3900X Temperature Reading Help!

Link

Gawd
Joined
Jul 28, 2002
Messages
699
There is quite a bit of temperature reading difference between Ryzen Master and HWiNFO64. I don't know which one is correct.

The screen shot was taken during the Geekbenching.
 

Attachments

  • Annotation 2019-08-06 185131.jpg
    Annotation 2019-08-06 185131.jpg
    68.1 KB · Views: 0
From what I have heard at this time go by Ryzen Mater as everything else will give inaccurate readings.
 
Yup heard the same, Ryzen Master is the one to use. Have the same issues, even higher reported temps with my 3700x (hitting 95C in Cinebench :S)

 
Yup heard the same, Ryzen Master is the one to use. Have the same issues, even higher reported temps with my 3700x (hitting 95C in Cinebench :S)

All that thread is saying is you want to make sure you're only running one monitoring program at once, which is true for any hardware. Having multiple programs trying to access and read the sensors at the same time is going to cause inaccurate readings.
 
I'm really not sure Ryzen Master is working right. My Voltage values in CPU-Z are a lot different from Ryzen Master, and according to AMD themselves, CPU-Z is reporting correct voltages.


Ryzen Master is showing voltages as high as 1.47-1.48 with a -.075 voltage offset, while CPU-Z seems to be showing the correct voltages maxing out around 1.408. My Idle temps are around 35c with a corsair h115 platinum, before the offset they were a hair above 40c. Load temps with the offset stay under 60c, while without they were in the mid 60s.

I haven't noticed any performance loss with the offset, only better temps.

I went from an 8086k system to 3700x until the 3950X comes out and I couldn't be happier with the performance and stability, my 4000mhz B-Die worked with XMP/DOCP settings and a minimal voltage bump from 1.35 to 1.36 to play it safe. (When I have a chance I'll probably downclock it to 3800 or 3600 for IF 1:1)

I also found out there must be some major issues with my intel system, as a lot of issues I used to have like black screen flickering and the taskbar showing up over games are gone. (Using same GPU in Ryzen system).
 
if you have the latest bios agesa ... one change I believe they made with 3000 series ryzens is that their sub-MS ramp up from idle to full power was changed to take a few milliseconds. Once it ramps up though, sub-ms changes in frequency and voltage can occur.

monitor tools that aren't aware of this could sample the cpu when it's spiking or dipping and provide an innacurate picture of what's going on. This dovetails into temperature readings as well as frequency readings.

ryzen master (latest version) has been updated to provide averaged samples ...as well as not wake cores out of c6 sleep to get readings. So the monitoring software is not altering the behavior of the cpu as much. Unlike other monitoring software not coded to behave the same way.. Those tools may never provide accurate idle readings.

some people report performance degradation when undervolting in single thread workloads (likely due to precision boost being unable to hit frequencies the higher voltage allowed it to).

I know on my 3900x the bios screen has the cpu core voltage sitting in the 1.4 volt range like most others report it being at. Would be interesting to see how flat voltage offsets behave compared to altering p-states of only the top-end or if maybe relaxing the cpu line load allowing more voltage droop @ stock core voltages has any positive results.

I have a decent phoronix benchmark baseline to compare to. I may have to re-run it though with sensors enabled. My original baseline was before I added the k10 patch to read the cpu temps on the 3900x.
 
if you have the latest bios agesa ... one change I believe they made with 3000 series ryzens is that their sub-MS ramp up from idle to full power was changed to take a few milliseconds. Once it ramps up though, sub-ms changes in frequency and voltage can occur.

monitor tools that aren't aware of this could sample the cpu when it's spiking or dipping and provide an innacurate picture of what's going on. This dovetails into temperature readings as well as frequency readings.

ryzen master (latest version) has been updated to provide averaged samples ...as well as not wake cores out of c6 sleep to get readings. So the monitoring software is not altering the behavior of the cpu as much. Unlike other monitoring software not coded to behave the same way.. Those tools may never provide accurate idle readings.

some people report performance degradation when undervolting in single thread workloads (likely due to precision boost being unable to hit frequencies the higher voltage allowed it to).

I know on my 3900x the bios screen has the cpu core voltage sitting in the 1.4 volt range like most others report it being at. Would be interesting to see how flat voltage offsets behave compared to altering p-states of only the top-end or if maybe relaxing the cpu line load allowing more voltage droop @ stock core voltages has any positive results.

I have a decent phoronix benchmark baseline to compare to. I may have to re-run it though with sensors enabled. My original baseline was before I added the k10 patch to read the cpu temps on the 3900x.

Tech Jesus did a video on voltage offset with 3900x. Granted this was prior to the latest updates.



Majority of his testing with -.05 offset showed no real performance degradation, most changes were within margin of error. He did a little bit of -.1 which seemed to show a little bit of degradation but not much, and could be board dependent. Seems like a lot more testing needs to be done though.

