5900x, running hot

Island

Gawd
Joined
Sep 28, 2005
Messages
880
I'd like to invite both of you to joining me on the darkside and buying a D15. I have a 5900X and am doing a lot better than both of your outcomes. Blowing those Corsairs out of the water.. I can't get mine to go over 61C after 10 minutes of a Prime95 24-thread torture test blend in a 19.6 liter mITX case, holding 4.5 to 4.6GHz on all cores. In games as you're describing, I'm not going much over 50C. It does sound like temps you're getting on that AIO are within expected range.
Thanks for the reply. I'm sure your Noctua is a great air cooler but I seriously doubt it will cool better then my Capellix 360 AIO. Are u running the Newest Prime95 with AVX instruction test? The temps we are seeing are with AVX enabled. My CPU idles in the 20's-30's with Ambient room temp at 72-75F. I stay in the 50's with most tests/tasks but if It's something with AVX, that is where the CPU will spike in temp
 

sabrewolf732

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Dec 6, 2004
Messages
4,760
This starts to get into the temp range where I'd normally see 8c+ consumer cpus pegged from synthetic benchmarks.

Is AMD trying to close the IPC gap by keeping their cpus pegged on zen3?

OP I'd worry about fsilures when they happen.
Figure an aio goes 3 years, you got your $ out of it.

Maybe increase intake volume vs aio curve so you aren't creating a psi problem at full boost.


you don't decrease IPC gap by pushing MHz. You can mitigate an IPC gap by clocking higher.

Also, AMD has had superior IPC since zen 2. Sorry for being annoying, so many people use the term ipc incorrectly.
 

Island

Gawd
Joined
Sep 28, 2005
Messages
880
I just checked to be sure on my settings, yes those temps are with AVX enabled. I don't want to attack any AIO but my numbers are in a constrained case. Granted I have 5 Noctua fans in there, but some are less than ideal (15x120mm), nothing is setup for any trickery. Stock bios settings etc. Mine are legit temps on what I consider a proper D15 rig. I've seen hwmon record a 71C max, but that's momentarily. I've never caught it hitting over 71C, even for a second, and my fans are set to ramp to 100% after 255 seconds, giving the heatsink a lot of time to get saturated with heat. I do that to prevent tiny blips from making any noise on the desktop. Under load, I can't get this system to go over 61C. At least the hardest workload I know of, Prime95 with 24-thread torture test.
Well then that Noctua is a great cooler, especially in a tight case. I will run some prime95 AVX later and get back to u with the temps I am seeing. I also have a Lian li Dynamic XL so my case is huge, and if you are getting those temps, it is putting my 360 AIO to shame
 

KickAssCop

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Mar 19, 2003
Messages
6,926
Yeah I didn't post it to show off or be a dweeb about it. If I knew how to help you guys get those temps down, I would. I was just happy- I have been so impressed with this system that I came to the forum to see what people were talking about in regards to cooling. I always wanted a D15 and this worked out better than I imagined. I'd use an AIO but I know there's a massive difference between different choices and there's a lot going on there, I'm kind of lazy, I want to set things up and forget it. The only ones I've looked at though were the NZXT and I'm unfamiliar with the rest. I took a screenshot of it last time I did a 10 minute run, I did this a couple times to burn it all in. Proof (as good as you can produce at least) because talk is cheap and people lie, but I don't.

It does get worse. This is with an IC Diamond graphite thermal pad. One that has been moved from a previous build and it's cracked/torn, which probably hurts nothing, which is why I used it again. No paste in there at all, I wanted zero maintenance. I remember a Jayz2cents video or similar that said water is always better for short-burst cooling, and they take longer to saturate. I'm hitting 5050MHz on two of my twelve cores everyday though, so I'm not complaining about the burst performance.

View attachment 320554
Can you post results from CBR20 and HWInfo.
 
Joined
Nov 25, 2020
Messages
30
Did some more temp analysis. R6 ranged from 65C to 75C over 3 hours. Just for fun I tracked it during Halo 2, and it came back in the 50s over an extended play time.

Path of Exile Stayed between 55C and 60C most of the time.
 
