench. PBO plays together with the offset voltage: the lower voltage from the offset cools things down and the CPU will then in turn be able to ask for more voltage and will boost higher.
> 
> For the offset voltage, just try a value and see what happens. Look out for WHEA warnings getting logged in the Windows Event Viewer, run Cinebench and some light stress test like a memory test tool, and play some games that you know normally don't crash. On my 2700X here, I can use -0.100 V offset and it runs fine. That's the lowest setting that my BIOS allows, I can't go lower.
> 
> About PBO, you could just enable it and use its Auto values. Personally I don't like that the CPU then hits 85°C for stress tests so I limit things by using manual PBO values. AMD's defaults for the 2700X are:
> 
> PPT = 141
> TDC = 95
> EDC = 140
> 
> That's the values that are used at stock settings, when PBO is disabled. With these defaults, the "EDC" value is the one that limits everything. If you increase it, the CPU will start boosting higher. After increasing it enough, you will then start getting limited by TDC instead (if your cooling is strong enough).
> 
> What I like to do is increase EDC, then lower TDC to limit things to something where my cooler and normal fan speed setup can still keep things below 80°C.
> 
> You can use AMD's "Ryzen Master" software to check on the EDC, TDC, PPT limits. That Ryzen Master tool will show how close the CPU is to the limits.
> 
> There's also another limit for the temperature. When boosting, the CPU will try to stay below 85°C. It will limit the boost when you hit that temperature. That's why when your goal is to find the limit you want to use for EDC and TDC, make sure you are still below 85°C while you experiment with stress tests. This 85°C temperature can also be customized somewhere in the BIOS if you want, on my board it's one of the options on the "NBIO" page of the "AMD CBS" section.
> 
> About that thermal paste and stock cooler thing, is this your first AMD CPU? If that's the case, make sure you rotate and wiggle the cooler around a little before you try lifting it. If you immediately start pulling upwards, you will rip the CPU out of the socket. That's dangerous for the CPU pins. Also perhaps warm things up by running prime95 for a while so that hopefully the paste gets a bit softer.


Thanks for the thermal paste tip, i will turn on the computer and run some light loads to get the paste warmed up and then remove it. My ultimate goal is to let the CPU do what it is supposed to do, meaning leaving things on Auto and hopefully with the better cooler, the headroom for temps will increase and for all core operations i might get higher than 3,89ghz which i am currently.

After i hopefully reach that level and the auto functions of XFR2 and PBO operate as they should i might try offsetting some voltage off in small increments.


----------



## darkling333

I swaped for a Ryzen 5 3600, so i'll be posting somewhere else now.

p.s. i did the trick with prime95 and the cpu cooler was removed like butter.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

I too used that trick lol... I have a "curing" type thermal paste that you really have to warm up to get it to cure, and to remove the cooler either takes a small pry bar or a really warm cpu... 

I've swapped to a 3900x.... I was able to get all core 4.3ghz at only 1.256v...eventually failed a prime95 test, but still the improvement frequency/voltage is real... fully stable at 1.23v for 4.2ghz all core and uses less power than stock settings.


----------



## chevy350

I've noticed these values and am thinking they would be caused by c-states?? I have gd and pd disabled for memory, but I believe low-power idle is enabled. Anyone seens HWInfo reporting weird readings like this lol


----------



## cssorkinman

chevy350 said:


> I've noticed these values and am thinking they would be caused by c-states?? I have gd and pd disabled for memory, but I believe low-power idle is enabled. Anyone seens HWInfo reporting weird readings like this lol



I usually only get those kind of errors if the machine goes into some kind of power saving mode.


----------



## hazium233

deepor said:


> PPT = 141
> TDC = 95
> EDC = 140
> 
> That's the values that are used at stock settings, when PBO is disabled. With these defaults, the "EDC" value is the one that limits everything. If you increase it, the CPU will start boosting higher. After increasing it enough, you will then start getting limited by TDC instead (if your cooling is strong enough).
> 
> What I like to do is increase EDC, then lower TDC to limit things to something where my cooler and normal fan speed setup can still keep things below 80°C.
> 
> You can use AMD's "Ryzen Master" software to check on the EDC, TDC, PPT limits. That Ryzen Master tool will show how close the CPU is to the limits.
> 
> There's also another limit for the temperature. When boosting, the CPU will try to stay below 85°C. It will limit the boost when you hit that temperature. That's why when your goal is to find the limit you want to use for EDC and TDC, make sure you are still below 85°C while you experiment with stress tests. This 85°C temperature can also be customized somewhere in the BIOS if you want, on my board it's one of the options on the "NBIO" page of the "AMD CBS" section.


Thanks for this info. I still haven't altered my core parameters off of default, and I had wondered about the behavior. Does temperature for Tdie (or Tctl) affect the frequency below 85C though? Or is it only indirectly by somehow affecting EDC or TDC?

I ask because from Prism to TS140P it seems that I was able to boost Cinebench R20 by 39 points all core. Granted, that is only about 1%, but even on the Prism it seemed an aggressive curve and cooler ambient was necessary for my best scores.


----------



## deepor

hazium233 said:


> Thanks for this info. I still haven't altered my core parameters off of default, and I had wondered about the behavior. Does temperature for Tdie (or Tctl) affect the frequency below 85C though? Or is it only indirectly by somehow affecting EDC or TDC?
> 
> I ask because from Prism to TS140P it seems that I was able to boost Cinebench R20 by 39 points all core. Granted, that is only about 1%, but even on the Prism it seemed an aggressive curve and cooler ambient was necessary for my best scores.



In my experience, at default settings, only the "EDC" value will matter. This will be the only limit the CPU will hit. The default EDC value makes it so the voltage will be very low when the CPU is under load. The power usage is always far away from the PPT and TDC limits. This then makes it so the temperature will not matter if it's below 85°C.

Where the temperature matters is if you hit the "PPT" limit. The power usage of the CPU will change with the temperature. It's pretty interesting to see what happens there. In HWINFO you can double-click on an entry in the sensor window, and it will then open a small history graph window for that sensor. If you track power usage like that while running some stress test and the CPU uses some constant voltage, you can see that the power usage goes up and down when you play around with fan speeds and the temperature changes. If you are then the PPT limit, the CPU will try to keep the power usage constant. It will reduce MHz and voltage to do that.

The "TDC" limit is in practice very similar to "PPT", you can use either one of those two to limit things to a certain power usage. But with TDC, the temperature will not influence things. When the CPU gets hotter, the power usage goes up.


----------



## hazium233

deepor said:


> In my experience, at default settings, only the "EDC" value will matter. This will be the only limit the CPU will hit. The default EDC value makes it so the voltage will be very low when the CPU is under load. The power usage is always far away from the PPT and TDC limits. This then makes it so the temperature will not matter if it's below 85°C.
> 
> Where the temperature matters is if you hit the "PPT" limit. The power usage of the CPU will change with the temperature. It's pretty interesting to see what happens there. In HWINFO you can double-click on an entry in the sensor window, and it will then open a small history graph window for that sensor. If you track power usage like that while running some stress test and the CPU uses some constant voltage, you can see that the power usage goes up and down when you play around with fan speeds and the temperature changes. If you are then the PPT limit, the CPU will try to keep the power usage constant. It will reduce MHz and voltage to do that.
> 
> The "TDC" limit is in practice very similar to "PPT", you can use either one of those two to limit things to a certain power usage. But with TDC, the temperature will not influence things. When the CPU gets hotter, the power usage goes up.


I think since I had not accepted the PBO warning in bios, I couldn't view those in hwinfo yet. Either that or it might not work for the X370-F, I guess I will find out when I get around to that.

Highest power usage I have recorded was 136.92W, that was running Realbench under the Prism. I have not done a whole lot of small FFT, but for the time I ran that I only saw 130W or so, the different sizes seemed to have slightly different wattage. Voltage does seem to get pretty low in heavy loads, I saw down to 1.212V in small FFT. These were all just using default 2s polling time, so the real peak or nadir may have potentially been missed.


----------



## hazium233

Updated to newer hwinfo which seems to track TDC and PPT even though PBO is set disabled. But not EDC. I am not sure if this is intentional, or if this is some interaction with my specific board and bios. Default values show in RM - PPT 141, TDC 95, EDC 140.

Used Ryzen Master a bit to look at these three values with the default settings (except ram related). Behavior seemed to be fairly different between Cinebench R20 and Prime95.

In Cinebench, EDC pegged to about 100 near instantly, but TDC hovered near there at ~98-99%. On the second run I saw EDC actually hit 100%. PPT was usually lower, like 92-95%.

In Prime95 with arbitrary custom 448K test, the result a bit different. EDC pegged to 100% near instantly and stabilized at 99% for most of the test, but EDC was down at only 83-84%. Similarly, PPT was about 84-85%, in both cases they seemed to be higher near the end of the FFT size before it switched to 480K. Temp was low 60's (specifically ~61.75 stabilized for much of the test, climbing to 62.63C before transitioning sizes). Ran most of the test at 3.9GHz all core.
@deepor you said that the increased power usage is a result of the temperature creep? I did not log voltage carefully, but since that also seems to correspond to TDC creep, I would guess current is somehow increasing.

Pushing the definition of default processor settings, I am wondering if VRM current limit does anything if the above limiters are not modified. Maybe I will experiment with that and phase to see. I would assume this shouldn't do much until either modifying limits, or going all core (which I am not particularly interested in trying).

Best CB20 is a little higher than my previous post, it is now 4042, which is 46 better than max Prism score of 3996 at same motherboard settings, except fan control which is more relaxed than with the Prism actually. Still have a fair amount of variability, but it looks like a real second distribution formed higher than where the Prism scores were. I never tried the Prism with the high switch though.


----------



## deepor

hazium233 said:


> @deepor you said that the increased power usage is a result of the temperature creep? I did not log voltage carefully, but since that also seems to correspond to TDC creep, I would guess current is somehow increasing.



What I noticed is that when I limit things through TDC and I run a stress test, then the reported power usage goes up when the CPU gets hotter. The power usage also goes back down if I take manual control over the fans and ramp them up to push the temperature down. While all this is happening, the MHz of the CPU stays constant.

When I limit things through the PPT setting instead of the TDC setting, then the temperature stays roughly constant, but the CPU gets slower, its MHz go down.

I didn't look at the current when I experimented with all of this, so I don't know where the extra power usage comes from exactly. Maybe it's the voltage that increases, and not the current? I thought TDC is supposed to limit the current. The way I researched things is with HWINFO. You can double-click on entries in HWINFO to open small history graph windows. That's where I could see the power usage and temperature being related. I looked at what happens in those graphs over time while I was playing around with fan speeds manually, and while the stress test was running.

The stress test I used is prime95 with a custom fft size. I've set both min and max fft size to the same value so that it will just repeat the same test indefinitely. I used large fft values like 4096 or 8192 to make it run less hot so that the stress is a bit more comparable to what a normal program like Handbrake might do in the worst case.


----------



## hazium233

deepor said:


> What I noticed is that when I limit things through TDC and I run a stress test, then the reported power usage goes up when the CPU gets hotter. The power usage also goes back down if I take manual control over the fans and ramp them up to push the temperature down. While all this is happening, the MHz of the CPU stays constant.
> 
> When I limit things through the PPT setting instead of the TDC setting, then the temperature stays roughly constant, but the CPU gets slower, its MHz go down.
> 
> I didn't look at the current when I experimented with all of this, so I don't know where the extra power usage comes from exactly. Maybe it's the voltage that increases, and not the current? I thought TDC is supposed to limit the current. The way I researched things is with HWINFO. You can double-click on entries in HWINFO to open small history graph windows. That's where I could see the power usage and temperature being related. I looked at what happens in those graphs over time while I was playing around with fan speeds manually, and while the stress test was running.
> 
> The stress test I used is prime95 with a custom fft size. I've set both min and max fft size to the same value so that it will just repeat the same test indefinitely. I used large fft values like 4096 or 8192 to make it run less hot so that the stress is a bit more comparable to what a normal program like Handbrake might do in the worst case.


I should have been more precise, when I said "TDC creep," what I meant was percentage of TDC crept up, so current had to have been increased. I was looking at percent of the power and current targets rather than the actual numbers. For stock TDC 1% should be 0.95A. This happened near the end of the 448K size, and temperature went up, along with power. Fan control was on automatic though, and really for much of the test it did not max due to the way the curve is set (and since my mobo forces use of package temp not Tdie or Tctl).

I had used some arbitrary sizes of FFT to test cooler differences, the 448K because it is low end of large. But it seemed like power usage always goes up at the end of an FFT size, even if the temp had looked to have flatlined long before. But temp also goes up. I was using older hwinfo version for much of this where the PPT, TDC, EDC monitoring was not available so I just had package power (SMU). Using 6.22 now where EDC is not available.

The observations about the difference between TDC and PPT with varying temp are interesting, even though they seem counter-intuitive to me. Not well enough versed on semiconductors to understand that.

Practically speaking though, is it predominantly these three limits that are affecting boost frequency if temperature is lowered? Or is it the "hidden" temperature targets? In lower power / stressful all core tests like AIDA with some settings, max Tdie can stay below 60C in which case I see cores above 3.9GHz. At loads that keep Tdie at about 60C or a little above, seems nearly locked to 3.9GHz. I assumed this was XFR below 60C, is that correct?


----------



## hazium233

Probably old news, but I was trying to look more into the PB2 / XFR2 to see clocks v temp and found some tests Hardware Numb3rs had done back in 2018. One was real time in Blender using LN2 to show real time clock changes with temp, the other was a graph I will attach. The full load was P95.

That was PBO enabled, so from that standpoint I am not sure how well it correlates to stock. It seems like nearly any decent all-core load I run hits EDC 140, and may or may not hit TDC. In any case, that showed 3925MHz for Tctl 70C (or Tdie 60), which is similar to what I see in CB. I wonder if EDC is a real current or a derived number solely for boost calculations.

Also posted on the hwinfo forum regarding EDC monitoring, I guess there was a question of whether or not this was used for Zen+ at all. Maybe that can get updated.


----------



## Regnitto

Time for me to finally join the party. Picked up a Ryzen 7 2700 on newegg for $149.99! I've had the system up and running since friday night. So far I've got 4.0ghz at 1.325v on the wraith spire cooler. Is that good or should i try to dial down the volts a little?


----------



## cssorkinman

Regnitto said:


> Time for me to finally join the party. Picked up a Ryzen 7 2700 on newegg for $149.99! I've had the system up and running since friday night. So far I've got 4.0ghz at 1.325v on the wraith spire cooler. Is that good or should i try to dial down the volts a little?



Thats much better than my 2700, its close to 1.4 volts at 4 ghz

Enjoy the new rig!


----------



## Regnitto

cssorkinman said:


> Thats much better than my 2700, its close to 1.4 volts at 4 ghz
> 
> Enjoy the new rig!


