# 1usmus Power Plan for AMD Ryzen - New Developments



## W1zzard (Nov 19, 2019)

Two weeks ago, we released the 1usmus Power Plan for AMD Ryzen processors, which received a ton of attention. Both Microsoft and AMD got involved, releasing fixes on their own. Today, we're taking a look at the improvements these patches bring, and also got a new version of the power plan for you to download.

*Show full review*


----------



## spectatorx (Nov 19, 2019)

Kinda related story of mine: recently i did clean install of windows 10 1909 and in comparison to 1903 i'm getting better performance and smoother frametimes in games. Unfortunately before update/reinstall i didn't think i could get such noticeable changes so i can't give you specific numbers. If i remember correctly fps values from 1903 then in some games fps gains are about 10% (this is not exact value so do not quote me on that), all that on regular ryzen balanced power plan. I would like to see any website or youtube channel to perform proper tests and post results.

All that on 3800x with asrock x570 taichi and 2x16GB 3200MHz memory, radeon rx580 8GB nitro+.


----------



## damric (Nov 19, 2019)

Keep up the good work!


----------



## RH92 (Nov 19, 2019)

Maybe the reason AMD didn't provide 3950X sample to Yuri is because he is doing a better job than their engineers FOR FREE  .....  jokes aside keep up the outstanding work man !


----------



## MKRonin (Nov 19, 2019)

Could you update the article to explicitly state which CPU(s) you used during your testing? I'm assuming it was a 3900X.


----------



## 529th (Nov 19, 2019)

What exactly in the registry is being changed to the CPU Power Scheme?


----------



## jamexman (Nov 19, 2019)

If we have version 1.0 installed, can we just install this new version over it? Or do we have to uninstall the older one first? If so, how do we uninstall it?

Edit: Nevermind, found out how to delete the old one.


----------



## DeathtoGnomes (Nov 19, 2019)

> S and firmware vendors are as of late changing things far too often with too little documentation.


Sadly this has been a known issue for years. Those that did any BIOS modding had to rely on forums to figure out what been changed.


----------



## jamexman (Nov 19, 2019)

Amazing. I just installed it and now I have two cores back boosting to 4616 Mhz on my 3900x (and yes, they are the two best cores!). On AMD's Ryzen balanced they would never boost past 4550 mhz on Agesa 1.0.0.4B (they did to 4625 Mhz back with Agesa 1.0.0.3 ABBA, so I don't know what AMD messed up with on 1.0.0.4 B...).

Thanks 1usmus!


----------



## 1usmus (Nov 19, 2019)

529th said:


> What exactly in the registry is being changed to the CPU Power Scheme?



Thread planning policy used for short-term threads in heterogeneous systems has been changed. Also we force scheduler to use the best cores (if possible) .
By default, the auto option is enabled there. That is, windows may use the best cores, or it may not.


----------



## W1zzard (Nov 19, 2019)

RH92 said:


> Maybe the reason AMD didn't provide 3950X sample to Yuri is because he is doing a better job than their engineers FOR FREE  .....  jokes aside keep up the outstanding work man !


AMD didn't give me a sample for CPU review. Yuri is completely separate both geographically and logistically


----------



## Ubersonic (Nov 19, 2019)

Hate to be a drag but:


> echo - Use "1usmus Ryzen Power Plan", if you have a Zen 2 processor, runnning Windows 10 May 2019, Oct 2018, and earlier.
> echo - Use "1usmus Ryzen Universal", with any processor running Windows 10 Nov 2019 Update or later.



Which one to use with a 3900X on a fully up to date 1903?


----------



## Tahna (Nov 19, 2019)

Hoping to get some help here. I can't get my 3900x to a speed over 4262 Mhz on my best single core stress, and around 4040 Mhz on all cores. I'm using CPUZ to stress the CPU (maybe i need to use something else?). Like anyone else, I just want to get the best out of my 3900x. Normal use temp (< 10% usage) is around 50 C.

What else can I do, and am I missing something?