Last edited:

evhvis

Limp Gawd
Joined
Feb 12, 2021
Messages
217
I'd like to invite both of you to joining me on the darkside and buying a D15. I have a 5900X and am doing a lot better than both of your outcomes. Blowing those Corsairs out of the water.. I can't get mine to go over 61C after 10 minutes of a Prime95 24-thread torture test blend in a 19.6 liter mITX case, holding 4.5 to 4.6GHz on all cores. In games as you're describing, I'm not going much over 50C. It does sound like temps you're getting on that AIO are within expected range.
Keep in mind that when playing games you will be GPU limited. E.g. running at 4k with a 2060 will make sure the CPU barely does any work so there isn't as much heat produced. If you change the res to 720p and everything to low then your temps will go up so comparing games without everything else the same is apples to oranges.

Running 24 threads prime95 is actually very kind to the 5900x as all the cores will be put down to low wattage and heat will be distributed in over a large area. Worst temps in prime95 will be achieved with 4-6 threads (first point which you reach 142 watts). This will put all the load on one CCD and wont have switching between threads so you get a lot of heat in a tiny area. For reference I get temps around 57C with 24 threads small fft in prime95 and with 5 threads I am at around 80C with ambient around 23C. For the torture test I average around 60 degrees as it doesn't even fully load the CPU (only 133 watts average). In cinebench 24-thread I have around 62C average with some minor peaks into 65C as it fully loads the CPU to 142 watts. Keep in mind all my temps are CPU-package which are about 10 degrees above CPU reported by the motherboard. The one noted as CPU in hwinfo is afaik motherboard and reports around 10-12 degrees lower than CPU-package, depending on how high the temp is, so deduct 10 degrees from all my numbers if you compare with the one that says CPU. Keep in mind that there is a noise factor as well. Case fans are running at 650rpm and low noise fans on rad are making noise equivalent to running two 140mm noctua fans at 800rpm on inntake.
 
Last edited:

evhvis

Limp Gawd
Joined
Feb 12, 2021
Messages
217
We going to hear back from you? Curious on more benchmark results myself. My rig like all of yours is a new 5900X build so comparing is good. I'm happy with my 8301/612 CBR20 score, but my previously amazing temps appear to be gone now- so rest easy on that front! I'm probably closer to the rest of you. Unleashing the additional 600 points in CBR seems to have unleashed some power limitation that was in place with PBO being set to auto in my BIOS.
Posting my cinebench scores in case you are interested. The score of 8359 is stock and 8770 is with PBO and 627 single core with PBO off. Single core score drops when PBO is on, not sure why. Not much gain for a whole lot of watts. Keep in mind that the CPU will throttle on watts. Mine stays at at 195w average. My guess is yours throttles a bit more. The D15 is a great cooler, but once you run PBO with a 200w limit you are close if not above the thermal limit of the D15. At stock 142w it should work very well if noise is not a factor (needs high speed on case fans to provide fresh air vs. a front mounted rad).
cinebenchRes.jpg
 

evhvis

Limp Gawd
Joined
Feb 12, 2021
Messages
217
I never understood the people that worry about noise. I have my rig to turn all 5 fans up to 100% at 50C+. I think that's why I'm getting such good results. Noctua fans are still definitely bearable at full speed. I also have a pair of Sony WH1000XM4 noise cancelling headphones, but I didn't buy them for the fans. :) I'm pretty happy with my results, I'm within margin of error with everyone else's 5900X, and my multicore is only suffering a bit due to zero memory optimization being done. I'm also on a mini-ITX board, which is surprisingly adequate. To be clear, I like watercooling, I just don't think the additional performance is worth it for me. If you have the space as I do, and you refuse any case that doesn't have a horizontal motherboard layout (GPU sag and any form of strain from components is eliminated), a big chunk of metal and fans makes sense for me.. someone who wants to set it and forget it. I highly doubt in real world use it makes any difference between the best coolers, especially in gaming. My machine only really gets any sort of intensive use when in-home streaming (8-threads in use and the game, Steam Link) or code compilation.
Margin of error is generally 1% or at most 2% so around 5% is well outside. How much real world impact it would have depends on the use. My setup is built in memory profile and all else stock, outside of turning on PBO in one run. Manual OC and increasing temp and power limits just dont't bring real world gains that are large enough on the 5900x and it is just better to control the temps as the CPU will OC by itself. That said, I do agree with you that real world gains are generally small outside of noise between air and water on stock settings as there just isn't enough heat at 142 watts or less.