Oh, trust me, I am  Loving this thing. Huge improvement from my old i5 4690


----------



## yrelbirb

Hi, people i got my 2700x new  a dear friend of mine suggested these settings for my gigabyte b450 board,

cpu core ratio = 41
core voltage offset = +0.126
core boost = off

with these settings, cpu stays at stable 4.1 ghz and i like the performance so far and i dont need windows to downclock (idle temps 35 45 degrees so its fine for me)

my question is, my vcore average for 2 hours of gaming is 1.317v with peaks to 1.35 and minimums to 1.28.

is it safe to use the cpu like this? are these safe and expected voltage and frequencies for this chip? i aim to use my cpu for 4+ years so i would like to have it not degrade and have a longer life span and not degrade or get broken or etc. but in the same time get a little bit ouf of my cpu.

an extra question, ihave these rams,

https://n11scdn.akamaized.net/a1/45...-cmk16gx4m2b3200c16-ram__0347507025728143.jpg

i gave the rams 1.41 volt and i found its stable at 3200 mhz cl14-20-20-34. is it safe as well or should i stick with default 1.35v xmp?

soc voltage seems to be stable and static around 1.10 and 1.11


----------



## Minotaurtoo

yrelbirb said:


> Hi, people i got my 2700x new  a dear friend of mine suggested these settings for my gigabyte b450 board,
> 
> cpu core ratio = 41
> core voltage offset = +0.126
> core boost = off
> 
> with these settings, cpu stays at stable 4.1 ghz and i like the performance so far and i dont need windows to downclock (idle temps 35 45 degrees so its fine for me)
> 
> my question is, my vcore average for 2 hours of gaming is 1.317v with peaks to 1.35 and minimums to 1.28.
> 
> is it safe to use the cpu like this? are these safe and expected voltage and frequencies for this chip? i aim to use my cpu for 4+ years so i would like to have it not degrade and have a longer life span and not degrade or get broken or etc. but in the same time get a little bit ouf of my cpu.
> 
> an extra question, ihave these rams,
> 
> https://n11scdn.akamaized.net/a1/45...-cmk16gx4m2b3200c16-ram__0347507025728143.jpg
> 
> i gave the rams 1.41 volt and i found its stable at 3200 mhz cl14-20-20-34. is it safe as well or should i stick with default 1.35v xmp?
> 
> soc voltage seems to be stable and static around 1.10 and 1.11


bit of an eye infection here so if I make and missreads/typos please forgive... but I'd say you are pretty safe at those voltages... if I remember correctly 1.4 was suggested as a max limit... however I usually stuck below 1.38 for safety.

as for ram, sometimes more voltage can actually decrease stability... and vice versa... I'd test at xmp defaults first, if it's good you might try tightening timings or upping the frequency... use the ryzen dram calculotor (google it for latest version or someone else may have the link)

soc voltage I've found can be reduced usually for a power savings, but I don't think any harm will come from it being at 1.1v


----------



## MishelLngelo

yrelbirb said:


> Hi, people i got my 2700x new  a dear friend of mine suggested these settings for my gigabyte b450 board,
> 
> cpu core ratio = 41
> core voltage offset = +0.126
> core boost = off
> 
> with these settings, cpu stays at stable 4.1 ghz and i like the performance so far and i dont need windows to downclock (idle temps 35 45 degrees so its fine for me)
> 
> my question is, my vcore average for 2 hours of gaming is 1.317v with peaks to 1.35 and minimums to 1.28.
> 
> is it safe to use the cpu like this? are these safe and expected voltage and frequencies for this chip? i aim to use my cpu for 4+ years so i would like to have it not degrade and have a longer life span and not degrade or get broken or etc. but in the same time get a little bit ouf of my cpu.
> 
> an extra question, ihave these rams,
> 
> https://n11scdn.akamaized.net/a1/45...-cmk16gx4m2b3200c16-ram__0347507025728143.jpg
> 
> i gave the rams 1.41 volt and i found its stable at 3200 mhz cl14-20-20-34. is it safe as well or should i stick with default 1.35v xmp?
> 
> soc voltage seems to be stable and static around 1.10 and 1.11


Yes, that's very safe, just keep max and average high temps as low as possible.


----------



## yrelbirb

Minotaurtoo said:


> bit of an eye infection here so if I make and missreads/typos please forgive... but I'd say you are pretty safe at those voltages... if I remember correctly 1.4 was suggested as a max limit... however I usually stuck below 1.38 for safety.
> 
> as for ram, sometimes more voltage can actually decrease stability... and vice versa... I'd test at xmp defaults first, if it's good you might try tightening timings or upping the frequency... use the ryzen dram calculotor (google it for latest version or someone else may have the link)
> 
> soc voltage I've found can be reduced usually for a power savings, but I don't think any harm will come from it being at 1.1v



Thank you a lot my friend. Its great to hear from experienced peoples. :thumb:





MishelLngelo said:


> Yes, that's very safe, just keep max and average high temps as low as possible.


Yes, in prime95 cpu seems to be maxing out at 80 degrees and in gaming (i tried RDR 2 and ACdyssey for now), it seems to be around 50 60 degrees. I'm very happy overall with performance and thermals, i loved Ryzen alot, proud to be a part of this community as well :Snorkle:


----------



## deankenny

Having such a hard time with this chip, i've had it since not long after it's release paired with an Asus x470-f gaming board. After early problems, 100% constant fan speed and many other issues I slowly trickled them down, but 1 problem always bugs me and that's my temps and cpu package power vs other peoples 2700x.

On PE level 2, even with an undervolt of -0.1 running a cinebench r15 results in temps of 75c+ and even more worringly cpu package power exceeds 185w, which would explain the high temperature, I'm also running an AIO cooler in the kraken x62, which just makes all this even more frustrating. If I add more undervolt, I don't post, if I default the vcore then the temps are even higher of course. If I set PE level 1 I get some good looking temps of 60c under a cinebench run, but my score goes down to 1700 just under, cpu package power is much lower too at 120-140w. Whenever I see others results, their temps are usually below 70c scoring close to 1900 and cpu package power of around 150w seems to be everyone elses norm. I've been through many bios's and it's always the same.

This video is old now, but still applies today. I'm begging anyone for some help on this, as it's really got to me now.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aIA3WiwvKPs


----------



## deankenny

Having such a hard time with this chip, i've had it since not long after it's release paired with an Asus x470-f gaming board. After early problems, 100% constant fan speed and many other issues I slowly trickled them down, but 1 problem always bugs me and that's my temps and cpu package power vs other peoples 2700x.

On PE level 2, even with an undervolt of -0.1 running a cinebench r15 results in temps of 75c+ and even more worringly cpu package power exceeds 185w, which would explain the high temperature, I'm also running an AIO cooler in the kraken x62, which just makes all this even more frustrating. If I add more undervolt, I don't post, if I default the vcore then the temps are even higher of course. If I set PE level 1 I get some good looking temps of 60c under a cinebench run, but my score goes down to 1700 just under, cpu package power is much lower too at 120-140w. Whenever I see others results, their temps are usually below 70c scoring close to 1900 and cpu package power of around 150w seems to be everyone elses norm. I've been through many bios's and it's always the same.

This video is old now, but still applies today. I'm begging anyone for some help on this, as it's really got to me now.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aIA3WiwvKPs


----------



## Minotaurtoo

not sure what you are expecting out of the chip really... when I had one, I could easily see over 200w power draw to achieve mid 1900's cinebench R15 scores... I'm on a custom loop cooler and I even saw temps hitting in the 70's at that point... I usually ran mine with PBO enabled and a small undervolt then just let it do it's thing. With that I achieved a score of around 1850 and I usually saw power draw around 150w or so and temps in the low 60's then.. I'd be surprised if you could score 1900+ on one of them without having temps hitting at least near 70C... unless you were running an unstable overclock with voltage too low... that being said, I could run benches at significantly lower volts than what was actually stable and make my temps look better than they actually were.


----------



## deankenny

Don't get me wrong I expect it to use alot of power somewhere down the line during heavy use or gaming. But I am trying to do like for like comparisons, I know every system is different, but im talking about the norm of what most people see. So for example running 1 quick cinebench yields around 120-150 cpu package power on all the videos or screenshots that I have seen with similar scores to mine whereas my package power hits 186w. I see PE level 2 is one of the most popular options to choose, whereas when I choose this option, even with undervolting, I am 75c+ in temps and using hell alot of power/watts compared to other Level 2 users.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

deankenny said:


> Don't get me wrong I expect it to use alot of power somewhere down the line during heavy use or gaming. But I am trying to do like for like comparisons, I know every system is different, but im talking about the norm of what most people see. So for example running 1 quick cinebench yields around 120-150 cpu package power on all the videos or screenshots that I have seen with similar scores to mine whereas my package power hits 186w. I see PE level 2 is one of the most popular options to choose, whereas when I choose this option, even with undervolting, I am 75c+ in temps and using hell alot of power/watts compared to other Level 2 users.


have you tried an all core overclock? With my 2700x I was able to get an all core OC of 4.25ghz at around 1.4v, many could do it for less (vdroop was bad on my board for this chip)... since switching to the 3900x it's been a different world for me, I run out of "safe" voltage room way before power consumption or temps become an issue... I can't even get this chip to pull the same wattage my 2700x did staying within anything reasonable for voltages.


----------



## deankenny

I want to keep it at an offset rather than fixed.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

deankenny said:


> I want to keep it at an offset rather than fixed.


I understand, but it was more of a way of testing a theory... if you can do an all core OC at the same clocks or greater than your all core boost and it runs cooler then it is not the chip, but the board that's causing it to run warm... Thinking your board may be a bit to aggressive with the boost voltage when using the performance enhancer at that level.

reason for edit: forgot important conditions aka I'm an idiot.


----------



## deankenny

Minotaurtoo said:


> I understand, but it was more of a way of testing a theory... if you can do an all core OC at the same clocks or greater than your all core boost and it runs cooler then it is not the chip, but the board that's causing it to run warm... Thinking your board may be a bit to aggressive with the boost voltage when using the performance enhancer at that level.
> 
> reason for edit: forgot important conditions aka I'm an idiot.


I'm scoring 1902 on R15 now when putting it as real time priority. Reaching 73-74c. Actually think im happy with that even if package power is crazy. Real time scenarios most likely will not be like that of course.


----------



## The Sandman

deankenny said:


> Don't get me wrong I expect it to use alot of power somewhere down the line during heavy use or gaming. But I am trying to do like for like comparisons, I know every system is different, but im talking about the norm of what most people see. So for example running 1 quick cinebench yields around 120-150 cpu package power on all the videos or screenshots that I have seen with similar scores to mine whereas my package power hits 186w. I see PE level 2 is one of the most popular options to choose, whereas when I choose this option, even with undervolting, I am 75c+ in temps and using hell alot of power/watts compared to other Level 2 users.



I'm not sure what your system specs are as you don't have a rig sig filled out yet.
I understand your on a Kraken x62 (meh) but what about the rest such as case, fans etc.
Reason I ask is even with my custom loop with a EK monoblock I still run a 120mm (2000 rpm chocked down to 850 rpm normal running) behind the CPU socket.
It *will* make a difference in which multiplier system chooses during boot, and will also lower CPU temp.


Is Rad setup as intake? I run all three of my rads as intake (2 x 360s plus a 140mm).
How about case interior air flow? Anything to cool VRMs? When not running a tower cooler you remove any/all direct air flow to cool VRMs.
When I ran a FX9590 I *HAD* to have active cooling on both sides of socket to tame that animal (remember those days @Minotaurtoo hahaha).


I always had real good luck running PE3 with Auto Vcore (Offset + mode) and Auto CPU LLC which always ended up at 42x (4200MHz) @ 1.250v SV12 TFN under load running ITB AVX version.
Imho sounds like you need to work on thermals/airflow.
As for that negative offset to lower temps, it might not be the case here but I have found that sometimes lowering voltage can add heat/strain to system.
For me sometimes adding voltage actually lowered temps, I know it sounds crazy, but you won't know till you've tested it.


What memory kit are you running? Those are way less than optimum timings for 3200MHz. Not able to make suggestions without system info.


----------



## deankenny

Memory is on 3400mhz now and tighter timings, and seems to be stable so far, 48 hours system uptime with gaming use.










As for case, yes rad is on intake. Bearing in mind I've done all the same testing with side panel off etc with no drastic change.


























Those are older pics, i have new exhaust fans and new cables for gpu, but pretty much remains the same.


----------



## yrelbirb

Hi people, i've yet again made some changes on my 2700x overclock

i was 1.32v 4.1 ghz and tried some undervolting

currently i'm down to 1.265v at 4.1 ghz 

https://prnt.sc/rpacxu

currently im at a 7 hours of blend test and its still going strong (i know vrm temps are toasty, in gaming its tend to hover around 50 55 degrees though)

can it be expected to hit 4.1 ghz at this voltage?

also i saw that it my vcore drops to 1.248 and sometimes jumped to 1.32. is this an acceptable vdroop? sadly gigabyte board doesn't have any llc option

here's my cpu temps as well;

https://prnt.sc/rpaei6

also; is blend test can be consired a good stability along with my RAM?

my timings goes like this; https://prnt.sc/rpagzr

(not sure about tRAS. some say it should be tCL+tRCD+tRP. some say tCL+tRCD+2. im stable at both values but latency is same. some say it can hurt performance in some cases when tRAS is set to low. no idea on that


----------



## The Sandman

yrelbirb said:


> Hi people, i've yet again made some changes on my 2700x overclock
> 
> i was 1.32v 4.1 ghz and tried some undervolting
> 
> currently i'm down to 1.265v at 4.1 ghz
> 
> https://prnt.sc/rpacxu
> 
> currently im at a 7 hours of blend test and its still going strong (i know vrm temps are toasty, in gaming its tend to hover around 50 55 degrees though)
> 
> can it be expected to hit 4.1 ghz at this voltage?
> 
> also i saw that it my vcore drops to 1.248 and sometimes jumped to 1.32. is this an acceptable vdroop? sadly gigabyte board doesn't have any llc option
> 
> here's my cpu temps as well;
> 
> https://prnt.sc/rpaei6
> 
> also; is blend test can be consired a good stability along with my RAM?
> 
> my timings goes like this; https://prnt.sc/rpagzr
> 
> (not sure about tRAS. some say it should be tCL+tRCD+tRP. some say tCL+tRCD+2. im stable at both values but latency is same. some say it can hurt performance in some cases when tRAS is set to low. no idea on that



The most accurate CPU Voltage reading will be from SVI2 TFN which is reporting the voltage the VRM controller is seeing (not the Vcore value under ITE IT8686E header). 
source: https://www.overclock.net/forum/25889679-post1.html

Add active cooling for the VRMs. An old case fan with zip ties mounted very close will help a lot. If your case has the option, adding another fan behind the mobo blowing on the back side on the CPU socket and VRM area will also lower temps. You have to think that going under h2o you've removed a lot of the internal case air flow which should be replaced. My VRMs rarely see 50c under load as an example. It all adds up, more heat requires more power, more power makes more heat.

Prime95 Blend is alright but is not the final answer by any means. 

Here is how "The Stilt" recommends to run P95 on Ryzen.

"For testing Zen's stability I highly recommend using Prime95 28.10 version, with custom FFT config (Min & Max = 128, with run FFTs in place selected). The other versions or settings I've tested do not stress the CPU properly (the resulting power draw is around 70% of the real maximum). I haven't checked the most recent beta versions thou. Also Linpack is a rather poor stability test, since it won't sustain high stress levels very long / constantly, unless you use extremely large problem sizes (requiring more than 16GB of RAM). In addition regardless the problem size Linpack idles around 20% of the time required for the total computation, while allocating memory."Source: https://www.overclock.net/forum/26265802-post25177.html

I like running P95 with a "Custom" run using 90% memory after a bit of Blend. 