Setup/Settings: 

Ryzen 3900x - haven't touched OC settings outside of the 1usmus instructions, or Ryzen Master settings.
x570 Auros Elite mobo
32GB (3200mhz Elite XMP profile) Corsair vengeance RAM
Windows Build 10.0.18362 Build 18362
F10c BIOS from Gigabyte website
1.09.27.1033 chipset drivers, 
1usmus 1.1 power settings and bios settings to match. I know for sure I got the following BIOS settings: Global C-state Control, Low Current Idle, and CPPC Preferred Cores to Enabled, and I set PPT to 0 ( I couldnt find PPC).








Stressing all cores in following SS:


----------



## 1usmus (Nov 19, 2019)

Ubersonic said:


> Hate to be a drag but:
> 
> 
> Which one to use with a 3900X on a fully up to date 1903?


Universal  Power Plan


----------



## jamexman (Nov 19, 2019)

Tahna said:


> Hoping to get some help here. I can't get my 3900x to a speed over 4262 Mhz on my best single core stress, and around 4040 Mhz on all cores. I'm using CPUZ to stress the CPU (maybe i need to use something else?). Like anyone else, I just want to get the best out of my 3900x. Normal use temp (< 10% usage) is around 50 C.
> 
> What else can I do, and am I missing something?
> 
> ...



Yo be honest, I’ve never seen Ryzen master boost up to 4600mhz, I don’t think it shows real clocks but a rolling average... you should try monitoring clocks with hwinfo64; that’s the I le app ive ever seen the max boats to 4.6+ Ghz on my 3900x.


----------



## 1usmus (Nov 19, 2019)

Tahna said:


> Hoping to get some help here. I can't get my 3900x to a speed over 4262 Mhz on my best single core stress, and around 4040 Mhz on all cores. I'm using CPUZ to stress the CPU (maybe i need to use something else?). Like anyone else, I just want to get the best out of my 3900x. Normal use temp (< 10% usage) is around 50 C.
> 
> What else can I do, and am I missing something?
> 
> ...



You have PBO enabled, this may be a problem. On stock, problem also observed?
Which core does system use in the CB15 single thread?


----------



## chief-gunney (Nov 19, 2019)

what is the power supply low current idle setting about? and is this related to and apply to  psu hardware?


----------



## Artex (Nov 19, 2019)

1usmus said:


> You have PBO enabled, this may be a problem.


I have a similar spec'd machine and I'm curious what the PBO setting should be set to as well.  I too cannot boost passed 4.2Ghz with the power profile, and my temps hover in the mid-40s under 10% load with my AIO Corsair H115 Platinum for cooling.

Ryzen 3900x - haven't touched OC settings outside of the 1usmus instructions, or Ryzen Master settings.
x570 Auros Extreme Mobo
64GB (3600mhz XMP profile) Corsair RAM
Windows Build 1903
F10c BIOS from Gigabyte website
Corsair H115 Platinum AIO
1.09.27.1033 chipset drivers,
1usmus 1.1 power settings and bios settings to match. I know for sure I got the following BIOS settings: Global C-state Control, Low Current Idle, and CPPC Preferred Cores to Enabled -  I also couldnt find PPC).


----------



## Assimilator (Nov 19, 2019)

Thanks for all your hard work @1usmus - while I can't benefit from it, it's evident that your thorough and exhaustive testing has lit a fire under the collective a**es of AMD and Microsoft and the motherboard manufacturers, and that's made things better fro a lot of people. I don't understand why AMD hasn't hired you yet...


----------



## Jism (Nov 20, 2019)

On Ryzen Univeral power plan, this thing constantly keeps the CPU core voltage at around 1.45V. Even in 2129Mhz. This is bullshit.

Even the balanced plan of windows itself nicely puts the CPU into 0.890mv instead of 1.45v. Are you kidding me? If you make a power plan please test it properly and dont cram this up your system without monitoring it's abilitys. Ryzens are proned to suffer from degradation fast and having it in idle on 1.45V / 2129Mhz (CPU-Z, Ryzen 2700X) is just asking for problems.