People have different threshold for noise. I get annoyed with 140mm noctua fans at 800rpm on desktop use and even went as far as to get 7tb of SSDs to avoid the noise. At most I will tolerate 1200 rpm for the case fans for gaming, but I usually just leave them well below 1000rpm. I use open back headphones for gaming and the fans would be heard during quiet parts of games. Photo editing is another use, which will run at 85% CPU load when converting images and I can't stand loud noise while spending hours editing photos. Others are fine with fans at full blast speed which is OK as well. We each get to choose what we want and build our system accordingly :)

For real world use it depends on what you are using it for and how the system is set up. Sticking an AIO with rad at the top of my case would never work as my GPU dumps 300+ watts of heat (running on air) into the case so the air coming into the rad would raise the temps quite a bit. The issue would be similar though with air. Temps are at 65c on GPU at full load and noise is minimal so will probably keep it on air, but it means there shouldn't be any cooling for the CPU above it.
 

evhvis

Limp Gawd
Joined
Feb 12, 2021
Messages
217
I haven't really looked hard at your results or anyone elses, I just know I'm in the ballpark at 8490 multicore. It's margin of error in my book, as a small tweak or memory overclock would put me around 8770 as you had there. I'm not going to make any changes though as my system is fine as it is. I'm running AMD spec/3200MHz. My machine isn't noisy at full fanspeed because I have all-Noctua. Not a lot of room in my case for heat to build up.
Nice small-form factor computer setup :) That setup will massively improve the performance of the air cooler compared to a normal case though, so it will not be comparable if running a midi tower or full tower.

We do disagree on the definition of noisy though. My computer is all noctua as well. 3xNF-A12 on rad, 1x NF-F12 bottom inntake, 1xNF-A14 rear and 1xNF-A14 at the top. Should be around 25db on idle and around 30-32db on full gaming load for my setup. Fan RPM that annoys me was for the NF-A14 fans. The NF-A12 are quite a bit lower noise for a given fan RPM, but they do become annoying at around 1350rpm in games and around 800rpm on idle.
 

evhvis

Limp Gawd
Joined
Feb 12, 2021
Messages
217
Don't know the a9 fans or your case so these numbers are guesses. If you put your a9 fans to 700rpm and the rest to 650 then you would get an idea what my idle noise is. Should be barely audible in a quiet room and PSU-fans stop is needed. PSU fan is twice as loud as the rest of my system if I turn off idle stop (fan doesn't run until around 300w powerdraw). Increase to 1000 rpm on a-9 and rest to around 800 for the rest and you will probably get an idea what my gaming noise is like. My case does damp high pitched noise though and quite a bit of the fan noise so my estimates could be slightly off, but it should give you an idea.
 

evhvis

Limp Gawd
Joined
Feb 12, 2021
Messages
217
Housecat I am just really curious about your D15 performance. Could you do a loop run/long test with cinebench with stock settings, let it soak for 3-4 minutes and then take a 5 minutes measurement and a similar screenshot to below which includes both average temps and average watts? Will need HW-Info or similar tool that keeps averages and Tdie is the interesting temp. Remember to reset measurements after 5 minutes or so and don't stop the test. The temps drop significantly in the short time it takes to init of the next run, even when it is on loop. Cinebench 23 and 20 give equal temps, just different scoring.

Intersting thing is that PBO only gives 6-7% at the expense of a massive temp and power gap and no I have no real world cases that benefit from it so I just leave it off unless testing thermals or benchmarking for fun.

I did put my fans on full for an unbareable 40+ db at 1m.

12 minutes pre-soak stock with ambient temp of 21C continuous loop with 5 minutes measurement. As you can see, my memory isn't anything special, just about average (D.O.C.P with no additional tweaking).
cinebenchSoakedStock.jpg


14 minutes pre-soak PBO with continuous loop with 5 minutes measurement with 21c ambient temp. Do keep in mind that the watts must be equal for it to be truly comparable. Just 10 watts difference could mean 5 degrees, depending on the cooler, especially since this is throttling on thermals
temps_pbo.jpg
 

kensiko

Limp Gawd
Joined
Oct 5, 2011
Messages
135
The smaller the process goes the higher the temp will increase. In a way I miss my Threadripper, I might have a look again when Threadripper Zen3 arrives.

I confirm that PBO gives you a insignificant performance boost for a huge amount of additional power.