Before I get into P95 I use IBT AVX version found here https://www.overclock.net/attachments/13202 to help find the easy instabilities a little faster.
Source:https://www.overclock.net/forum/10-...cial-fx-8320-fx-8350-vishera-owners-club.html 

Y-Cruncher is another good test utility I recommend.
Memory should be tested with HCI MemTest (free, but Pro version is more user friendly) and /or Karhu RamTest ($10.00 but worth it imho) I use both.

As for the Vdroop you mentioned, if this was noticed while running P95 it's very possible it is just the difference in the load P95 creates. It is not a constant load and will vary. To a point this fluctuation is normal and intended.

Will yours run stable 4.1 @ 1,265v...? Maybe but I wouldn't hold my breath at this point. Depends which value you're calling 1.265v to actually be. Your current snip is showing Vcore of 1.154v for SV12 TFN. To me this is low and probably hurting performance.

Also be sure to read CPU Tdie for temp.

This is how my setup looks at 4.2GHz (PE3 OC) running P95 with 90% memory utilized to give you something to gauge against.


----------



## rares495

deankenny said:


> Memory is on 3400mhz now and tighter timings, and seems to be stable so far, 48 hours system uptime with gaming use.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As for case, yes rad is on intake. Bearing in mind I've done all the same testing with side panel off etc with no drastic change.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Those are older pics, i have new exhaust fans and new cables for gpu, but pretty much remains the same.


The GPU cables in the last image are horrible. Eww.


----------



## deankenny

I knew it, why I always got to lose the silicon lottery, FFS!!!!


----------



## The Sandman

deankenny said:


> I knew it, why I always got to lose the silicon lottery, FFS!!!!



You have to remember especially while running a PE OC it's all about the cooling solution being there at boot.
This is when the system determines which multiplier to apply based off thermals. 

My setup has a mono block plus a Noctua NF-A12x25 PWM (2000 rpm) mounted directly behind the CPU/VRM inside of the right cover and as system boots 
it's real close to max rpm before going silent at 900 rpm. Add this to 3 rads and a D5 and things do act a little more friendly.

If it where me I wouldn't be so quick to judge the chip but perhaps take notice of how much things may change by lowering temps.
I really don't feel my chip is anything special trust me. Here's another snip, (previous snip was 100 Bclk) same test but with my current OC using a 101.8 Bclk.
Notice the difference in the multiplier/Vcore and "Intake Air Temp" between snips?


----------



## umeng2002

Silicone lottery on these chips is like playing Cash 3 instead of Powerball.


----------



## yrelbirb

The Sandman said:


> The most accurate CPU Voltage reading will be from SVI2 TFN which is reporting the voltage the VRM controller is seeing (not the Vcore value under ITE IT8686E header).
> source: https://www.overclock.net/forum/25889679-post1.html
> 
> Add active cooling for the VRMs. An old case fan with zip ties mounted very close will help a lot. If your case has the option, adding another fan behind the mobo blowing on the back side on the CPU socket and VRM area will also lower temps. You have to think that going under h2o you've removed a lot of the internal case air flow which should be replaced. My VRMs rarely see 50c under load as an example. It all adds up, more heat requires more power, more power makes more heat.
> 
> Prime95 Blend is alright but is not the final answer by any means.
> 
> Here is how "The Stilt" recommends to run P95 on Ryzen.
> 
> "For testing Zen's stability I highly recommend using Prime95 28.10 version, with custom FFT config (Min & Max = 128, with run FFTs in place selected). The other versions or settings I've tested do not stress the CPU properly (the resulting power draw is around 70% of the real maximum). I haven't checked the most recent beta versions thou. Also Linpack is a rather poor stability test, since it won't sustain high stress levels very long / constantly, unless you use extremely large problem sizes (requiring more than 16GB of RAM). In addition regardless the problem size Linpack idles around 20% of the time required for the total computation, while allocating memory."Source: https://www.overclock.net/forum/26265802-post25177.html
> 
> I like running P95 with a "Custom" run using 90% memory after a bit of Blend.
> 
> Before I get into P95 I use IBT AVX version found here https://www.overclock.net/attachments/13202 to help find the easy instabilities a little faster.
> Source:https://www.overclock.net/forum/10-...cial-fx-8320-fx-8350-vishera-owners-club.html
> 
> Y-Cruncher is another good test utility I recommend.
> Memory should be tested with HCI MemTest (free, but Pro version is more user friendly) and /or Karhu RamTest ($10.00 but worth it imho) I use both.
> 
> As for the Vdroop you mentioned, if this was noticed while running P95 it's very possible it is just the difference in the load P95 creates. It is not a constant load and will vary. To a point this fluctuation is normal and intended.
> 
> Will yours run stable 4.1 @ 1,265v...? Maybe but I wouldn't hold my breath at this point. Depends which value you're calling 1.265v to actually be. Your current snip is showing Vcore of 1.154v for SV12 TFN. To me this is low and probably hurting performance.
> 
> Also be sure to read CPU Tdie for temp.
> 
> This is how my setup looks at 4.2GHz (PE3 OC) running P95 with 90% memory utilized to give you something to gauge against.



its a gigabyte mobo bug, when an offset is set hwinfo reads the SV12 TFN voltage wrong (without offset)

my cpu Tdie maxes out at 80 degrees in alot of heavy stress tests and in gaming 55-60 degrees

same for vrm, it maxes out at 85 90 degrees but in gaming its usually around 45-60 degrees

i just stress test to make sure its stable, i dont plan on using any cpu intensive applications in near future (so gaming wise, vrm temps fine for me).  any thoughts on that? am i wrong to think like this_?

i cant downloda prime95 28.10  

ftp://mersenne.org/gimps/p95v2810.win64.zip

site is unreacheble

---

i upped the voltage offset +0.90 just to be sure though

i also added manually +0.09 offset to hwinfo sv2 tfn reading. it seems to be accurate along with vcore;

https://prnt.sc/rq1kzi

i started ibt maximum stress test i will do 10 runs (i guess?) and return with results

10 runs passed;

https://prnt.sc/rq2hjn

i know vrms are toasty and wiill add a modification for them in future but for now i think its stable_? for gaming at least. highest i see in ac odiyssey and battlefield 5 was 60 degrees (vrm s)


----------



## deankenny

You know what, instead of always worrying about the temp, I'm just going to leave it and not even look at temps, I know for sure when gaming hard I barely see it above the 60s, and I'm sure there's no danger there, if I can stop worrying and caring so much I can just go enjoy my computer.


----------



## rdr09

deankenny said:


> You know what, instead of always worrying about the temp, I'm just going to leave it and not even look at temps, I know for sure when gaming hard I barely see it above the 60s, and I'm sure there's no danger there, if I can stop worrying and caring so much I can just go enjoy my computer.


I agree.


----------



## The Sandman

yrelbirb said:


> its a gigabyte mobo bug, when an offset is set hwinfo reads the SV12 TFN voltage wrong (without offset)
> 
> my cpu Tdie maxes out at 80 degrees in alot of heavy stress tests and in gaming 55-60 degrees
> 
> same for vrm, it maxes out at 85 90 degrees but in gaming its usually around 45-60 degrees
> 
> i just stress test to make sure its stable, i dont plan on using any cpu intensive applications in near future (so gaming wise, vrm temps fine for me).  any thoughts on that? am i wrong to think like this_?
> 
> i cant downloda prime95 28.10
> 
> ftp://mersenne.org/gimps/p95v2810.win64.zip
> 
> site is unreacheble
> 
> ---
> 
> i upped the voltage offset +0.90 just to be sure though
> 
> i also added manually +0.09 offset to hwinfo sv2 tfn reading. it seems to be accurate along with vcore;
> 
> https://prnt.sc/rq1kzi
> 
> i started ibt maximum stress test i will do 10 runs (i guess?) and return with results
> 
> 10 runs passed;
> 
> https://prnt.sc/rq2hjn
> 
> i know vrms are toasty and wiill add a modification for them in future but for now i think its stable_? for gaming at least. highest i see in ac odiyssey and battlefield 5 was 60 degrees (vrm s)


Was not aware of the Giga bug thanks for sharing. I honestly can't keep all the bugs/manf are having straight. My C6H is real bad on the Super IO Chip granularity which is about the opposite, most all voltage values are off under the WMI header and need to be offset in HWInfo using a DMM lol. 

For gaming etc you should be okay at those temps. Iirc most VRM's max closer to 110c. Lower is always better, especially if you're riding the edge.

Prime95 v28.1 attached below if you're interested :thumb:

Good you passed IBT! Makes a good start. Sad part is there's always more to the story.
IBT is old as dinosaur poop (Linpack) and now-a-days all I use it for is a quick tune before the longer runs that P95.
While you did actually "Pass" the test this is what I see:

Notice how your values in the "Time" and "Speed" column vary? Might be due to back ground processes (*always* minimize these during a stress test) while they are nothing more than a reference they do aid in optimizing an OC.
You'll find that the more balanced (finer tuned) your OC is these values will flatten out thus saving time as test time is much shorter in IBT.
All this helps make P95 less work time wise. Hope this makes some sense. 

Compare my IBT snip to yours and you'll see more of what I mean. This OC currently passes 6hrs RamTest, 90 minuts Y-Cruncher, 4 hrs HCI, countless hrs of P95 both 128/128 and w/90% mem. 
Note: rather than Maximum I use "Custom" using 13350MB (90%) for 16GB of memory.


----------



## yrelbirb

Thank you, i will be continuing tests on my cpu

yes, ibt results are varied bcoz i continued to use my pc (a bad habit i guess)

i will sleep and leave the pc to p95 with your suggested settings ,

--

SORRy, couldnt do what i said, slept forgetting test

tried prime95 with your custom settings but vrm temps worried me a bit.

https://prnt.sc/rr0b9m

i think for me 20 min is enough  i will try intel burn test again though and see if its balanced and stable (when not using computer)


----------



## hazium233

yrelbirb said:


> (not sure about tRAS. some say it should be tCL+tRCD+tRP. some say tCL+tRCD+2. im stable at both values but latency is same. some say it can hurt performance in some cases when tRAS is set to low. no idea on that


So tRAS is the delay from a row activate command to the precharge command.

tRP is the delay from a precharge command until the next activate command in the bank.

For precharge to be issued after a read, both tRAS and tRTP (read to precharge delay) must expire. After a write, both tRAS and tWR (write recovery) must have expired.

The point of this is that tRP delay always occurs after tRAS, so a formula for tRAS with tRP in it is not right.

The second formula is someone trying to use activate to read (tRCDRD), then tCL (read to data burst), and then minimum burst length (2 clocks for four bits, BC4). It is unclear to me how often these controllers use BC4, since longer burst lengths are more efficient over time (BL8, 8 bits, four clocks). But in any case, DDR4 can precharge before a read is completed, but cannot do this with a write. Time from activate to precharge with a single write would be tRCDWR+tCWL+4+tWR, but it really doesn't matter if tRAS is less than this because you will be waiting on tWR before precharge.


----------



## Veii

What might have been ment for the longer tRAS formular is tRCD+tWR+tBL - where BL equals to either 4 or 2 
The direct response for tRAS would be tCL+tRCD
tCL+tRCD+2 heard of it once, but like @hazium233 wonderfully explained, it's awkward to use it
Normally lowering tRAS under tRCD+tCL will only have negative effects, unless you time it perfectly with the 3 parts formula above
But this one is abusing forced precharging and will 100% fail if unused latency is somewhere in the "loop"
* soo only to be used at the far end when you can't touch anything else anymore


----------



## yrelbirb

https://prnt.sc/rusq7h

this is completely stock, no voltage offset, just core boost enabled.

game is heroes of storm .known to put only 2 cores at load.

constant 1.4v, not ok.

i'm starting to consider to return my cpu. it seems like amd has designed in a way that it will degrade expire in a few years. i mean if i play this game non stop, it will run at 1.4v non stop. 
---

isnt there a way to STOP single core boosting?? jisnt there a way to cap maximum gboost frequency at 4 ghz? 

i dont want to close hwinfo and amd robert guy tells me to close hwinfo bcuz it will make my cpu boost to 1.4v non stop in short bursts. i just dont want to. its simple as that. cpu should not have hindered my ability to open a basic program like hwinfo. XD

i dont undertsand the logic behind giving cpu absurd voltages like 1.47 just to open mspaint with a boost of 4350 mhz.

:thumbsdow


----------



## MishelLngelo

yrelbirb said:


> https://prnt.sc/rusq7h
> 
> this is completely stock, no voltage offset, just core boost enabled.
> 
> game is heroes of storm .known to put only 2 cores at load.
> 
> constant 1.4v, not ok.
> 
> i'm starting to consider to return my cpu. it seems like amd has designed in a way that it will degrade expire in a few years. i mean if i play this game non stop, it will run at 1.4v non stop.
> ---
> 
> isnt there a way to STOP single core boosting?? jisnt there a way to cap maximum gboost frequency at 4 ghz?
> 
> i dont want to close hwinfo and amd robert guy tells me to close hwinfo bcuz it will make my cpu boost to 1.4v non stop in short bursts. i just dont want to. its simple as that. cpu should not have hindered my ability to open a basic program like hwinfo. XD
> 
> i dont undertsand the logic behind giving cpu absurd voltages like 1.47 just to open mspaint with a boost of 4350 mhz.
> 
> :thumbsdow


It's BIOS doing that, CPU is just doing what it's told to. OS is the one that decides which core to boost and how much. As for voltage try negative offset of about 0.05 - 0.1v.


----------



## yrelbirb

MishelLngelo said:


> It's BIOS doing that, CPU is just doing what it's told to. OS is the one that decides which core to boost and how much. As for voltage try negative offset of about 0.05 - 0.1v.


you actually mean me to say if i use it like this, cpu will degrade? why do you suggest me to put negative offset? i have nothing against offset but why do i need to in the first place, why cant it be plug and play?


----------



## MishelLngelo

yrelbirb said:


> you actually mean me to say if i use it like this, cpu will degrade? why do you suggest me to put negative offset? i have nothing against offset but why do i need to in the first place, why cant it be plug and play?


That you have to ask company that made MB and BIOS but most of them put voltage higher than it could and should be in the name of "stability".


----------



## yrelbirb

so how do i test out the "stability" of the said undervolt?

how can i make sure it is both stable at high workloads and light workloads? 

, i want to try -0.090 offset but dont know actual ways to test my stability everyone suggests some different thing so im confused here some say linpack some say ibt some say occdt some say prime95... in the same time they advise you to not overclock so that i dont need stress tests, but in the same time they say offset so...

that should i expect or aim? 

even though i undervolt theres no way to cap the boost still at 4 ghz?