Windows balanced is proper enough for me.


----------



## Tahna (Nov 20, 2019)

1usmus said:


> You have PBO enabled, this may be a problem. On stock, problem also observed?
> Which core does system use in the CB15 single thread?


Thanks for the response! I'll try with disabling the PBO, I must have enabled that in the BIOS. 

I just ran Cinebench 15 single core (got 194 pts), and it primarily ran on C 02, with some bouncing to C 01. The highest C 01 got was 4278 and C 02 with 4282.


----------



## Wickedt (Nov 20, 2019)

I  keep getting this error, not sure why though.

"Please extract all files from the downloaded .zip archive, not just install.bat"
Press any key to continue . . .

Yes ive unzipped all of the files to a separate desktop folder, and on the desktop itself, no joy.


----------



## Jism (Nov 20, 2019)

Wickedt said:


> I  keep getting this error, not sure why though.
> 
> "Please extract all files from the downloaded .zip archive, not just install.bat"
> Press any key to continue . . .



Put all files in a folder and execute from that folder, not from a zip.


----------



## Wickedt (Nov 20, 2019)

Jism said:


> Put all files in a folder and execute from that folder, not from a zip.



Did that, still same message, and all 3 files are there, wonder if its something else, very strange. Nothing in the bit-defender logs, weird.

Ok even stranger, went back to the original folder i unzipped to, and it worked. Thanks for the help though, now to test a bit.


----------



## Tahna (Nov 20, 2019)

So I've switched to Hwinfo for monitoring my speeds and i'm getting closer to the 4.6 than I thought. Still nothing over 4466 Mhz with my 3900x though. I've tried with PBO both on and off (doesn't make a difference). This seems pretty good but really I'm not sure what to expect tbh.


----------



## TheLostSwede (Nov 20, 2019)

Just in case anyone is looking to remove the previous one, or these, see link.
It would seem you have to use the command line option, as the other one is missing in the recent Windows 10 versions.








						Delete Power Plan in Windows 10
					

How to Delete a Power Plan in Windows 10




					www.tenforums.com
				




This does indeed seem to help with using the high performance cores first though, which is nice, as my fastest core is in the secondary CCX and didn't see much use so far. However, it still defaults to the second fastest core most of the time, as it's in the primary CCX. The boosts also seems to last longer, at least from what I can see in HWiNFO, as rather than just flashing up to a certain speed and then dropping straight away, it now stays there for 2-3 seconds before dropping back down.
However, AGESA 1.0.0.4B doesn't give me as high boosts as one of the 1.0.0.3 releases where I was hitting 4,600MHz, now the best I've seen is 4,550MHz.

As a side note, Global C-state Control, CPPC Preferred Cores, and AMD Cool'n'Quiet are not visible in Gigabyte's UEFI, but all of them are enabled by default. I guess they didn't want people messing with those settings, but it's also confusing in a way...
We might get to see them in the future though.


----------



## Frick (Nov 20, 2019)

W1zzard said:


> AMD didn't give me a sample for CPU review. Yuri is completely separate both geographically and logistically



been wondering about that.


----------



## TheLostSwede (Nov 20, 2019)

Tahna said:


> So I've switched to Hwinfo for monitoring my speeds and i'm getting closer to the 4.6 than I thought. Still nothing over 4466 Mhz with my 3900x though. I've tried with PBO both on and off (doesn't make a difference). This seems pretty good but really I'm not sure what to expect tbh.
> 
> View attachment 137042


Care to throw up some screenshots of your UEFI settings? Just plug in a FAT32 formatted USB drive and hit F12 to grab a screenshot.


----------



## VulkanBros (Nov 20, 2019)

This Power Plan tool - it only applies to RyZEN 3000 series CPU´s - correct? Or does it help any on RyZEN 1000 and 2000 series CPU´s as well?