I've have had a similar gain overclocking my RAM to 1800 instead of 1600 without all that increased heat.
 

evhvis

Limp Gawd
Joined
Feb 12, 2021
Messages
217
That's what I found through the course of this thread. PBO while increasing my CBR20 score by about 800 points, shot temps through the roof. Probably power too, I didn't look at that. It basically just takes the CPU out of any reasonable binning limits for not a lot of gain. I assume it's better to leave enabled as most tasks are shorter bursts and not as heavily threaded as CBR20. It does look like you're at 3600MHz on your RAM while I'm at 3200, which is going to make up the sort of difference we're seeing between my system and yours in multithreaded results. I could bump mine up probably, just don't want to.
To AMD's credit, they've always said pretty clearly that PBO is to "take advantage of extra cooling and power in enthusiast systems". It's freebie overclocking without the work.
Running 3200mhz at 14-14-14-36 or something like that would generally perform about equal or slightly better in most cases as long as it is 2x 2rank. Only some cases where 3600mhz with higher latency has a major benefit over 3200mhz with lower latency. If I were to run with OC then I would probably OC once a certain threshold is reached in amps and run "stock" the rest of the way. None of the games I've tried are even close to the 142 watt limit without PBO so makes no sense for me, especially with the possability of the added heat on occasion. However even with cyberpunk running 12-14 threads the boost clocks are still 4650+ so I doubt there are any games where overclocking would benefit and for other tasks it doesn't matter much if it takes 55 seconds or 1 minute. The single core performance drops about 3% in my system though with PBO on so stock seems the most sensible.
 

evhvis

Limp Gawd
Joined
Feb 12, 2021
Messages
217
The smaller the process goes the higher the temp will increase. In a way I miss my Threadripper, I might have a look again when Threadripper Zen3 arrives.

I confirm that PBO gives you a insignificant performance boost for a huge amount of additional power.

I've have had a similar gain overclocking my RAM to 1800 instead of 1600 without all that increased heat.
From my testing it seems to be the insane voltage they run (up to 1.5v in single or low core loads) which causes temp issues at stock. I have seen as high as 22w on one core and that can easily cause temps to spike to 75+ even if I can easily cool the entire CPU at 142 watts. The CPU is designed to run this hot though and it isn't much worse than what intel has been doing so it isn't something I worry about now, but it was a bit of a shock when first running the CPU in synthetic loads.
 

evhvis

Limp Gawd
Joined
Feb 12, 2021
Messages
217
Welp, just got a random reboot tonight while doing 8 thread libx264 encoding, so I've disabled PBO. Nothing in the event logs that's useful, no crash dump to sift through. So I can't blame a driver on it, I usually like to point the finger at Nvidia. Probably PBO pushing a bit too hard in some way.
You could try setting your TRC to XMP spec instead of the autosetting that you get with D.O.C.P. Got between 1 and 1.5 percent gains from that in benchmarks. Mine was set to 85 on auto and XMP spec for mine is 58. Did stability testing similar to what I would do with a permanent OC with no issues (about 10 hours worth of tests total). Also made some minor changes to my cooling as well so those two improvements combined has me up to 635single core and 8568 in multicore in cinebench 20 (no hardware monitors running) with only D.O.C.P+trc and rest on default settings. Most of the improvement was from the TRC.
 

evhvis

Limp Gawd
Joined
Feb 12, 2021
Messages
217
Screen #1 is an Asus specific one/shortcut, while the 2 others are part of the AMD AGESA. There are some duplicates where Asus seems to give shortcuts or it's own version of the setting and then there is the AMD AGESA version, which I believe is in all bioses. I only tested the advanced tweaker version briefly, as I don't have any scenarios that truly benefit from extra overclocking, but it was enough to affect performance. Generally auto means disabled/stock in the Asus bios. Not sure if you should need to touch the xfr enhancement, but it is supposed to be to allow the CPU to boost beyond advertised boost frequencies and the AMD overclocking is where most of the OC features should be. Those who have spent lots of time overclocking the ryzen platform will have better knowledge of this.