----------



## MishelLngelo

Just run some benchmarks like Cinebench r20 https://www.techspot.com/downloads/6709-cinebench.html
and or Passmark https://www.passmark.com/products/performancetest/download.php
few times in a row, that should be enough. 
Alternative to letting it boost by itself you could set multiplier to 40 so you have steady 4GHz and with is set voltage also manually, shouldn't take more than 1.3v or less.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

personally I wouldn't worry about it... this has been hashed over a few times and the only official word I've seen from AMD reps is that the cpu will not degrade it's self at stock settings... they said it's designed to run at those types of voltages under those loads... I pushed mine pretty hard and it was still ok, thought it had degraded, but turned out to be a software issue... and it hit voltages in the 1.5 + range when only loading a couple cores... so yeah, you'd likely be just fine, besides it comes with a nice warranty and by the time that warranty runs out, the latest greatest stuff today will be dirt cheap.


----------



## yrelbirb

i guess i have to trust you guys  but if anything happens on auto and with some negative offset, be sure that i will be one of the bigest amd haters that the internet will see , posting amd hating posts from my old crusty pentium p7450 intel laptop XD (joking). 

really though, i've used a couple of cpus in my life, always monitored such stuff. never broken stuff anyways. but never seen such voltage levels in any other cpus (cpus i used; pentium e1500, athlon x2 250 for a little bit of time; fx 6300 (amd brand, no such voltage issues with a low end asus board); 

some days i miss my fx 6300 wish i could just get it back and just slap a gtx 1060 on it and play 30 40 fps and be okay with it. maybe i shouldnt ve meddled with new generation no ideas though (still performance leap huge.. fx 6300 really gg in new games  )

,, i love amd in geeneral, thanks to them we get better budget cpus ; i got this cpu for 150* dollars after all (; very cheap i know thats why i pulled trigger))

still ; being in a third world country doesn't help much. i endured the dreaded fx 6300 till 6 years, believe me, it was crap after 2018 games but i endured. i just want long life out of my parts; thats why im anxious a bit. im sure 2700x will last longer than fx 6300 or fx 8350 for that matter (they were bad when they came out but very cheap here again) ;; i never overclocked it, always left at auto. cpu temps and voltages were in check. cpu still working btw; gave it to my dear friend  he play csgo, he's fine as well. thx fx 6300 

so pardon my tone ; i simply dont have the luxury of cycling pc parts every 2-3 or 4 years. i usually go 5-6 or 7 years with them (as in fx chip. if i had a i5 4460 from that era, i would still not upgrade and hold on to my chip. i know from my friend. he always had more fps and still has compared to fx 6300. i still dread the day i got fx 6300 instead of i5 4460 ((it was of course a bit more expensive. but it made its more expensiveness count over the years))

i even refrained from overclocking; i just want to use my cpu at stock. i think im safe Mobo wise, (vrm thermals are in check 50 55 degree) and want it last long... like fx 6300 did!

edit: wrong dollar conversion


----------



## Minotaurtoo

yrelbirb said:


> i guess i have to trust you guys  but if anything happens on auto and with some negative offset, be sure that i will be one of the bigest amd haters that the internet will see , posting amd hating posts from my old crusty pentium p7450 intel laptop XD (joking).
> 
> really though, i've used a couple of cpus in my life, always monitored such stuff. never broken stuff anyways. but never seen such voltage levels in any other cpus (cpus i used; pentium e1500, athlon x2 250 for a little bit of time; fx 6300 (amd brand, no such voltage issues with a low end asus board);
> 
> some days i miss my fx 6300 wish i could just get it back and just slap a gtx 1060 on it and play 30 40 fps and be okay with it. maybe i shouldnt ve meddled with new generation no ideas though (still performance leap huge.. fx 6300 really gg in new games  )
> 
> ,, i love amd in geeneral, thanks to them we get better budget cpus ; i got this cpu for 150* dollars after all (; very cheap i know thats why i pulled trigger))
> 
> still ; being in a third world country doesn't help much. i endured the dreaded fx 6300 till 6 years, believe me, it was crap after 2018 games but i endured. i just want long life out of my parts; thats why im anxious a bit. im sure 2700x will last longer than fx 6300 or fx 8350 for that matter (they were bad when they came out but very cheap here again) ;; i never overclocked it, always left at auto. cpu temps and voltages were in check. cpu still working btw; gave it to my dear friend  he play csgo, he's fine as well. thx fx 6300
> 
> so pardon my tone ; i simply dont have the luxury of cycling pc parts every 2-3 or 4 years. i usually go 5-6 or 7 years with them (as in fx chip. if i had a i5 4460 from that era, i would still not upgrade and hold on to my chip. i know from my friend. he always had more fps and still has compared to fx 6300. i still dread the day i got fx 6300 instead of i5 4460 ((it was of course a bit more expensive. but it made its more expensiveness count over the years))
> 
> i even refrained from overclocking; i just want to use my cpu at stock. i think im safe Mobo wise, (vrm thermals are in check 50 55 degree) and want it last long... like fx 6300 did!
> 
> edit: wrong dollar conversion


I understand that, I generally don't do a "full" upgrade often either... that's how I end up with some 12 year old parts mixed with some new parts lol... I generally sell my old hardware to regain some of the money, my son is getting my 2700x... I'm now running a 3900x in the same board I started out with a 1700 non x part... funny part is, the 3900x uses more power at idle, and a little more power at stock with a load... but when overclocked I can't even get this thing to pull the kind of power my old 1700 would pull... I hit the "unsafe" voltage point before it pulls much over 160w....my 1700 would pull just over 200w at its safe voltage limit... My 2700x would pull nearly 200w at 1.42v when I pushed it doing an all core OC... however, I went back and just did a custom PBO setting... that would push single core to 4.35 and hold all cores over 4.1 under pretty heavy loads pulling just over 160w

My son is retiring another of my old chips to get that 2700x... an old 9590fx that I used daily at over 5ghz.. usually 5.117 in the winter and 5.013 in summer... but it could hit over 5.4... 

TLDR, 
I've always pushed my cpu's harder than I should have...nervously at first and carelessly later lol, never had one die early... even still have an old phenom cpu I use in my retro gaming build and it's still overclocked... generally unless you are doing all core OC's with high/borderline voltages and leaving it on 24/7 or pushing insane voltages for benchmarks... you should be fine for years to come.... 

Running an undervolt though could help in performance, but one thing to note, precision boost will generally just push it to higher clocks and thus back to the same volts with the exception of your max voltage reached for single core boost.... and most 2700x chips I've seen could easily handle a -.075 offset... a quick run of OCCT with linepack could tell you if it's stable or not... either that or prime 95 with small fft's.... or you could just run it and if weirdness or crashes happen put it back to stock lol


----------



## MishelLngelo

It's not all about voltage alone, other things like power load and temperature are more important. Who was with PCs since beginning would remember when CPUs were using 3.3v or more but had none or just some elementary heat sink. 
Some of them are still working. I have a friend that uses a 386sx as a controller for wood mill band saw. Changed MB twice and still keeps one as reserve. CPU is still as new (3.3v).


----------



## Minotaurtoo

MishelLngelo said:


> It's not all about voltage alone, other things like power load and temperature are more important. Who was with PCs since beginning would remember when CPUs were using 3.3v or more but had none or just some elementary heat sink.
> Some of them are still working. I have a friend that uses a 386sx as a controller for wood mill band saw. Changed MB twice and still keeps one as reserve. CPU is still as new (3.3v).


Absolutely right... a lot of voltage limit is about process node, I had 3 different FX chips and 1 of them was a poor clocker... took 1.55v to hold 4.8ghz, and it ran there it's whole life here and was sold to a friend who is still running it at those settings... 

I remember very well the old chips lol... my first PC had a 386DX cpu.. ( I think I remembered that right)... like you said, temps, amperage and workload also make a huge difference... The safe static voltage limit has really dropped on the latest node...


----------



## yrelbirb

here's a game sample with stock boost with -0.048 offset ;






average vcore after game; 1.392v (svi2 tfn) 1.398 (vcore) from hw info.

so you mean to say, even though i play this game alot, this cpu can still 5 years with voltages like this?

its clear that its not in short bursts, but its constant (you can see from video, its not possible that its short burst. cpu clock always 4150 mhz and load on that core is %80-90)

im still not convinced... everyone says constant cpu safe voltage is 1.35v and its okay to have 1.35v+ voltages for short bursts

you can observe the video; voltage never goes below 1.35v always 1.35v+ and usually 1.38-1.4 (averaged by a 1.39)


----------



## MishelLngelo

yrelbirb said:


> here's a game sample with stock boost with -0.048 offset ;
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jA2U5AolI2E
> 
> average vcore after game; 1.392v (svi2 tfn) 1.398 (vcore) from hw info.
> 
> so you mean to say, even though i play this game alot, this cpu can still 5 years with voltages like this?
> 
> its clear that its not in short bursts, but its constant (you can see from video, its not possible that its short burst. cpu clock always 4150 mhz and load on that core is %80-90)
> 
> im still not convinced... everyone says constant cpu safe voltage is 1.35v and its okay to have 1.35v+ voltages for short bursts
> 
> you can observe the video; voltage never goes below 1.35v always 1.35v+ and usually 1.38-1.4 (averaged by a 1.39)


I don't know what would convince you that it's safe if you don't want to believe, that's your to decide. Just remember that it's not an Intel, it's made to work at those voltages.


----------



## yrelbirb

meh i give up

i just want to apologise in general for clogging the discussion. it seems that my fears wont calm down and its not you people's fault. i should've researched better maybe... sorry for everything

returning the cpu asap. it would be best practice i guess

i will wait for new 6/12 i5s i guess

--

i also accept the fact that maybe my mobo is bad quality and not enough for the cpu. but without overclock i thought i could get by, i was mistaken. i made a mistake and i accept my mistake. sorry for misconvenience

--


----------



## cssorkinman

yrelbirb said:


> here's a game sample with stock boost with -0.048 offset ;
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jA2U5AolI2E
> 
> average vcore after game; 1.392v (svi2 tfn) 1.398 (vcore) from hw info.
> 
> so you mean to say, even though i play this game alot, this cpu can still 5 years with voltages like this?
> 
> its clear that its not in short bursts, but its constant (you can see from video, its not possible that its short burst. cpu clock always 4150 mhz and load on that core is %80-90)
> 
> im still not convinced... everyone says constant cpu safe voltage is 1.35v and its okay to have 1.35v+ voltages for short bursts
> 
> you can observe the video; voltage never goes below 1.35v always 1.35v+ and usually 1.38-1.4 (averaged by a 1.39)


Fwiw, I've been running my 1800X at 1.52 V + since may of 2017- no signs of degradation. I do have excellent cooling however.


----------



## yrelbirb

cssorkinman said:


> Fwiw, I've been running my 1800X at 1.52 V + since may of 2017- no signs of degradation. I do have excellent cooling however.


well you can see from video, cpu temp is not over 50 degree, vrm temp 44 45 degree (okay i guess)

so like veii said, high constant voltage is safe with relatively low temps_?


----------



## MishelLngelo

yrelbirb said:


> well you can see from video, cpu temp is not over 50 degree, vrm temp 44 45 degree (okay i guess)
> 
> so like veii said, high constant voltage is safe with relatively low temps_?


50c is not relatively good but great temperature. 62-65c is still good for best PBO and max temp is 95c.


----------



## cssorkinman

yrelbirb said:


> well you can see from video, cpu temp is not over 50 degree, vrm temp 44 45 degree (okay i guess)
> 
> so like veii said, high constant voltage is safe with relatively low temps_?



Those numbers look good to me but in the end it's your decision.


----------



## deepor

yrelbirb said:


> well you can see from video, cpu temp is not over 50 degree, vrm temp 44 45 degree (okay i guess)
> 
> so like veii said, high constant voltage is safe with relatively low temps_?



AMD has a system named "FIT" that controls the voltage and is supposed to make everything safe. There are many sensors distributed across the CPU that measure what's happening in different areas. The FIT machinery tries to use the highest voltage it can, and that's why you see the scary voltages. It thinks that everything is safe. When it thinks there's something dangerous going on, it will reduce voltage. You should for example see a much lower voltage if you run prime95 or you encode a video with Handbrake or if the temperature is much higher than your 50°C example.




yrelbirb said:


> here's a game sample with stock boost with -0.048 offset ;
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jA2U5AolI2E
> 
> average vcore after game; 1.392v (svi2 tfn) 1.398 (vcore) from hw info.
> 
> [...]


Do you know if that -0.048V is the best offset you can use? Did you try using something much lower like -0.08V or -0.1V and that didn't work?


----------



## man from atlantis

Batman Arkham Knight is on Steam sale atm, if you still haven't played it yet, now it may be the time to give it a try.

Settings:

[email protected], 3200MHz CL16, AVG 165FPS -100
[email protected], 3200MHz CL14 XMP, AVG 165FPS -100%
[email protected], 3200MHz CL12, AVG 186FPS -113%
[email protected], 3466MHz CL14, AVG 186FPS -113%
[email protected], 3600MHz CL14, AVG 190FPS -115%

Subtimings
3200MHz CL16 Timings , vDIMM at1.35V
3200MHz CL14 XMP Timings , vDIMM at1.35V
3200MHz CL12 Timings , vDIMM at1.48V
3466MHz CL14 Timings , vDIMM at1.44V
3600MHz CL14 Timings , vDIMM at1.50V

AIDA64 Latency results:
3200MHz CL16 Timings
3200MHz CL14 XMP Timings
3200MHz CL12 Timings
3466MHz CL14 Timings
3600MHz CL14 Timings

Rig:
https://pcpartpicker.com/list/FPGphg
https://abload.de/img/img_20190511_212317wzk5c.jpg

Check out my other tests: https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/fxufb9/2700x_memory_scaling_batman_arkham_knight/


----------



## yrelbirb

man from atlantis said:


> Batman Arkham Knight is on Steam sale atm, if you still haven't played it yet, now it may be the time to give it a try.
> 
> Settings:
> 
> [email protected], 3200MHz CL16, AVG 165FPS -100
> [email protected], 3200MHz CL14 XMP, AVG 165FPS -100%
> [email protected], 3200MHz CL12, AVG 186FPS -113%
> [email protected], 3466MHz CL14, AVG 186FPS -113%
> [email protected], 3600MHz CL14, AVG 190FPS -115%
> 
> Subtimings
> 3200MHz CL16 Timings , vDIMM at1.35V
> 3200MHz CL14 XMP Timings , vDIMM at1.35V
> 3200MHz CL12 Timings , vDIMM at1.48V
> 3466MHz CL14 Timings , vDIMM at1.44V
> 3600MHz CL14 Timings , vDIMM at1.50V
> 
> AIDA64 Latency results:
> 3200MHz CL16 Timings
> 3200MHz CL14 XMP Timings
> 3200MHz CL12 Timings
> 3466MHz CL14 Timings
> 3600MHz CL14 Timings
> 
> Rig:
> https://pcpartpicker.com/list/FPGphg
> https://abload.de/img/img_20190511_212317wzk5c.jpg
> 
> Check out my other tests: https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/fxufb9/2700x_memory_scaling_batman_arkham_knight/


Heyy Atlantis, hello;; i knew you from your old reddit posts. your benchmarks gave me inspiration to tweak my rams and thx to you i managed to get some extra performance out of my games 

i've arkham knight on epic games; i will try some benching on my own as welll (with my weird 3200 14-20-14-34-56 kit). i will try non-pbo benchmark, pbo benchmark and 1.25v 4 ghz static benchmarks and see how game reacts :specool: and we would see how those speeds fare against 4.3 ghz


----------



## man from atlantis

yrelbirb said:


> Heyy Atlantis, hello;; i knew you from your old reddit posts. your benchmarks gave me inspiration to tweak my rams and thx to you i managed to get some extra performance out of my games
> 
> i've arkham knight on epic games; i will try some benching on my own as welll (with my weird 3200 14-20-14-34-56 kit). i will try non-pbo benchmark, pbo benchmark and 1.25v 4 ghz static benchmarks and see how game reacts :specool: and we would see how those speeds fare against 4.3 ghz


I'm using 102MHz PBO and 3466MHz CL14 on daily as well, since it stays on safe voltages (1.375V on load). It's just a shy slower than 3600CL14, 4300MHz.