----------



## 1usmus (Nov 20, 2019)

Artex said:


> I have a similar spec'd machine and I'm curious what the PBO setting should be set to as well.  I too cannot boost passed 4.2Ghz with the power profile, and my temps hover in the mid-40s under 10% load with my AIO Corsair H115 Platinum for cooling.
> 
> Ryzen 3900x - haven't touched OC settings outside of the 1usmus instructions, or Ryzen Master settings.
> x570 Auros Extreme Mobo
> ...




Do I understand correctly that your processor also does not receive maximum boost in single-threaded loads?

*Guys, everyone who needs help, attach to your message a log made using Hwinfo 6.15 in CB15 (single thread).

P.s. System must be in default + there should not be any background activity during logging.*


----------



## TylerTr (Nov 20, 2019)

Made an account to just say thank you.. my 3700x recorded highest averages for core clocks and i got the best c20 scores with the power plan and the right things enabled in bios. Cores are sleeping when not in use, and average core voltages are super low when im just browsing the web and doing normal things. will test gaming tomorrow, but i imagine i'll see the same results there.


----------



## jamexman (Nov 20, 2019)

Jism said:


> On Ryzen Univeral power plan, this thing constantly keeps the CPU core voltage at around 1.45V. Even in 2129Mhz. This is bullshit.
> 
> Even the balanced plan of windows itself nicely puts the CPU into 0.890mv instead of 1.45v. Are you kidding me? If you make a power plan please test it properly and dont cram this up your system without monitoring it's abilitys. Ryzens are proned to suffer from degradation fast and having it in idle on 1.45V / 2129Mhz (CPU-Z, Ryzen 2700X) is just asking for problems.
> 
> Windows balanced is proper enough for me.



Did I just read you have a 2700X? Dude, this power plans are for Ryzen 2nd gen (3XXX).


----------



## TheLostSwede (Nov 20, 2019)

Coming soon™ to a Gigabyte board near you...





Still not getting as good clocks as with AGESA 1.0.0.3 something.







VulkanBros said:


> This Power Plan tool - it only applies to RyZEN 3000 series CPU´s - correct? Or does it help any on RyZEN 1000 and 2000 series CPU´s as well?


No, it's only for Ryzen 3000.


----------



## DeathtoGnomes (Nov 20, 2019)

TheLostSwede said:


> Just in case anyone is looking to remove the previous one, or these, see link.
> It would seem you have to use the command line option, as the other one is missing in the recent Windows 10 versions.
> 
> 
> ...


thanks


----------



## bonezy (Nov 20, 2019)

1usmus said:


> Universal  Power Plan


Hey Yuri and thanks for all your hard work! I also follow you on Twitter to keep up with your releases.

I have 2 quick questions. 

1. Which power plan works best with 1909? 
I am running Win10 Pro 1909, OS build 18363.476 - KB4524570 is also installed.

2. In your previous post, you suggested the following changes to the bios but I can't find all of them in the bios.



> You have to set the following in your BIOS, under "CPU Features" or "AMD_CBS":
> Global C-state Control = Enabled
> Power Supply Idle Control = Low Current Idle
> CPPC = Enabled
> ...



Are they needed for the new (1.1) power plan to work as intended and does PBO have to be disabled?
I am running the latest bios version (1105) for my board (ROG Crosshair VIII Impact)

Again, many thanks!


----------



## RH92 (Nov 20, 2019)

W1zzard said:


> AMD didn't give me a sample for CPU review. Yuri is completely separate both geographically and logistically



Yeah i don't know what AMD PR team plans where for 3950X  but something went really wrong on the priority list to say the least .


----------



## Danielsweb (Nov 20, 2019)

1usmus said:


> Do I understand correctly that your processor also does not receive maximum boost in single-threaded loads?
> 
> *Guys, everyone who needs help, attach to your message a log made using Hwinfo 6.15 in CB15 (single thread).
> 
> P.s. System must be in default + there should not be any background activity during logging.*



Hi there. See attached log of HWInfo 2.15.3390, logged while running CB R15 using your universal power plan. Screen shots of "About my PC" and "Power Plan" settings here. See this reddit post for details on my hardware config and some other benchmarks I've run on Windows 1903 and 1909 using the .