Did you check your VRM, chipset and other temps while running PBO? It puts a lot more stress on components so it could be other things than just the CPU itself. I usually keep hwinfo open as it records both max and average and monitor much more than my CPU temp when I am testing PBO or other things that are well outside of stock. Voltage drops, VRM temps etc. can also be an issue when running high amounts of current and large voltages. Max temp on CPU can be kind of random at +/- 5 degrees if the load is not constant, while the averages are usually about the same for the same workload.
 

evhvis

Limp Gawd
Joined
Feb 12, 2021
Messages
217
My single core scores kinda suck. Just got 609 in CBR20. Best I've seen was about 614. I have to wonder if it's the 3200MHz memory or just a bad chip for single core performance, or maybe my board. It is an old X470, Asus x470-i. For me, I'm less concerned about games, I'm really looking for that additional multithread boost for Visual Studio compilation times. Only thing I have that I care about. As long as I don't lose low power idle which is the majority of the time for my system, I don't mind.
Dunno about the single core scores, they seem to vary quite a bit. Do run twice in a row to get representative scores as there seems to be a slight "startup" time that will take a few points away. Phase settings for power is another that can influence. Tried "ASUS Optimized", but got lower performance in general so went back to auto, which is CPU decides. Generally for single core I get the highest scores with D.O.C.P. + TRC and everything else on auto. Your memory should do fine for the test though, but there could be other factors. Bios could be another factor as well and maybe chipset. It is possible that the higher end x570 boards are just a bit faster. Being 2x16GB they are most likely dual rank which can also influence performance scores. Dual rank is preferred on zen3 (either 2 dual rank or 4 single rank which becomes 2 ranks per channel).

Noticed that your VRMs hit 84 when running with PBO on. Was that during a single run or a long duration test? If it was from a single run then it is possible that they overheat when running for extended periods. Asus has been caught underrepporting the VRM temps on a few boards by 10 degrees and I'm pretty sure mine is among them, don't know if yours is as well.
 

evhvis

Limp Gawd
Joined
Feb 12, 2021
Messages
217
Under advanced benchmark you can set minimum test duration. Set it to 700 seconds or so and it will automatically do two single core runs while you do something else :)

The VRMs can be difficult to cool as they are blocked by both the RAM and partially by coolers for front to back airflow. VRMs are usually good for well 125 or more degrees component wise, but I believe most motherboards throttle at 105 or less. Some might even shut down for safety.
 

evhvis

Limp Gawd
Joined
Feb 12, 2021
Messages
217
If the hwinfo from the second screenshot is from the multicore run, then it seems like it isn't boosting multicore at the same rate as the fullsize x570 boards. Mine boosts to an average of 139 to 140 watts and about 142 on peak in cinebench. If the board limits normal boost to 125w then comparing multicore numbers to mine and others who are boosting up to 142w becomes apples and oranges.

Do keep in mind that the monitoring software takes CPU cycles so probable a few more points to be had :) Benchmarking is fun, but the difference between 619 and the highest single core numbers found for the 5900x and 5950x is generally not noticeable in real world use.
 

Jamie Marsala

Limp Gawd
Joined
Mar 9, 2016
Messages
309
My single core scores kinda suck. Just got 609 in CBR20. Best I've seen was about 614. I have to wonder if it's the 3200MHz memory or just a bad chip for single core performance, or maybe my board. It is an old X470, Asus x470-i. For me, I'm less concerned about games, I'm really looking for that additional multithread boost for Visual Studio compilation times. Only thing I have that I care about. As long as I don't lose low power idle which is the majority of the time for my system, I don't mind.

My single cores are that way as well with PBO enabled and even using curve optimizer, but my multi core is great. If I disable PBO then I get better single core and low multi core, compared to what the reviewers got. With PBO tweaked though and curve optimizer at -10 all core I do see two cores hit over 5Ghz in HWInfo64 and all cores on CCD0 all hit over 4.875Ghz, all but one hit 4.925, and CCD1 all hit at least 4.750.
 

evhvis

Limp Gawd
Joined
Feb 12, 2021
Messages
217
My understanding was that 125W was the default limit for these CPUs from AMD. That's odd that anything is boosting to 140W if CPU limits are enforced. Maybe it's a way to encourage people to move to X570. I would've, but counted myself lucky to not have the chipset fan. I'll upgrade once there's a mITX board with no chipset fan that supports my soon to be old DDR4 and 5900X.
For zen 3 it is 142 watts PB limit for x570 motherboards and afaik some others. Just pointed it out so you would know the reason for a lot of the multicore difference you see vs those on full size x570 boards. I do believe there are som settings for increasing max watt, without going full PBO though. Increasing to 110% would give the same watts and your boards should handle 142 just fine. It is highly unlikely that there will be a passively cooled ITX board with x570 chipset as there are very few with passive heatsinks and those heatsinks are large. Keep in mind that you would probably gain 5-7% at most on multicore and probably little or no gain on single core for the cost of an entire new board and premium ITX boards are expensive. Not really worth upgrading the board IMO as zen 3 is supposed to be the last CPU on AM4 and the strix x470-i is a really nice ITX board. I do have one in my fanless living room PC and the amount of stuff they managed to fit into such a small package is mind blowing.
 