[email protected] BCLK PBO, 3466MHz CL14, AVG 186FPS -113%


----------



## rdr09

man from atlantis said:


> Batman Arkham Knight is on Steam sale atm, if you still haven't played it yet, now it may be the time to give it a try.
> 
> Settings:
> 
> [email protected], 3200MHz CL16, AVG 165FPS -100
> [email protected], 3200MHz CL14 XMP, AVG 165FPS -100%
> [email protected], 3200MHz CL12, AVG 186FPS -113%
> [email protected], 3466MHz CL14, AVG 186FPS -113%
> [email protected], 3600MHz CL14, AVG 190FPS -115%
> 
> Subtimings
> 3200MHz CL16 Timings , vDIMM at1.35V
> 3200MHz CL14 XMP Timings , vDIMM at1.35V
> 3200MHz CL12 Timings , vDIMM at1.48V
> 3466MHz CL14 Timings , vDIMM at1.44V
> 3600MHz CL14 Timings , vDIMM at1.50V
> 
> AIDA64 Latency results:
> 3200MHz CL16 Timings
> 3200MHz CL14 XMP Timings
> 3200MHz CL12 Timings
> 3466MHz CL14 Timings
> 3600MHz CL14 Timings
> 
> Rig:
> https://pcpartpicker.com/list/FPGphg
> https://abload.de/img/img_20190511_212317wzk5c.jpg
> 
> Check out my other tests: https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/fxufb9/2700x_memory_scaling_batman_arkham_knight/


Yes, that 3466 CL14 is ideal for Gen 1 and 1+. That 3200 CL12 is quite interesting. Never really tried that. Might be easier to achieve on non B-die kits. Same performance as the 3466 CL14.

Would you recommend that Gaming Plus? +rep.


----------



## man from atlantis

rdr09 said:


> Yes, that 3466 CL14 is ideal for Gen 1 and 1+. That 3200 CL12 is quite interesting. Never really tried that. Might be easier to achieve on non B-die kits. Same performance as the 3466 CL14.
> 
> Would you recommend that Gaming Plus? +rep.


I like the board and very happy with it. Haven't got any problems yet. And it's great clocker too, decent VRM onboard.
This was 30mins in blender benchmark, I say 67C VRM at 180W load(PBO) is not bad.
https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=338062

This is today's temperature, 7 hour gaming session(AC:Odyssey), and some low load desktop usage
https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=338166


----------



## rdr09

man from atlantis said:


> I like the board and very happy with it. Haven't got any problems yet. And it's great clocker too, decent VRM onboard.
> This was 30mins in blender benchmark, I say 67C VRM at 180W load(PBO) is not bad.


Very capable for its price. May not have the best audio and lan parts but i think how it handles the cpu and ram is more important.


----------



## yrelbirb

nvm


----------



## yrelbirb

ok my final attempt at fixed overclock for 2700x ( i dont feel comfortable with constant high voltages because i tend to play soft low core load games as well ; so please dont criticise me for using this method  )


my ratio;

https://prnt.sc/rz7yfr

my way of setting voltage; (question: have i done this correctly?)

https://prnt.sc/rz7z49


IBT 20 cycle at maximum stress and hwinfo values during the whole test;

https://prnt.sc/rz7zuj


can i consider this stable for games? 

is this voltage okay for long term? i also want to say during the IBT voltage hovered around 1.20-1.21 meaning -0.05 vdroop. I dont have any LLC option in BIOS however so i have no ways of controlling this. should i up the voltage to compensate or is it okay as it is?

if this is okay i will just leave it as it is and be done with it so that way i wont be returning the cpu 

another question is: somebody here said that if IBT time and speed is not constant it means unstable overclock. am i unstable still? because values are always different...

and also some people say that gigabyte mobo puts hidden +0.1v to the voltage set. is it the case here or not?


----------



## MishelLngelo

yrelbirb said:


> ok my final attempt at fixed overclock for 2700x ( i dont feel comfortable with constant high voltages because i tend to play soft low core load games as well ; so please dont criticise me for using this method  )
> 
> 
> my ratio;
> 
> https://prnt.sc/rz7yfr
> 
> my way of setting voltage; (question: have i done this correctly?)
> 
> https://prnt.sc/rz7z49
> 
> 
> IBT 20 cycle at maximum stress and hwinfo values during the whole test;
> 
> https://prnt.sc/rz7zuj
> 
> 
> can i consider this stable for games?
> 
> is this voltage okay for long term? i also want to say during the IBT voltage hovered around 1.20-1.21 meaning -0.05 vdroop. I dont have any LLC option in BIOS however so i have no ways of controlling this. should i up the voltage to compensate or is it okay as it is?
> 
> if this is okay i will just leave it as it is and be done with it so that way i wont be returning the cpu
> 
> another question is: somebody here said that if IBT time and speed is not constant it means unstable overclock. am i unstable still? because values are always different...
> 
> and also some people say that gigabyte mobo puts hidden +0.1v to the voltage set. is it the case here or not?


Looks fine but if any damage occurs it will be from all that stress testing. You are so preoccupied with longevity and yet you keep on loading it way much more than you ever will in real time. Each of those tests are like running a game 24/7 for a month.


----------



## yrelbirb

no worry, i dont usually do them fully; this is my only second time using ibt for full test, and if its okay ; this will be prob my last stress test as well


----------



## wermad

Any suggestions to best disable cores? I'm having trouble running Lost Planet 2 and found a Steam thread saying it's not too fond of Ryzen 8+cores. I tried Ryzen Master and the game still refuses to launch. I reinstalled it and still no go (I know, I know, this game has a notorious install issues with GfWL too). I don't have a "legacy compatibility" option on my Ryzen Master version. The game ran perfect on a i7-6700K and i3-4170 @ 4k.


----------



## yrelbirb

wermad said:


> Any suggestions to best disable cores? I'm having trouble running Lost Planet 2 and found a Steam thread saying it's not too fond of Ryzen 8+cores. I tried Ryzen Master and the game still refuses to launch. I reinstalled it and still no go (I know, I know, this game has a notorious install issues with GfWL too). I don't have a "legacy compatibility" option on my Ryzen Master version. The game ran perfect on a i7-6700K and i3-4170 @ 4k.


your bios should've some option to disable cores surely?

it would be best practice to disable an entire ccx so that threads dont jump between ccx'es maybe


----------



## Veii

wermad said:


> Any suggestions to best disable cores? I'm having trouble running Lost Planet 2 and found a Steam thread saying it's not too fond of Ryzen 8+cores. I tried Ryzen Master and the game still refuses to launch. I reinstalled it and still no go (I know, I know, this game has a notorious install issues with GfWL too). I don't have a "legacy compatibility" option on my Ryzen Master version. The game ran perfect on a i7-6700K and i3-4170 @ 4k.


Bottom half part shows how CPU affinity does work on ryzen / every ryzen and TR4
https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...chi-overclocking-thread-731.html#post28353860

For OBS for example it's recommended to focus all into threads, soo you can use preset "slowest" on a 1950X
The same method is used for checking safe voltage on ryzen and can be used to isolate games always on fixed threads

Another more resource heavy method is working with processor lasso
Disabling cores should be possible inside AMD CBS under zen common options near the powerstates
But if you do that, better disable SMT and use all your cores - IF it's needed
My personal recommendation is to learning to use core affinity and that way isolate apps if needed 
Only some benchmarks enforce still all cores but no game should do that


----------



## rdr09

wermad said:


> Any suggestions to best disable cores? I'm having trouble running Lost Planet 2 and found a Steam thread saying it's not too fond of Ryzen 8+cores. I tried Ryzen Master and the game still refuses to launch. I reinstalled it and still no go (I know, I know, this game has a notorious install issues with GfWL too). I don't have a "legacy compatibility" option on my Ryzen Master version. The game ran perfect on a i7-6700K and i3-4170 @ 4k.


In BIOS, Go to

Advance mode>Advance>CPU Configuration>Core Leveling>Disable 2, 4, or 6 of the cores.

That or as suggested Disable SMT.

Sleep Function may not work after these settings.


----------



## The Sandman

yrelbirb said:


> ok my final attempt at fixed overclock for 2700x ( i dont feel comfortable with constant high voltages because i tend to play soft low core load games as well ; so please dont criticise me for using this method  )
> 
> 
> my ratio;
> 
> https://prnt.sc/rz7yfr
> 
> my way of setting voltage; (question: have i done this correctly?)
> 
> https://prnt.sc/rz7z49
> 
> 
> IBT 20 cycle at maximum stress and hwinfo values during the whole test;
> 
> https://prnt.sc/rz7zuj
> 
> 
> can i consider this stable for games?
> 
> is this voltage okay for long term? i also want to say during the IBT voltage hovered around 1.20-1.21 meaning -0.05 vdroop. I dont have any LLC option in BIOS however so i have no ways of controlling this. should i up the voltage to compensate or is it okay as it is?
> 
> if this is okay i will just leave it as it is and be done with it so that way i wont be returning the cpu
> 
> another question is: somebody here said that if IBT time and speed is not constant it means unstable overclock. am i unstable still? because values are always different...
> 
> and also some people say that gigabyte mobo puts hidden +0.1v to the voltage set. is it the case here or not?





I can't help with the settings in first two links (Gigabyte Bios )
I wouldn't worry about the voltage values you have shown so far when displayed in HWInfo.

As far as the IBT results, that may have been me that told you that.
Your results while not showing proof positive of a completely stable system it looks fine to me for a gaming only stable, hell ya :thumb:

Notice how much closer values (GFlops and Sec) are now compared to earlier conversation? 

This would be the point (for me 10 rounds) where I would start running P95, HCI etc, but I freely admit I'm a "Ole School" stability nut.
If you were to ask how many others can actually pass 20 rounds of ITB AVX version set to Maximum I think you'd be surprised.

Also don't be so concerned about what you call Vdroop. It's in the architecture and will vary due to load type. Hence what you're seeing when you game.
I'd say good to go for gaming only stability, turn er loose!


----------



## yrelbirb

The Sandman said:


> I can't help with the settings in first two links (Gigabyte Bios )
> I wouldn't worry about the voltage values you have shown so far when displayed in HWInfo.
> 
> As far as the IBT results, that may have been me that told you that.
> Your results while not showing proof positive of a completely stable system it looks fine to me for a gaming only stable, hell ya :thumb:
> 
> Notice how much closer values (GFlops and Sec) are now compared to earlier conversation?
> 
> This would be the point (for me 10 rounds) where I would start running P95, HCI etc, but I freely admit I'm a "Ole School" stability nut.
> If you were to ask how many others can actually pass 20 rounds of ITB AVX version set to Maximum I think you'd be surprised.
> 
> Also don't be so concerned about what you call Vdroop. It's in the architecture and will vary due to load type. Hence what you're seeing when you game.
> I'd say good to go for gaming only stability, turn er loose!


yes; youy were right. i went back and checked my first results; difference is crazy. it seems that i was fooling myself into thinking it was any kind of stable ; new one is much better


----------



## Minotaurtoo

so... my son bought an Asus TUF B450 board, I gave him my 2700X, he got 16 GB of Gskill FlareX cas14 ram and a 5700XT... I came home and he told me he had built a sleeper.... this is what I found... naturally I helped him setup the ram timings, update 5700XT bios and do a little tweaking to the gpu and cpu clocks... but even bone stock this was awesome just because you don't expect that to be in this case... needs some cable managment, but still, it's a sleeper... not a peeper.

Temps are surprisingly ok given the case... cpu max temp 75C, VRM max temp: 53C and gpu junction max temp 95C.... not the best, but hey, it's a compact case... and he's still tweeking fan settings.


----------



## man from atlantis

pass through TestMem5 but got errors in prime95 blender, haven't tried on an games though.


----------



## sonic2911

Hi all,


[Before stress](https://i.imgur.com/pboogmY.png)

[After about 1day stress, I run prime and memtest same time](https://i.imgur.com/xdj1q3E.png)

[CBR20](https://i.imgur.com/ZyEpyFx.jpg)

[CBR15](https://i.imgur.com/kCrXvVl.jpg)

My specs:
2700x with Noctua D15
Asus C7H
2x8gb Gskill 3200c14, Samsung B-die, single rank

I use PE3, negative .075v offset, LLC5, vcore will drop below 1.287v when I set LLC below 5 so I have to adjust the offset to -.05 or more...and the temp will go up too.
My ram currently run at 3466c14. I think the temp could be better if I change my case, mine now is Phanteks Evolv, which doesn't have much airflow.
So can my chip go over 4.1 all cores? I see many guys can run it @ 4.25..


----------



## rdr09

sonic2911 said:


> Hi all,
> 
> 
> [Before stress](https://i.imgur.com/pboogmY.png)
> 
> [After about 1day stress, I run prime and memtest same time](https://i.imgur.com/xdj1q3E.png)
> 
> [CBR20](https://i.imgur.com/ZyEpyFx.jpg)
> 
> [CBR15](https://i.imgur.com/kCrXvVl.jpg)
> 
> My specs:
> 2700x with Noctua D15
> Asus C7H
> 2x8gb Gskill 3200c14, Samsung B-die, single rank
> 
> I use PE3, negative .075v offset, LLC5, vcore will drop below 1.287v when I set LLC below 5 so I have to adjust the offset to -.05 or more...and the temp will go up too.
> My ram currently run at 3466c14. I think the temp could be better if I change my case, mine now is Phanteks Evolv, which doesn't have much airflow.
> So can my chip go over 4.1 all cores? I see many guys can run it @ 4.25..


I saw this thread in another forum. The motherboard used was Asus, so you should be able to follow easy. The temp is, like you said, critical. You have excellent cooler but your case will be limiting in terms of thermals. Now, follow this at your own risk. I only have a 2700 and i see 6 cores maxing boost (4.1GHz) at bone stock settings in gaming.

https://forums.tomshardware.com/thr...2700x-and-rog-strix-x470-f-gaming-mb.3486815/

Try this too.

https://www.overclock.net/forum/13-amd-general/1741052-edc-1-pbo-turbo-boost.html


----------



## rdr09

I successfully installed macOS Catalina on one of my Ryzen system with an R7 2700 @ 4GHz. In blender bmw benchmark, Catalina 10.15.5 was over 20 secs faster than Win10 Pro 1909 - 170 vs 197.