My board is an Asus and I know they love having a ton of voltage just to make sure every situation works, but it really feels like they put too much on the table this time.
 
Tech Jesus did a video on voltage offset with 3900x. Granted this was prior to the latest updates.



Majority of his testing with -.05 offset showed no real performance degradation, most changes were within margin of error. He did a little bit of -.1 which seemed to show a little bit of degradation but not much, and could be board dependent. Seems like a lot more testing needs to be done though.

My board is an Asus and I know they love having a ton of voltage just to make sure every situation works, but it really feels like they put too much on the table this time.


With the 1st 3900X I had at the time of release, even -0.025 offset immediately crashed my system upon running Geekbench. In lieu of offsetting, undervolting didn't crash the system, but resulted in lower benchmark score, up to about 1,000 points.
Regarding the temperature reporting issue, Ryzen Master displays much lower idle temperature than other monitoring apps, however, once you run a benchmark or a torture test, the load temperature reading become equal.
 
If you're undervolting and seeing performance drop, I'm pretty sure you're doing it wrong.

https://openbenchmarking.org/result...1&obr_sor=y&obr_ab=y&obr_hgv=ryzen+3900x+uv.1

(it's a mess with the sensors data since I had all enabled for the first couple runs, then switched to just temp and freq)

summary, 0.1v negative offset. no loss of performance, in fact, in 9 of the tests it edges out wins over stock. No loss in frequency capability. No stability issues. over 10% drop in peak and average temps.
 
If you're undervolting and seeing performance drop, I'm pretty sure you're doing it wrong.

https://openbenchmarking.org/result...1&obr_sor=y&obr_ab=y&obr_hgv=ryzen+3900x+uv.1

(it's a mess with the sensors data since I had all enabled for the first couple runs, then switched to just temp and freq)

summary, 0.1v negative offset. no loss of performance, in fact, in 9 of the tests it edges out wins over stock. No loss in frequency capability. No stability issues. over 10% drop in peak and average temps.
any good guides there for under volting cpu? I can't find any on my gigabyte aorus build. Set it from normal vcore to 1.12 and 1.17 and had lower preformance on top of higher voltage when cores are up.
 
not sure what settings are exposed on your motherboard or what the equivs would be called.

Basically, you set the offset to something like negative .1 or whatever you are attempting. I wouldn't go much further than that that though as a base undervolt (I haven't played with pstate manipulation)

goto your voltage settings

Set the cpu load line to mid aggressiveness instead of auto. Do this for the vrm etc as well

Set the cpu voltage frequency to 400 or 500 instead of auto (which seems to be 300)

Optionally set the current limits higher than 100% - like 110 or 120 depending on cooling


Set your pbo and such to enabled. Reboot.


Cpu load line aggressiveness deals with voltage sag/droop under heavy loads. You need that to be more aggressive when you're undervolting.

Voltage frequency needs to be raised to deal with the lower voltage just like previous ryzen chips. It's just more important apparently on the ryzen 7nm chips when trying to undervolt.


I've only worked with offset mode for setting the core voltage, not fixed. Not sure if you had mentioned you were setting a fixed voltage, but I wouldn't go below 1.35ish volts when in bios. I'm referring to the 3900x, which when on the bios screen likes to hover stock in the mid 1.4's.
 
not sure what settings are exposed on your motherboard or what the equivs would be called.

Basically, you set the offset to something like negative .1 or whatever you are attempting. I wouldn't go much further than that that though as a base undervolt (I haven't played with pstate manipulation)

goto your voltage settings

Set the cpu load line to mid aggressiveness instead of auto. Do this for the vrm etc as well

Set the cpu voltage frequency to 400 or 500 instead of auto (which seems to be 300)

Optionally set the current limits higher than 100% - like 110 or 120 depending on cooling


Set your pbo and such to enabled. Reboot.


Cpu load line aggressiveness deals with voltage sag/droop under heavy loads. You need that to be more aggressive when you're undervolting.

Voltage frequency needs to be raised to deal with the lower voltage just like previous ryzen chips. It's just more important apparently on the ryzen 7nm chips when trying to undervolt.


I've only worked with offset mode for setting the core voltage, not fixed. Not sure if you had mentioned you were setting a fixed voltage, but I wouldn't go below 1.35ish volts when in bios. I'm referring to the 3900x, which when on the bios screen likes to hover stock in the mid 1.4's.

Thanks for the insight.
I might try the undervolting again if I feel my temperature is bad. For now, I'm good. At 26C ambient temperature, my 3900X does 85C~86C running Aida FPU.
 
i was hitting 86C too stock. Same tests now result in temps in the low to mid 70's. This results in less thermal throttling and so slightly faster speeds, on top of the less stress on the components due to high localized heat.

I'd say if you're in the 80's stock, it's worth it to try to get the .1uv to work. 10% drop in temps is nothing to sneeze at when you're running that hot.
 
Back
Top