soulesschild

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 18, 2007
Messages
6,176
I have to say that I finally got my first WHEA crash after like...4 weeks of using my machine. So frustrating that it's hard/impossible to suss out instability without just waiting for it to happen. At least I can easily identify which core crashed and tweak it.
 

soulesschild

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 18, 2007
Messages
6,176
My PBO crash took a long time to occur as well. Due to the nature of how PBO works, high load testing ie. Prime95 isn't enough. 1000 +/- 300 points in CBR20 multicore it doesn't really make sense to me, people are netting ~14% multicore improvements for the chance of instability and mostly, and removing the ability to run it at 100% nonstop if the need ever arised. Mine does stabilize at 80-85C without throttling, but nearly everything in the system is pushed to the limit for the equivalent of that 1000 point gain.

Yeah for me it was an idle/low power crash. And it only happened after like...if I read my logs right, after about 11 hours of idling. Basically I turned my computer on during the day and just left it alone until I woke it up from sleep when I got back to it. But testing like just waiting an hour or two, no crash. :confused::mad:
 

evhvis

Limp Gawd
Joined
Feb 12, 2021
Messages
217
Cinebench is somewhat "unstable" in multicore score. I seem to be getting about 8470 with a deviance of +-100 points. Not sure if the TDC and EDC are set by motherboard manufacturerer or if it is in the CPU. My guess is that you would see scores between 8200 and 8400 with 142w limit. Scores are not 100% consistent, even a very low CPU background task is enough to offset it quite a few points. Added the max I've seen on stock for comparison, but I can not achieve the max with consistency, usually it is something like 8470 to 8540 unless I shut down a lot of background tasks and all monitoring.

Another interesting thing is that the boost clock goes higher when I keep it in the mid 50s (cooling at max) vs very low noise where it will sit at aprox 60 degrees with ambient of aprox 23 degrees. E.g. I get max boost of 4300 when in the low 60s and lower average compared to keeping it in the mid 50s.

I did run it looped to get accurate readings while still running so averages are correct, but as you can see I am hitting PPT, TDC and EDC equally. The CPU is a silver sample with quite uneeven CCDs according ryzen clock tuner, so those who lucked out and got a golden sample will probably get even better results.
1615120158242.png


cinebenchMaxMulti.png
 
Last edited:

evhvis

Limp Gawd
Joined
Feb 12, 2021
Messages
217
Looked through both of our monitorings and the current is the same and we are both hitting the same 97A limit for the CPU core. TDC is long term (sustained) EDC is short term (peak) limits. The difference is that my CPU runs higher voltage, not sure why. Do you have the latest bios for your board? It came out late january with AGESA 1.2.0.0.

Btw. are you running balanced windows powerplan or higher and latest chipset drivers? Posted a ryzen master image for comparison. We have the same current limits, but for some reason my voltages are significantly higher.

1615129071458.png
 
Last edited:

evhvis

Limp Gawd
Joined
Feb 12, 2021
Messages
217
Seems kindo of strange. My bios is pretty much defaults, except for memory, fan curves and boot drives. It does show 1.42-1.47 or something like that when I am in bios and looking at CPU voltage with it set to auto. Afaik you wouldn't get full PBO unless your motherboard was considered powerful enough to handle 142 watts. You might be able to get an answer in the Asus ROG forums, they have a separate section for 400 and 500 series motherboards there.
 

evhvis

Limp Gawd
Joined
Feb 12, 2021
Messages
217
Hope you figure it out, really interested to see what kind of scores you get when running full "stock".

I did some tests to figure out what kind of impact cooling has when running PBO. Hadn't run PBO on after adjusting TRC either. It seems like it will boost quite a bit higher when keeping the temps down. E.g. the current is fixed, but the voltage can go higher. Score is after pre-chilling the coolant so it was running at around 71 degrees during the scored run. Temps below is after about 7 minutes of running in a loop so probably 1 degree or so away from stable state. It boosts quite a bit higher when I am able to keep it in the low to mid 70s than before I made changes to my cooling and maxed out at around 78 degrees with full fan speed. Still not seeing amazing gains though with aprox 6% score for 50% increase in average watts.
cinebench9064.png
pboWatts.png
 