----------



## Veii

rdr09 said:


> I successfully installed macOS Catalina on one of my Ryzen system with an R7 2700 @ 4GHz. In blender bmw benchmark, Catalina 10.15.5 was over 20 secs faster than Win10 Pro 1909 - 170 vs 197.


Good job :wubsmiley
might i ask, if P-States are working ?
Back then *puts fedora on* we had no way of DSDT patching and had to relay on XHCI and EHCI handoff in order for USB 3.0 and with a lot of luck Type C - to work
But macOS had no access to the Powermanagement and so also any P-States 

Did the AMD Hackintosh guys finally release a FakeSMC.kext which won't require NullCPUPowerManagement.kext to run with Zen ?
I remember being in talk with them near High Sierra about kernel injection after the installation is done
But such method broke after apple pushes their mysterious security patches who sometimes change USB naming sheme, or always check EFI partition for anything non apple related 

Yes, how is the progress this days
- Do we still relay on Kernel Injection after the installation ?
- Can we finally move away from 3rd party kext and patch DSDT firmware correctly ?
- Zen 2 shouldn't require P-States access, but 2nd gen ? 
- How is AppleHDA injection going ~ did mirone make some progress, as AppleHDA patching relays on DSDT firmware or how is the workflow these days


----------



## rdr09

Veii said:


> Good job :wubsmiley
> might i ask, if P-States are working ?
> Back then *puts fedora on* we had no way of DSDT patching and had to relay on XHCI and EHCI handoff in order for USB 3.0 and with a lot of luck Type C - to work
> But macOS had no access to the Powermanagement and so also any P-States
> 
> Did the AMD Hackintosh guys finally release a FakeSMC.kext which won't require NullCPUPowerManagement.kext to run with Zen ?
> I remember being in talk with them near High Sierra about kernel injection after the installation is done
> But such method broke after apple pushes their mysterious security patches who sometimes change USB naming sheme, or always check EFI partition for anything non apple related
> 
> Yes, how is the progress this days
> - Do we still relay on Kernel Injection after the installation ?
> - Can we finally move away from 3rd party kext and patch DSDT firmware correctly ?
> - Zen 2 shouldn't require P-States access, but 2nd gen ?
> - How is AppleHDA injection going ~ did mirone make some progress, as AppleHDA patching relays on DSDT firmware or how is the workflow these days


I never played with P-states even in Win10, so i can't answer that. Both cpu and ram oc's work. Currently have no way of monitoring temps and my cpu is recognized as an 8-core but as an i5. I saw how to fix it but have not delved into it. The RX 5700 works in this version of Catalina but have not tried gaming.

I just followed the steps in the vid and everything is pretty straight forward. The guy provided all the files downloads to be used. 

The only function that does not work is the Sleep function, which i also know how to fix but haven't had a chance. 

I will be using the same usb boot loader on my R5 3600 system soon.


----------



## Minotaurtoo

rdr09 said:


> I successfully installed macOS Catalina on one of my Ryzen system with an R7 2700 @ 4GHz. In blender bmw benchmark, Catalina 10.15.5 was over 20 secs faster than Win10 Pro 1909 - 170 vs 197.


I'm not sure if people will be as impressed as they should be at that.... but you can rest assured I am... :thumb:


----------



## Veii

rdr09 said:


> I never played with P-states even in Win10, so i can't answer that. Both cpu and ram oc's work. Currently have no way of monitoring temps and my cpu is recognized as an 8-core but as an i5. I saw how to fix it but have not delved into it. The RX 5700 works in this version of Catalina but have not tried gaming.
> 
> I just followed the steps in the vid and everything is pretty straight forward. The guy provided all the files downloads to be used.
> 
> The only function that does not work is the Sleep function, which i also know how to fix but haven't had a chance.
> 
> I will be using the same usb boot loader on my R5 3600 system soon.


Might you want to try an Cinebench R15 openGL benchmark on that gpu , i'm curious if it can beat 210FPS 

Also thank you for the video,
I've dived into it and see what they changed
Soo clover got replaced, by a community bootloader
ACPI patching is still done on the fly, and pre-kernel boot patching remains to be done with lilu.kext & their kext suite, like whatevergreen.kext (gpu patcher) and AppleALC.kext (auto audio patcher)

This are wonderful news :specool:
XLNC seems to be the maintainer of the patches, but they right now seem to abuse old Intel Penryn architecture to basically inject support for a new architecture
Unsure how long this can be kept up, but it's wonderful news ~ as no kernel patching is required

To what i can read,
we still need to inject couple of SSDT's for example the USB controller fix
Oh, on your main system - screenshot edit your Serial number away the next time
It can be used to lock down your Apple account and so also remote lock down the machine 
In the past, Apple has couple of times already pushed a FW update in the hidden that encrypted the filesystem on my Notebook
Making it pretty much unusable and they are known to blacklist you on iCloud if the serial number and UUID missmatches and your machine leaks as non apple verified one 

Although that's in the past 
What triggers a lockdown is also changing more than 3 times the machine UUID on the same logged account
Tho changing serial number is quite easy with a re-generated SMBIOS.plist
Looking forward to the zen 2 unit
You might want to disable C-States and CPPC then before you try, soo the CPU P-Manages itself without OS ACPI handoff
Might even try turning this ivy notebook back to Catalina just to test out OpenCore :thinking:
Memory OC is possible on macOS, just needs to be detected correctly inside the config.plist with the correct serial number


----------



## rdr09

Minotaurtoo said:


> I'm not sure if people will be as impressed as they should be at that.... but you can rest assured I am... :thumb:


Wifey wants a macpro and trying to persuade her that i'll just build her a ryzentosh consisting of Gen 3.



Veii said:


> Might you want to try an Cinebench R15 openGL benchmark on that gpu , i'm curious if it can beat 210FPS
> 
> Also thank you for the video,
> I've dived into it and see what they changed
> Soo clover got replaced, by a community bootloader
> ACPI patching is still done on the fly, and pre-kernel boot patching remains to be done with lilu.kext & their kext suite, like whatevergreen.kext (gpu patcher) and AppleALC.kext (auto audio patcher)
> 
> This are wonderful news :specool:
> XLNC seems to be the maintainer of the patches, but they right now seem to abuse old Intel Penryn architecture to basically inject support for a new architecture
> Unsure how long this can be kept up, but it's wonderful news ~ as no kernel patching is required
> 
> To what i can read,
> we still need to inject couple of SSDT's for example the USB controller fix
> Oh, on your main system - screenshot edit your Serial number away the next time
> It can be used to lock down your Apple account and so also remote lock down the machine
> In the past, Apple has couple of times already pushed a FW update in the hidden that encrypted the filesystem on my Notebook
> Making it pretty much unusable and they are known to blacklist you on iCloud if the serial number and UUID missmatches and your machine leaks as non apple verified one
> 
> Although that's in the past
> What triggers a lockdown is also changing more than 3 times the machine UUID on the same logged account
> Tho changing serial number is quite easy with a re-generated SMBIOS.plist
> Looking forward to the zen 2 unit
> You might want to disable C-States and CPPC then before you try, soo the CPU P-Manages itself without OS ACPI handoff
> Might even try turning this ivy notebook back to Catalina just to test out OpenCore :thinking:
> Memory OC is possible on macOS, just needs to be detected correctly inside the config.plist with the correct serial number


Navi shows poorly in Open GL even in Windows. My R9 290s got better scores. Prolly the uarch.


----------



## Veii

rdr09 said:


> Navi shows poorly in Open GL even in Windows. My R9 290s got better scores. Prolly the uarch.


This is interesting :thinking:
A bios modded Red Devil 5700 -> XT , pushes 204FPS on it 
Which driver did you test on windows ?
I would've expected macOS to push at least 15-20FPS more out of experience


Spoiler












The picture is very bad and the score is not great - but it was a fast timestamp to capture timings
Somehow it got compressed down to 720p from 1440p 


Your Aida64 latency score i remember was also a bit higher than usual
I wonder if something with the OS is not correct, or why this OpenGL result is that "high"
We are drifting a bit offtopic - i'm sorry


----------



## rdr09

Veii said:


> This is interesting :thinking:
> A bios modded Red Devil 5700 -> XT , pushes 204FPS on it
> Which driver did you test on windows ?
> I would've expected macOS to push at least 15-20FPS more out of experience
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The picture is very bad and the score is not great - but it was a fast timestamp to capture timings
> Somehow it got compressed down to 720p from 1440p
> 
> 
> Your Aida64 latency score i remember was also a bit higher than usual
> I wonder if something with the OS is not correct, or why this OpenGL result is that "high"
> We are drifting a bit offtopic - i'm sorry



You are absolutely right. Something wrong with my R7. Can't be the ram cos it is set at 3466 CL14 with 61ns. Other tests/benchmarks are fine, tho. Ran the bench on my 5700 and it was fine. Both using latest driver. MacOS uses whatever the install has in the Driver folder. It works quite well but not sure if it will work in gaming. My next hackintosh build will be a non-gaming pc.


----------



## Rawson

Hi. New here. I've got a 2700X. I've got a few questions.
1. Is 1.5V safe? - core
2. Is 1.55V safe? - core
3. My 2700x boosts significantly faster than stock - is this normal? re-5.6ghz randomly
4. I have a EVGA 650w bronze rated PSU. This is just efficiency parameter right - can I overclock to the days on it or should I wait to get a better PSU?
5. Is leaving this on 4.4+ a danger in anyway if its @1.5v?


----------



## MishelLngelo

Rawson said:


> Hi. New here. I've got a 2700X. I've got a few questions.
> 1. Is 1.5V safe? - core
> 2. Is 1.55V safe? - core
> 3. My 2700x boosts significantly faster than stock - is this normal? re-5.6ghz randomly
> 4. I have a EVGA 650w bronze rated PSU. This is just efficiency parameter right - can I overclock to the days on it or should I wait to get a better PSU?
> 5. Is leaving this on 4.4+ a danger in anyway if its @1.5v?


5.6GHz ??? Where did you see those numbers ??? Even with LNG or dry ice that would be a record.


----------



## Rawson

MishelLngelo said:


> 5.6GHz ??? Where did you see those numbers ??? Even with LNG or dry ice that would be a record.


https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/48382750?


----------



## MishelLngelo

Rawson said:


> https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/48382750?


Lol, no way,try HWinfo and Ryzen Master.


----------



## Rawson

MishelLngelo said:


> 5.6GHz ??? Where did you see those numbers ??? Even with LNG or dry ice that would be a record.





MishelLngelo said:


> Lol, no way,try HWinfo and Ryzen Master.


I know. It peaks @ that. It'll downclock. I have seen it peak quite high before (4500mhz+) for a couple of seconds but im trying to still see WHY it peaks - whats causing it - and how i can trigger that again for higher sustained runs. hwinfo/master will show it peaking in real time as well but it wont be sustained. i think its a golden chip but im not sure if this behaviour for ryzen is normal as ive only used intel platforms in the past for overclocking.


----------



## MishelLngelo

Rawson said:


> I know. It peaks @ that. It'll downclock. I have seen it peak quite high before (4500mhz+) for a couple of seconds but im trying to still see WHY it peaks - whats causing it - and how i can trigger that again for higher sustained runs. hwinfo/master will show it peaking in real time as well but it wont be sustained. i think its a golden chip but im not sure if this behaviour for ryzen is normal as ive only used intel platforms in the past for overclocking.


4.5GHz for a micro second could possibly be believable for really , really, golden chip, further than that would be a miracle. 1.55v would also be suspect, XFR would surely cut it down at some 65-70c.


----------



## Rawson

MishelLngelo said:


> 4.5GHz for a micro second could possibly be believable for really , really, golden chip, further than that would be a miracle. 1.55v would also be suspect, XFR would surely cut it down at some 65-70c.


If I leave voltage on "auto" it skips around from 1.4-1.55v in ryzen master. ive heard this is normal - but 1.5v contrastively to intel - which is what i know/understand - is considerably higher. this chip will stay stable @4350. i believe it will reach 4.4 but i have yet to test that. the performance post stock XFR is nothing regardless of these speeds i've noticed. it is also to be noted this is being overclocked on an x570 formula - so it can handle these specs far greater than a b450. my last b450 (gigabyte arous pro wifi) wouldnt go above 4.05ghz all core OC with this chip. 
a question - can I get away with continued experiments on this chip on a 650W bronze PSU or do you recommend upgrading if I'm going to be pushing this? from what i under bronze/silver/gold are just efficiency ratings and thats it.


----------



## MishelLngelo

Rawson said:


> If I leave voltage on "auto" it skips around from 1.4-1.55v in ryzen master. ive heard this is normal - but 1.5v contrastively to intel - which is what i know/understand - is considerably higher. this chip will stay stable @4350. i believe it will reach 4.4 but i have yet to test that. the performance post stock XFR is nothing regardless of these speeds i've noticed. it is also to be noted this is being overclocked on an x570 formula - so it can handle these specs far greater than a b450. my last b450 (gigabyte arous pro wifi) wouldnt go above 4.05ghz all core OC with this chip.
> a question - can I get away with continued experiments on this chip on a 650W bronze PSU or do you recommend upgrading if I'm going to be pushing this? from what i under bronze/silver/gold are just efficiency ratings and thats it.


When overclocking, raised PSU power requirement doesn't raise sharply but power stability comes as most important part. If you don't have some power guzzling GPU, 650W should be more than enough.
Are you watching core voltage under load ? That's more important than CPU voltage at idle. Some BIOS versions are known for high idle voltage.


----------



## Rawson

MishelLngelo said:


> When overclocking, raised PSU power requirement doesn't raise sharply but power stability comes as most important part. If you don't have some power guzzling GPU, 650W should be more than enough.
> Are you watching core voltage under load ? That's more important than CPU voltage at idle. Some BIOS versions are known for high idle voltage.


here's some evidence. quickly tuned in my oc settings and tried 4.4. booted 100% stable/fine, no stress testing yet. that voltage reading is inaccurate


----------



## MishelLngelo

Unless you set voltage manually it will jump around pretty fast so a program may not catch them both at same time. 
HWinfo can show graphs of frequency and voltages and you can compare timing. You can also set polling period to some small number like 200 mSeconds so it catches minute changes.


----------



## Rawson

MishelLngelo said:


> Unless you set voltage manually it will jump around pretty fast so a program may not catch them both at same time.
> HWinfo can show graphs of frequency and voltages and you can compare timing. You can also set polling period to some small number like 200 mSeconds so it catches minute changes.


Heres the 4.5 bump. 1.4v at this rate. multiple programs are showing that so will see if it can sustain 4.4 @1.4v before trying 4550 @ 1.45-1.5 at this rate.


----------



## MishelLngelo

That voltage is tolerable since you have good cooling. 
BTW, I had 2700x on this same MB and the rest of system and almost regretted switching to 3700x as my 2700x (that replaced 1700x) was a relatively good overclocker with 4.3GHz at 1.3v super stable. This 3700x can't go over 4.35GHz at 1.4v core and hits 4.42GHz on one core while at PBO settings. Only saving grace is that I manged to switch without loosing any money.
It's one from first batch while newest batches can do another 100MHz, PBO and all core OC. 
Now I'm waiting for 3900x or 3950x to drop in price for any meaningful upgrade. Probably early next year when 4000 shows up and prices level somewhat. 
PS. 3600MHz RAM worked just as good with 2700x.