I'm curious to see what you think. I was seeing 4625 Mhz peak on preferred cores at some point in my past (could have been 1003ABB or 1003ABBA) but now the highest peak I ever see is 4550 Mhz on preferred core.

I'm actually happy with this performance, I think it's great, so I'm not really concerned. This is more "for science" than anything else. I'm also willing to do any testing you'd like, if it helps, on fresh installs of Windows and BIOS reset/flashback.

Thank you for all you do for our community.


----------



## Artex (Nov 20, 2019)

1usmus said:


> Do I understand correctly that your processor also does not receive maximum boost in single-threaded loads?
> 
> *Guys, everyone who needs help, attach to your message a log made using Hwinfo 6.15 in CB15 (single thread).
> 
> P.s. System must be in default + there should not be any background activity during logging.*



Correct - I will attach the log this evening.  I've also disabled PBO and verified all other required settings visible to me in the Gigabyte BIOS.


----------



## Jism (Nov 20, 2019)

jamexman said:


> Did I just read you have a 2700X? Dude, this power plans are for Ryzen 2nd gen (3XXX).



There's a Universal powerplan included for "Ryzen processors". So i assume thats from Gen 1 to 3. But it's worse for balanced, it keeps the voltage up to a constant 1.45 while even on 2100 mhz idle.


----------



## speedgoat (Nov 20, 2019)

both power plans boost really high for me, the first one was giving me constantly 4.6 on 2 cores and all cores over 4.5  but i think i probably prefer the most recent one since on this i see the freq down to 2.200 MHz when idling but i ve only been using it for a couple of hours so not sure yet. 

they are both on 1.0.0.3, with a C7H, the first one is with 1903 and the 2nd with 1909, ignore the 1.5Vs, they are not happening i am constantly running a small offset. 
Really thank you for your contribution Yuri ! i have now the 3800X i thought would have came out of box when i first bought it.


----------



## Wickedt (Nov 20, 2019)

1usmus said:


> Do I understand correctly that your processor also does not receive maximum boost in single-threaded loads?
> 
> *Guys, everyone who needs help, attach to your message a log made using Hwinfo 6.15 in CB15 (single thread).
> 
> P.s. System must be in default + there should not be any background activity during logging.*


----------



## kara.new (Nov 20, 2019)

Jism said:


> There's a Universal powerplan included for "Ryzen processors". So i assume thats from Gen 1 to 3. But it's worse for balanced, it keeps the voltage up to a constant 1.45 while even on 2100 mhz idle.



If you read the article, it even states it's for the 3000 series.


----------



## Wickedt (Nov 20, 2019)

CPU Cooling: the boost frequency of the Zen 2 processors is very dependent on temperature. AMD calculated their rated boost clocks at 50°C.

Depending on the processor, maximum boost will go down with temperature:
- 3900/3950 - 75 MHz per 10°C
- 3800/3700 - 50 MHz per 10°C
- 3600/3500 - 35 MHz per 10°C

So when bench marking your computer, unless you can stay at 50 or below, you will never see full boost. I think this is the reason why we see 4525 Mhz so often when running benchmarks, because the temps hover around 50-57 C
Then once it cools down over time, we see 4600+ showing up on some cores, the temps are usually idle temps, and then some background process causes it to boost to its max of 4600+.
Is it possible with water cooling to keep temps at max 50 C?


----------



## W1zzard (Nov 20, 2019)

RH92 said:


> Yeah i don't know what AMD PR team plans where for 3950X  but something went really wrong on the priority list to say the least .


tell them on social media


----------



## Jism (Nov 20, 2019)

Wickedt said:


> CPU Cooling: the boost frequency of the Zen 2 processors is very dependent on temperature. AMD calculated their rated boost clocks at 50°C.
> 
> Depending on the processor, maximum boost will go down with temperature:
> - 3900/3950 - 75 MHz per 10°C
> ...