evhvis

Limp Gawd
Joined
Feb 12, 2021
Messages
217
Btw. probably forgot to mention that I did have Corsair h150i PRO XT as a temporary solution while I tried to decide what to do for cooling. That is the non-rbg equivalent of the Corsair 360mm capellix AIO. That would average 195w and around 86-87 degrees with PBO on so your air cooler is doing very well, even with PBO on :)
 

evhvis

Limp Gawd
Joined
Feb 12, 2021
Messages
217
The main difference with regards to the CPU is that mine is pulling about 7 watts more. Not sure why you or how you get that low SOC reading. My readings are about normal for the SOC. Only wondering if ASUS did put in place voltage limiters at certain current limits on some boards at stock.

A tier D rating should be fine for stock, but probably not enough for sustained PBO. I am running a board from the S tier, but am still about uncertain if I am comfortable with PBO on at all times. More worried about long term CPU wear with AVX etc. than the motherboard though. If the gains had been better then I might have run a PB and manual OC hybrid (PB until certain amp limit). But at most I could pretty much keep my single core and gain 10% in multicore which I would rarely benefit from as I almost never fully load 12 cores over long periods of time.

You do create kind of a wind tunnel in your case which amplifies the cooling capabilities. If we put your CPU, motherboard and cooler in my case (fairly large fulltower) and put 3 140mm fans on inntake and 1 on exhaust then the temps would prabably be 3-7 degrees worse for the CPU due to distances. I did pick the case due to having room for a lot of cooling and easy to install huge graphics cards.

Do keep in mind that I almost always pre-soak my system when doing thermal tests, e.g. run for 5-15 minutes before reading thermals depending on the cooler. I can keep the CPU at 71 or so degrees on a single cinebench PBO run but temps go up around 4 degrees after reaching stable state when on a loop. Would be same for the AIO. On a single cinebench PBO run the AIO temps would be 78 or so, but pre-soaking for 10 minutes would increase temps about 8 degrees. Every CPU is different (even if same model) so comparing coolers can only be done on the exact same parts. A great sample might run 10-15 degrees cooler than a bad sample on the same cooler.
 

evhvis

Limp Gawd
Joined
Feb 12, 2021
Messages
217
I agree, my board should be fine for matching yours with standard PB, but should fall down in comparison with PBO. I'll never hit that 9000 score you have.

I think the answer is that Asus is playing with settings / bad defaults. My control mode is "auto overclocking" while yours is just default. I never changed any of this stuff. I'm going to have to see what is required to get that to default. edit- Actually I think that's because I set the 200MHz boost override at a point, but it'd be good to remove that.

View attachment 337181

View attachment 337182
That might be a lead. I did try ASUS optimized VRMs etc. and it took away 0.5-1% performance. Having everything on "auto", outside of setting D.O.C.P. and TRC, is what seems to give me the best stock performance. I think the settings change quite a bit as soon as you touch any of the ASUS or AMD provided options. There is a lot of menus to go through though, unless you remember the exact settings. My SOC power is always around 18-19 watts, even on idle so really makes me wonder why yours shows up so low.

My impression is that the default setup from AMD, with the CPU controlling everything, is very good and close to optimal. Did removing the 200 boost override change anything?
 

evhvis

Limp Gawd
Joined
Feb 12, 2021
Messages
217
If you switch to simplified view, then you shouyld be able to select default. You could try that, let it reboot the PC by pressing apply and see if that helps.

1615312355169.png
 

evhvis

Limp Gawd
Joined
Feb 12, 2021
Messages
217
Your PBO clocks are about the same or slightly below my PB clocks, which explains the score difference. It definitely seems strange though, but it is likely that it is something that AMD or Asus would have to solve with a correction in bios. I do think there is AGESA 1.2.0.1 or similar coming sometime within the next two months in a non-beta version.