----------



## Rawson

MishelLngelo said:


> That voltage is tolerable since you have good cooling.
> BTW, I had 2700x on this same MB and the rest of system and almost regretted switching to 3700x as my 2700x (that replaced 1700x) was a relatively good overclocker with 4.3GHz at 1.3v super stable. This 3700x can't go over 4.35GHz at 1.4v core and hits 4.42GHz on one core while at PBO settings. Only saving grace is that I manged to switch without loosing any money.
> It's one from first batch while newest batches can do another 100MHz, PBO and all core OC.
> Now I'm waiting for 3900x or 3950x to drop in price for any meaningful upgrade. Probably early next year when 4000 shows up and prices level somewhat.
> PS. 3600MHz RAM worked just as good with 2700x.


read my mind. ive considered 3700x for pcie 4.0 but honestly i might wait yeah another 2-3y to upgrade to a 3900/3950x tbh. pick one up cheap second hand. what other results did you get from your 2700x? did you ever notice it reach 1.5 or over? what did you use to cool it? got any relevant info? i'm doing a combination of LLC, core performance enhancements and letting go of power limits for it to run stable.


----------



## MishelLngelo

Rawson said:


> read my mind. ive considered 3700x for pcie 4.0 but honestly i might wait yeah another 2-3y to upgrade to a 3900/3950x tbh. pick one up cheap second hand. what other results did you get from your 2700x? did you ever notice it reach 1.5 or over? what did you use to cool it? got any relevant info? i'm doing a combination of LLC, core performance enhancements and letting go of power limits for it to run stable.


Lol, yeah, because it makes sense if it does the job you need it for. If I was still working with CAD i wouldn't mind some 1950/2950/3950x as it would pay for itself but not now when I'm retired and heaviest "work" is some games and graphics. 
As far as voltages go, with 2700x first BIOS version used to push voltage above 1.5v, at moments 1.55v which I didn't appreciate and had to curb it by negative voltage offset. Last BIOS and 3700x keeps it at 1.4v max but offset will not go above -0.03v. against 0.1v on 2700x.


----------



## Rawson

MishelLngelo said:


> Lol, yeah, because it makes sense if it does the job you need it for. If I was still working with CAD i wouldn't mind some 1950/2950/3950x as it would pay for itself but not now when I'm retired and heaviest "work" is some games and graphics.
> As far as voltages go, with 2700x first BIOS version used to push voltage above 1.5v, at moments 1.55v which I didn't appreciate and had to curb it by negative voltage offset. Last BIOS and 3700x keeps it at 1.4v max but offset will not go above -0.03v. against 0.1v on 2700x.


thanks that makes a lot of sense. i have a positive offset, and am @1.4. so guessing the offset is 0.1 on default then. do you have any experiments you want to suggest? i have 2 kits of ram, 1 hynix a die, 1 samsung b die. my b die performs significantly worse in timing tuning and thus, the memory controller doesn't act as snappy as the hynix kit and lowers my overall performance. do you know much about that? i can elborate.


----------



## MishelLngelo

At one time I had Kingston 3000 with Hyinix m-die but that was when I still had x370 and 1600x (which was lousy prospect of faster RAM). Managed 3000 MHz but with Cl 12 which put memory score about same as with 3200MHz and Cl 15 (comparing to other people's results with same setup and 3200MHz b-die) which was about max that would reliably work. According to tests Samsung a-die is just as good as b-die. It was mostly fault with b350/x370 MBs and their memory topology. This setup netted me 3800MHz (yes RAM is b-die but apparently not all are same bin) but Cl climbed to 19 and even got 4000MHz but with ridiculous CL 28 which together with memory above 1:1:1 ratio which promptly killed any performance  .
Maybe that's next thing you can play with as Ryzen really appreciates faster RAM frequency as well as low Cl. Here's best result as it sits.


----------



## Rawson

MishelLngelo said:


> At one time I had Kingston 3000 with Hyinix m-die but that was when I still had x370 and 1600x (which was lousy prospect of faster RAM). Managed 3000 MHz but with Cl 12 which put memory score about same as with 3200MHz and Cl 15 (comparing to other people's results with same setup and 3200MHz b-die) which was about max that would reliably work. According to tests Samsung a-die is just as good as b-die. It was mostly fault with b350/x370 MBs and their memory topology. This setup netted me 3800MHz (yes RAM is b-die but apparently not all are same bin) but Cl climbed to 19 and even got 4000MHz but with ridiculous CL 28 which together with memory above 1:1:1 ratio which promptly killed any performance  .
> Maybe that's next thing you can play with as Ryzen really appreciates faster RAM frequency as well as low Cl. Here's best result as it sits.


1. i have a kit of hynix A die, 3200 16/18/18/18/36 stock which is got all the way down to 14/17/17/17/28 @1.4v
2. i have a kit of samsung B die, 3200 16/18/18/18/36 stock and will not go down in any single timing array without hard crashing and potentially starting boot loops. 
3. the samsung and hynix are the exact same memory man (g.skill trident z) and same serial number.
4. they work fine stock xmp 4x8gb
5. i assume that this is an extremely low tier of b die? or am i doing something wrong? do i go straight to 1.5v before i start tuning timings? 

imo 3600 cl16/3800 cl18 are the sweet spots atm for ryzen. timings are looking to be important in the new z490 intel platform too. do you enjoy memory tuning? ive been really getting into it since my high quality hynix A die but this samsung b die is a bit disappointing - but was a very cheap kit of trident z.

p.s. if you want REALLY tight timings, you need to up the voltage to 1.5. ive heard its the case for 14/14/14/14/34 w/b die. you might want to try that. samsung makes high quality parts id trust putting my trident z @1.5v tbh

edit - wanna show me the rest of your timings?


----------



## MishelLngelo

Right now my RAM is sitting pretty with 1.4v but works fine with 1.35v, this is just for stability reasons. I was playing with RAM a lot using DRAM-Calculator-for-Ryzen by 1ismus and just by gut feeling but funny thing happened with this setup. Almost by accident I turned DOCP on set it for 3000 and memory at 3600MHz and presto, it worked, 3600MHz at Cl16 although RAM XMP says it should be Cl 18 @3600 and Cl17 at 3000 to 3200MHz. Couple of more settings and it got a good memory score so that's where it sits now. 
Tried with even lower Cl but it's no go at any voltage. It's probably due to lousy b-die binning as I can see better scores with other RAM but mainly with lower latency (makes sense).
On a good and cool day this is one of best CB r20 score, otherwise it just tops 5000. Second picture it's all core OC at 4.35GHz.


----------



## rdr09

Geekbench 4 on Win10 and MacOS with same exact BIOS settings.


----------



## MishelLngelo

GB with PBO, it takes memory into account more than CB which barely reacts to RAM speed changes.


----------



## rdr09

MishelLngelo said:


> GB with PBO, it takes memory into account more than CB which barely reacts to RAM speed changes.


With MacOS you might get 6000! My 2700 is oc'ed to 4GHz. RAM at 3466 CL14 and gets around 61ns.


----------



## MishelLngelo

I have no interest in Mac, I'm using Linux Mint as second OS. Didn't do any testing with it as it's lousy in AMD driver department and performance is quite good for simple uses without any games.


----------



## rdr09

MishelLngelo said:


> I have no interest in Mac, I'm using Linux Mint as second OS. Didn't do any testing with it as it's lousy in AMD driver department and performance is quite good for simple uses without any games.


Me either. I do use lubuntu for htpc but this Catalina is so stable. Might even try Big Sur next week to convince wifey to settle for a Ryzentosh for next build instead of buying a Mac.


----------



## MishelLngelo

rdr09 said:


> Me either. I do use lubuntu for htpc but this Catalina is so stable. Might even try Big Sur next week to convince wifey to settle for a Ryzentosh for next build instead of buying a Mac.


Lol, I'm happily un-merried but last Mac I had was Lisa. I heard that Mac OS is not working on 3rd gen Ryzen, just like W7 was a dog to install after 1st gen Ryzen, I had it running on 1600x but never after, just too much hassle.


----------



## rdr09

MishelLngelo said:


> Lol, I'm happily un-merried but last Mac I had was Lisa. I heard that Mac OS is not working on 3rd gen Ryzen, just like W7 was a dog to install after 1st gen Ryzen, I had it running on 1600x but never after, just too much hassle.


I've seen others with Ryzen 3000 running Mac OS. I'm thinking of trying out on my R5 3600, since i already have the boot loader. should only take a half hour tops. The community seems faster than Linux for support.

They already have Big Sur running on Ryzen and it is still in beta.

EDIT: Enjoy being single.


----------



## MishelLngelo

rdr09 said:


> I've seen others with Ryzen 3000 running Mac OS. I'm thinking of trying out on my R5 3600, since i already have the boot loader. should only take a half hour tops. The community seems faster than Linux for support.
> 
> They already have Big Sur running on Ryzen and it is still in beta.


I haven't even tried How do you go about it ?


----------



## rdr09

MishelLngelo said:


> I haven't even tried How do you go about it ?


I followed this guy's guide. I suggest do it on a separate/spare drive with Win10 on it. The files needed are in the description.






Here is the actual installation after creating the boot loader.


----------



## MishelLngelo

Hmm, might try one of these days.


----------



## Rawson

Ryzen was fine @4.35 in c20. @4.4 immediate black screen. im only giving it 100% power. might try higher and add into 1.45v from 1.401 with a + offset. does that sound reasonable?


----------



## MishelLngelo

Rawson said:


> Ryzen was fine @4.35 in c20. @4.4 immediate black screen. im only giving it 100% power. might try higher and add into 1.45v from 1.401 with a + offset. does that sound reasonable?


Frankly I wouldn't go with that high voltage for long run even if cooling can handle it. Not sure how true it is but there are talks about silicone deterioration and BIOS/sensors lying about true voltages.


----------



## hazium233

I guess everyone has Zen3 now.  I am a late adopter I guess.

I have been playing around with my 2700X on a B550 Gaming Edge Wifi a little bit. I hadn't really done anything with all core on it before, but I had been taking a look at 4.1GHz just to do it. I had done very brief look at 4.1 on my X370-F but nothing serious. It sits under a True Spirit 140 Power, which may be relevant in a bit.

For Cinebench R15, pretty much just seem to need ~1.231V on SVI2 TFN to run it back to back about as much as a want. This stays pretty cool, which is why this voltage seems to work.

Cinebench R20 was a different animal. It could run one iteration at ~1.244V, but that might have been lucky. For back to back for a while it sadly needs 1.281V, with Td going to ~72.1C during the fifth run.

Amusingly OCCT medium ran similar voltage as above, 1.281-1.275V on SVI2 TFN (either 1.30 LLC4 or 1.3375 LLC6) but only getting to ~64C over half an hour for each of the runs.

LinX wanted to cook my chip, and to pass the low bar of 5 loops at 35000 problem size, it seemed like it also was going to need at least 1.281V on SVI2 TFN, where Td climbed to 80.9C max.

Above was with a rather pedestrian 3200 14-14-14-28-50 ram profile.

***

I don't know how many people would care or find this, but the droop I saw with various LLC in Cinebench R15 was (set v SVI2 TFN so not as good as a real measurement)

Auto - 12mV
LLC3 - 12mV
LLC4 - 19mV
LLC5 - 38-44mV
LLC6 - 56-62mV
LLC8 - 106-112mV

I thought it was interesting Auto was similar to LLC3, but I haven't owned an MSI before. Also above was at 800kHz switching, but I don't believe that should matter all that much. Range for some is probably because it is in between the 6mV resolution.

If I have a complaint, it is that voltages on this board seem to be twice as large as I expected.

I think I will test 4.0GHz, and then see if I can maybe get some ram stability >3600MT/s.


----------



## rdr09

hazium233 said:


> I guess everyone has Zen3 now.  I am a late adopter I guess.
> 
> I have been playing around with my 2700X on a B550 Gaming Edge Wifi a little bit. I hadn't really done anything with all core on it before, but I had been taking a look at 4.1GHz just to do it. I had done very brief look at 4.1 on my X370-F but nothing serious. It sits under a True Spirit 140 Power, which may be relevant in a bit.
> 
> For Cinebench R15, pretty much just seem to need ~1.231V on SVI2 TFN to run it back to back about as much as a want. This stays pretty cool, which is why this voltage seems to work.
> 
> Cinebench R20 was a different animal. It could run one iteration at ~1.244V, but that might have been lucky. For back to back for a while it sadly needs 1.281V, with Td going to ~72.1C during the fifth run.
> 
> Amusingly OCCT medium ran similar voltage as above, 1.281-1.275V on SVI2 TFN (either 1.30 LLC4 or 1.3375 LLC6) but only getting to ~64C over half an hour for each of the runs.
> 
> LinX wanted to cook my chip, and to pass the low bar of 5 loops at 35000 problem size, it seemed like it also was going to need at least 1.281V on SVI2 TFN, where Td climbed to 80.9C max.
> 
> Above was with a rather pedestrian 3200 14-14-14-28-50 ram profile.
> 
> ***
> 
> I don't know how many people would care or find this, but the droop I saw with various LLC in Cinebench R15 was (set v SVI2 TFN so not as good as a real measurement)
> 
> Auto - 12mV
> LLC3 - 12mV
> LLC4 - 19mV
> LLC5 - 38-44mV
> LLC6 - 56-62mV
> LLC8 - 106-112mV
> 
> I thought it was interesting Auto was similar to LLC3, but I haven't owned an MSI before. Also above was at 800kHz switching, but I don't believe that should matter all that much. Range for some is probably because it is in between the 6mV resolution.
> 
> If I have a complaint, it is that voltages on this board seem to be twice as large as I expected.
> 
> I think I will test 4.0GHz, and then see if I can maybe get some ram stability >3600MT/s.


Ideal is 3466 CL14. Use the Dram Calc.


----------



## yaan

hazium233 said:


> I guess everyone has Zen3 now.  I am a late adopter I guess.
> 
> I have been playing around with my 2700X on a B550 Gaming Edge Wifi a little bit. I hadn't really done anything with all core on it before, but I had been taking a look at 4.1GHz just to do it. I had done very brief look at 4.1 on my X370-F but nothing serious. It sits under a True Spirit 140 Power, which may be relevant in a bit.
> 
> For Cinebench R15, pretty much just seem to need ~1.231V on SVI2 TFN to run it back to back about as much as a want. This stays pretty cool, which is why this voltage seems to work.
> 
> Cinebench R20 was a different animal. It could run one iteration at ~1.244V, but that might have been lucky. For back to back for a while it sadly needs 1.281V, with Td going to ~72.1C during the fifth run.
> 
> Amusingly OCCT medium ran similar voltage as above, 1.281-1.275V on SVI2 TFN (either 1.30 LLC4 or 1.3375 LLC6) but only getting to ~64C over half an hour for each of the runs.
> 
> LinX wanted to cook my chip, and to pass the low bar of 5 loops at 35000 problem size, it seemed like it also was going to need at least 1.281V on SVI2 TFN, where Td climbed to 80.9C max.
> 
> Above was with a rather pedestrian 3200 14-14-14-28-50 ram profile.
> 
> ***
> 
> I don't know how many people would care or find this, but the droop I saw with various LLC in Cinebench R15 was (set v SVI2 TFN so not as good as a real measurement)
> 
> Auto - 12mV
> LLC3 - 12mV
> LLC4 - 19mV
> LLC5 - 38-44mV
> LLC6 - 56-62mV
> LLC8 - 106-112mV
> 
> I thought it was interesting Auto was similar to LLC3, but I haven't owned an MSI before. Also above was at 800kHz switching, but I don't believe that should matter all that much. Range for some is probably because it is in between the 6mV resolution.
> 
> If I have a complaint, it is that voltages on this board seem to be twice as large as I expected.
> 
> I think I will test 4.0GHz, and then see if I can maybe get some ram stability >3600MT/s.


I have a rig quite similar ..
2700X with a Noctua NH-U14S and an early bird 'cheap' Asus X570-P mobo. RAM is Trident F4-3200C14D-16GTZ. Windows10 20H2

I rapidly found that thermal would be troublesome with this chip (mine at least). 
that is first I had to forget about using PBO , the chip would downclock too rapidly.
RM would find only one core willing to go "as high" as a deceptive 4275 MHz max. Sigh... 

So I went for good old manual OC and 4.1Ghz was the best I could get fully stable .
for heavy workload the CB20 MT figures are okay though around 4250/4260 ( 4272 is the actual record figure !) 

HWINFO would indicate temps from 64 to 69°C ( 24 average ambient in the room) ; 69 with 26 in the room ;

The combo chip/mobo can go as low as 1,212v (average is 1,231) for 4.1 all cores in CB20 and still be fully stable ( that is 1,287 in Bios and Vdrop accordingly with LLC3 )

Prime95 is stable too even with small FFTs ; the chip would still be stable with 1.2v (after Vdrop) and again around 65/66° for thermal. AIDA stable too.

The irritating thing here is that thermals are finally not that bad , but the chip sensors are a pain in the butt when setting "free" the chip with PBO.
Indeed AMD makes it clear that past 60° at Tdie junction the sensors will start dropping things accordingly ! 

so achieving the best results with a 2700X does require a (very) good WC.

The 3200cl14 RAM sticks ( Samsung B-die ) would also prove to be very picky ! 
in the end I had to settle to an again deceptive 3333 as max frequency but they do accept very tight 1/2/3 timings (>50GB read/write troughput and 62.4ns latency) so matching 3400 with looser timings. 

I found here that only TM5 would be NON tolerant enough for testing ; Memtest64 would say zero errors where TM5 would find some !

finally the most puzzling choice was whether I would go for AGESA 1.0.0.4 or stay 'safe' (as for Zen+ chips) with 1.0.0.3 ABB (ABBA would be slightly worse).
I guess there is nothing more for a Zen+ chip starting with the 'Combo integrated' AGESA(s) for Zen 3xxx and later

In the future I might change for some 5xxx since the mobo is OK ( the minimalist VRMs stay surprinsingly cool even on sustained full load !)

Lately I have looked for some hypothetical smarter Power Plan than Ryzen or Windows Balanced , something possibly idling only C1 ..C2...c? but it does not seem to exist for CPPC only chips ! only for CPPC2 , too bad;
Other that I have no idea how many of these C states there are in a Zen+ cpu and what they each do, my guess being more than 6 quite possibly 

this is long  but ppl rambling on 2700X are now getting rare , so...


----------



## hazium233

yaan said:


> so achieving the best results with a 2700X does require a (very) good WC.


I think this is right, at least for my chip and all-core. I ran The Stilt's CPO test a long while back and posted it in this thread, and although the split from best to worse is small on my 2700X, I think the voltage requirement is fairly "stout."

The TS140P was having trouble cooling it at high watts, and I think that is in part due to the baseplate being a bit too convex in one direction. I got a deal on a D15S and temps are a bit better at higher watts. But yes, 8 cores at 4.1GHz or greater seems like it would need water.

I made the trek to Micro Center yesterday and picked up a 5600X, so I don't know how much more experimentation I will do with this 2700X. I wanted to get below 60ns on the ram, and I was close the other day. I also wanted to see if I could do 3733, but I might have to put the Rev E back in for that. Also, although the B550 has decent hardware, the ram training leaves a bit to be desired. 

I bumped vcore two steps for this, and it might be uncoolable in something like LinX, but I did run some y-cruncher.

















Really this is more tinkering for the sake of doing it, for my applications 3200C14 was good enough with this chip.


----------



## yaan

hazium233 said:


> I got a deal on a D15S and temps are a bit better at higher watts. But yes, 8 cores at 4.1GHz or greater seems like it would need water.


I hesitated between NH-U14S and the D15S ... ( I missed an almost brand new D15S thus with Ryzen fixations selling for 45€  the buyer had just signed in minutes ago while I am almost a 20 years veteran ; I was mad ! lol )

So I finally got this U14S for 50€ normal forum price ; and from what I have read here and there the temps difference with D15 are 1.5°C when it is not 1° only 

Indeed I tried to see what would happen adding a second fan for exhaust . I picked a server NIDEC ( some >100 CFM from memory) the ultra noisy kind that will chop a finger to blood ( it did once) . That lowered the final temp by 1°C to sometimes ...1.5° degree . I tried more civilized fans (Gentle typhoon , etc..) and thus with almost no temps gain at all ...

Once I discussed whether I should try a Corsair ML140 as the push fan a guy said he even tried the industrial 3000rpm Noctua with almost no gain on his Corsair ML140 while static pressure is 30% more !

The issue being that once the radiator is 'saturated' there is little hope from a 20% (or so) more static pressure fan.

So getting to the point I am impressed by this 56°C I see in your HWINFO stats with a D15 . Is it on a sustained 100% heavy load ? since then 100W CPU P-power would be quite low too

As for memory latency I too looked for 60ns  Your RAM specs look quite fine
the best I could get (my memory definitely caps @3400MHz whatever voltage/ timings..) ended in 61.5 or so


----------



## hazium233

That 56C is only with TM5, so it is quite a bit lower than a heavy AVX all core load would be. I do have the fans somewhat aggressive, so it did hit 90% of max fan speed.

At the settings in the screenshot, with Y-cruncher I don't have the max Td in my notes, I think it was more near 80C on the hot tests*. I should have written it down or screenshotted.

I might see what above looks like with just PBO, or I am going to just try to adjust 3466C14 or make a 3533C14 config.

edit: this was with BKT, FFT, N32, N64, VST, and C17 enabled. N64 is the hottest for me, C17 then N32 and VST are few degrees less.


----------



## yaan

The air cooling era seems to come to an end , at least for excellent cooling.

Just before the pandemic Noctua showed some revanmped 'monster' D15 prototype (1.5kg or so ..) at an Asian show but no news since. As afaik D15 is still king (by whatever low margin is not the point) then the state of the art of air cooling is stagnant for quite a while now.

I have no pb with AIOs ..until the pump may break or the water loop inside 'depot' grows , etc.. 
I guess that is why the warranty of say Corsair is 5 years to accomodate for such eventuality.

But indeed I will go for an AIO for any future rig.

as for all the test arsenal I try to use sets of instructions that will/may be used by my apps as today and near future. 
For instance I see little point in stressing the rig with some exotic AVX512 (256?) though indeed these may be used outside of the pro domain (servers etc..) in the future, I dunno

Lately I looked after this 'tweaker trend' to allocate one or two drivers ( say GFX , USB ) to specific cores. 
The mobile here would be first to discharge some process/threads out of core0/1 and secondly lock cache data of these drivers to specific cores. 

Why not ..but that will not prevent Windows to also use these "dedicated" cores and flush caches accordingly if it needs to and without prior notice ! 

so...is it only snake oil ? I just make a simple interrogation here , I am no expert.

I have simply observed the Windows Dispatcher at work and it is indeed quite imprevisible.

For instance with a just booted and soon (apparent) no more activity computer ( CPUs @ zero use , no background process , etc..) then why Windows _may_ use Core 14/15 if I simply launch Notepad or any similar light load app ! Isn't Windows supposed to first 'fill up' as reasonably as possible the first CCX . There is no need here to spread thermals , no high activity indeed, almost NO activity ; So why core14/15 ?

Actually as for higher activity I can see Windows (20H2) make use of all cores quite 'evenly' even when the total workload obviously does not require the use of many cores. It looks OK to me since there is no guarantee to ameliorate the hit/miss data cache speed factor from such specific cores 'lock' tweak

Indeed it is not a specific 2700X point so a bit outside the scope of this thread (?)
In other words I for sure don't want to start any pro/anti tweaks argument


----------



## yaan

a (short  ) question ..

Does the Windows 10 'two prefered cores pairing' also applies to Zen1/Zen+ cpus via CPPC ?
or does this require CPPC2 and thus 'Windows 10 core pairing' only applies to Zen2/zen3 cpus ?


----------



## yaan

another short one....
Does the 2700X has some known better stepping ? or even simply different steppings if that is still meaningful with Ryzen(s) ? mine is PiR-B2


----------



## The Sandman

yaan said:


> another short one....
> Does the 2700X has some known better stepping ? or even simply different steppings if that is still meaningful with Ryzen(s) ? mine is PiR-B2


The last I heard anyone keeping tabs on said topic was during FX series and I don't recall seeing anything since.
Hence why you don't hear much about Silicon Lottery like we use to.


----------



## yaan

The Sandman said:


> The last I heard anyone keeping tabs on said topic was during FX series and I don't recall seeing anything since.
> Hence why you don't hear much about Silicon Lottery like we use to.


Indeed stepping is a thing of the past, correct, was just asking . Now on Silicon Lottery as a thing of the past I will disagree.

My sample just highlight only one (1) gold star (4275Mhz) via RM on a full stock brand new built machine . When I see other ppl have up to 3 gold stars in same conditions. Then If you also read all what users have finally achieved it is obvious that there is an overall large discrepancy in final results with often same mobo/ram/etc..

This for what is not 'verified' as being statements from individuals. Okay let's look at what trustful sites say.

oveclocking.com (french site ) have managed to get their sample of 2700X to 8 cores at...4300MHz (158W ) for a still confortable 70°C ! the cooler was the ML240 AIO and as usual the all set was in 'open air'condition on a bench table ; they however aknowledge that the AIO fans at max speed were terribly noisy ...well that's the minimum inconvenient I would expect here

their torture test was Handbrake encode with use of AVX instructions ; a quite demanding stress test indeed by any standard. The Vcore was 1,48v for 4300 (1.394 measured) but their chip would also still keep all cores full load @3700 with less than 1v (0.987v measured) ; try that with yours ...

they also state that keeping to 4200 all cores is a much more "reasonable" option , lol , I wish I had that option



https://q5r8g8c5.rocketcdn.me/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Ryzen-7-2700X-Overclocking.png



The (very trusty) french site Hardware.fr got their sample reaching "quite easily" up to 4300MHz all cores full load with ...1.341v real (measured) !! (4.1GHz with 1.175v , ouch again)

://www.hardware.fr/articles/974-1/amd-ryzen-2700x-2600x-memes-plus-petit.html
://www.hardware.fr/articles/956-2/zen-architecture-equilibree.html ( was on 1800X here)

these reviews bring nothing more than say Anandtech, TomsHardware, etc.. but their own test results 

In both case they received their sample from AMD . I guess it helped a lot . With a funny point , Hardware.fr had a first sample 'not that fantastic' and so they soon got another..

So obviously (at least IMO) there are 2700X chips which are closer to what possibly a 2800X could have been. And I definitely would rank this as Silicon Lottery , even if nowadays industrial process and binning are ultra performant as for delivering "equal quality" chips. It remains that some chips are -still- obviously 'more equal' than others and by a large margin ; a fact , no ?


----------



## hazium233

yaan said:


> a (short  ) question ..
> 
> Does the Windows 10 'two prefered cores pairing' also applies to Zen1/Zen+ cpus via CPPC ?
> or does this require CPPC2 and thus 'Windows 10 core pairing' only applies to Zen2/zen3 cpus ?


Zen2 and later I believe.


yaan said:


> another short one....
> Does the 2700X has some known better stepping ? or even simply different steppings if that is still meaningful with Ryzen(s) ? mine is PiR-B2


Only one stepping as far as I know.

There are cores that are better than others, and 2700X that are better than others of course.

***

I let my 2700X go to a new home the other day, and I was a little sad. It was like trading in my muscle car for a family sedan that is more modern and is a little faster in the quarter mile and gets better fuel economy.

Anyway I did sort of squeak under 60ns, but only had tested it with a bit of TM5 and 30 min of y-cruncher. The actual temps under the D15S are in that shot. Probably older AGESA like on my old Strix board would have made more sense than doing any of this on B550.



















I ran TM5 in diagnostic mode, and ZenTimings wouldn't start, so that is why that had RTC (I added the values that didn't read). Ah well, will just have to regret not spending more time on it when I had it.


----------



## Chrislan

Is this thread still Alive?
I would like to request 
1 Cinebench r20 run screenshot
With HWMONITOR AND HWINFO running
@4.0ghz
@Lowest possible Voltage passing (1) CB r20 run

I'm just checking the AMP consumption..

I've done 4ghz but afraid to go back due to 
MAYBE fire hazards... Damage explosions of chips and boards

I forgot to run hwinfo and just won't take the risk doing it because of high AMPS


----------



## DivineLight

Do I see right you all run 2T GDM off? Never saw this, but the performance looks good.

Don't even dare to go over 4 or maybe 4.1, its not worth on the 2700X. With stock it annoyed me so much I rather used my 1700 because it caused the fans to spin up randomly (that temp offset was cruel). 4 is the speedspot for this CPU and still more than any Zen 1 would do. Otherwise RAM OC is the way to go, 1800 IF for a 2700X is really impressive.


----------



## Chrislan

DivineLight said:


> Do I see right you all run 2T GDM off? Never saw this, but the performance looks good.
> 
> Don't even dare to go over 4 or maybe 4.1, its not worth on the 2700X. With stock it annoyed me so much I rather used my 1700 because it caused the fans to spin up randomly (that temp offset was cruel). 4 is the speedspot for this CPU and still more than any Zen 1 would do. Otherwise RAM OC is the way to go, 1800 IF for a 2700X is really impressive.


I'm still at
3.675ghz @ 1.093v LLC5(lowest) 
0.9v SOC 
3133 16-17-17-37
now I'm still afraid my board catching fire or something..

That screenshot is at
4.0ghz @ 1.306v LLC2 (I'M SCARED)
3133 16-17-17-36


----------



## DivineLight

Chrislan said:


> I'm still at
> 3.675ghz @ 1.093v LLC5(lowest)
> 0.9v SOC
> 3133 16-17-17-37
> now I'm still afraid my board catching fire or something..
> 
> That screenshot is at
> 4.0ghz @ 1.306v LLC2 (I'M SCARED)
> 3133 16-17-17-36


Those values are absolutely laughable, even 1.4 V is still fine. Maybe around 2 V you may ignite your hardware. If you are that afraid you better not run electronic devices in your home. Otherwise, anything up to 1.35 V is fine. 1.4 V is a bit high for 24/7 but if you have the cooling even that is fine. But usually its not worth it. For my experience Zen 1 performs best at 3.8, Zen+ at 4 GHz.


----------