Overall though your single core scores are normal and the multi core performance is still more than adequate for pretty much every normal task.
 

evhvis

Limp Gawd
Joined
Feb 12, 2021
Messages
217
I spent the last day or so trying to flash back my bios to that older version to test.. I've flashed to older versions before on this board using the AMI DOS utility, and it's not a fun feeling to do.. worked out of course, but this time it failed a security check that wasn't a problem before, so Asus has put some additional safeguards in from flashing back. Maybe they saved me here, but who knows. I guess I'll have to keep playing with settings or wait for another update. There's definitely not a lot of x470-i users out there that moved to Zen3 and are posting.. I can't find a single person to compare with.
Afaik flashing back from AGESA 1.2.0.0 can only be done using biosflashback, not from ezflash. Your motherboard does support biosflashback (reserved USB slot). Haven't done a bios flash like that since I got the x470-i (almost 3 years ago) so don't remember the procedure for that board, but it is listed in the manual and it should work.
 

evhvis

Limp Gawd
Joined
Feb 12, 2021
Messages
217
I'm not using either of those, ezflash or biosflashback. AMI's utility is done off a flash drive, it always worked for me in the past. I'm not going to tempt fate though. I'm sticking with what I have and whatever they put out going forward..
https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthre...-in-DOS-with-USB-tutorial-Intel-AMD-roll-back
It was marked on the beta version that biosflashback was the only way to roll back the AGESA 1.2.0.0 version. AGESA 1.2.0.1 final is out for x570 so probably close for your board as well.
 

evhvis

Limp Gawd
Joined
Feb 12, 2021
Messages
217
I've stayed on the hunt and I realize I'm the only one here that cares about this issue but my quest may help someone else that's doing a search on this.

I did find another user with an MSI board that reported the same 125W limit on AGESA 1.2.0.0. Once he rolled back, it was back to 142W. I'm probably going to try another AFUDOS bios rollback this weekend, pretty sure I know what I did wrong last time. My other option is to wait and see on 1.2.0.1, but I have the feeling Asus will drag their feet on 400 series boards from here on out.

I understand Asus said you can't go back, but they probably meant through their tools.. they would never endorse using the AMI bios utilities. It's not my favorite thing to do because it's risky, and after you flash via commandline, you really should clear CMOS, then flash the BIOS again with the same version via official methods, then clear CMOS again (IMO). So it's kind of a process to ensure a clean outcome but I've done it before on this board.
Interesting that that someone with MSI had the same issue. It could very well be an AGESA 1.2.0.0 issue of it occurs on both MSI and ASUS as that makes it unlikely that is the manufacturer customization that cause the issues.

Never used beta bios, as there is a reason for them being beta, but saw the instructions on the page as I checked for the 1.2.0.0 final release. The special thing about bios flashback is that it doesn't require a "working" CPU and can be used with CPUs that are unsupported by the bios.

I do remember the old days when you had to use a floppy to flash bios, then CD, USB stick and finally being able to do it from within bios. Definitely don't miss having to create bootable floppies and running .exe files to update the bios.
 

oldmanbal

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 27, 2010
Messages
2,594
Many of the motherboard vendors actually push the chips harder than what one could have considered stock a decade ago. They will try to get a higher boost / all core than actually running at what we may perceive as 'stock'. You can manually tune the bios to better fit what a stock profile may look like to you, or decrease the amount of extra power that may be built in to ensuring stability under full load. In my experiences the 5xxx run pretty hot, much hotter than the 3xxx series I slotted it in to replace in an x570 with same core layout. I am particularly perturbed by the idle temps, which irritates me to no end. Why can't the chips idle under 35*c when there's literally nothing going on, under water. Grinds my gears.
 

evhvis

Limp Gawd
Joined
Feb 12, 2021
Messages
217
Many of the motherboard vendors actually push the chips harder than what one could have considered stock a decade ago. They will try to get a higher boost / all core than actually running at what we may perceive as 'stock'. You can manually tune the bios to better fit what a stock profile may look like to you, or decrease the amount of extra power that may be built in to ensuring stability under full load. In my experiences the 5xxx run pretty hot, much hotter than the 3xxx series I slotted it in to replace in an x570 with same core layout. I am particularly perturbed by the idle temps, which irritates me to no end. Why can't the chips idle under 35*c when there's literally nothing going on, under water. Grinds my gears.
Sure you don't have a lot of processes going on? Mine pulled 45+ watts on "idle" until I removed a lot of stuff like asus lighting services etc. that were causing the CPU to run at 2-4% load constantly. Now it idles at around 35 watts. I generally have around 29 degrees celcius on true idle and typically 35 degrees average while browsing the web with 23 degrees ambient. Afaik the 5xxx series is much faster to ramp up the clocks than the older ones though so it will spike every time you open a new webpage etc. but average idle temps shouldn't be too bad.

AMD enforces what is stock though, unlike intel which lets the motherboard manufacturers run wild. They have set the limit to 142w as long as the cooling solution and VRMs permits it.
 
Top