Yes. I have a 2700x and the boost algorithm pretty much works the same way as the 3x00 series. Its all dependent of temps and it has to stay within the 60 degree mark for it to fully utilitize. Now i have a 360mm rad with 6 fans sandwiched in between. On stock it's not enough and it takes a slight undervolt to keep it within 60 degrees mark.

What happens on IBT all core is that for a few minutes it's just stomping all core on 4.2Ghz, and slowly goes down as the water heats up. Eventually tuning in on 4.15Ghz which is really not bad for a 2700x.

So if you want to have best / max boost, keep the temps within. The undervolting on some 3x00 series seem to harm performance instead of bringing.


----------



## jamexman (Nov 20, 2019)

Danielsweb said:


> Hi there. See attached log of HWInfo 2.15.3390, logged while running CB R15 using your universal power plan. Screen shots of "About my PC" and "Power Plan" settings here. See this reddit post for details on my hardware config and some other benchmarks I've run on Windows 1903 and 1909 using the .
> 
> I'm curious to see what you think. I was seeing 4625 Mhz peak on preferred cores at some point in my past (could have been 1003ABB or 1003ABBA) but now the highest peak I ever see is 4550 Mhz on preferred core.
> 
> ...



Exactly the same for me and my 3900x.  Highest boost was with agesa 1.0.0.3 abba 4625mhz. Agesa 1.0.0.4b lowered them to max 4550mhz.

1usmus new plan at least brought 4615mhz back, but only on one core.

AMD fixed boost clocks with abba and the ruins then again with 4b...


----------



## nangu (Nov 20, 2019)

jamexman said:


> Exactly the same for me and my 3900x.  Highest boost was with agesa 1.0.0.3 abba 4625mhz. Agesa 1.0.0.4b lowered them to max 4550mhz.
> 
> 1usmus new plan at least brought 4615mhz back, but only on one core.
> 
> AMD fixed boost clocks with abba and the ruins then again with 4b...



I observed the same behaviour, regardless the power plan utilized. On 1.0.0.4, sustained clocks on ST are 100/150 mhz lower than 1.0.0.3, and ~50 Mhz in MT. Benchmarks numbers correlate with this lowered clocks.

Windows 1909 changed things for the worst to my system. The scheduler is now splitting single threaded workloads between Thread0 and Thread1 on my best two cores, instead to sustain the workload on the Thread0 or Thread1 on the core. It's bouncing like mad between Core0 T0 T1, and Core2 T0 T1. With 1.0.0.3 ABBA and Windows 1903 ST Workloads always hitted Core2 T0 and/or Core0 T0, never went to the SMT portion of the core like now.

All of it it's regardless the power plan I use.

I'm really tired to the apparently Microsoft, AMD and Gigabyte incompetence on the software and/or firmware side of things. I'm done with PB and PBO, I dialed a stable CCX Overclock with Ryzen Master and I'm done :-(


----------



## Weshya (Nov 20, 2019)

nangu said:


> I observed the same behaviour, regardless the power plan utilized. On 1.0.0.4, sustained clocks on ST are 100/150 mhz lower than 1.0.0.3, and ~50 Mhz in MT. Benchmarks numbers correlate with this lowered clocks.
> 
> Windows 1909 changed things for the worst to my system. The scheduler is now splitting single threaded workloads between Thread0 and Thread1 on my best two cores, instead to sustain the workload on the Thread0 or Thread1 on the core. It's bouncing like mad between Core0 T0 T1, and Core2 T0 T1. With 1.0.0.3 ABBA and Windows 1903 ST Workloads always hitted Core2 T0 and/or Core0 T0, never went to the SMT portion of the core like now.
> 
> ...



Owner of a 3600 here. I also observed the same behavior after updating to Agesa 1.0.0.4b, lower sustain clocks overall and the inability of Window's scheduler to properly function. For me 1usmus power plans (both the old and the new universal after updating to Win'1909) & correct BIOS settings have permitted my CPU to regain its pre Agesa 1.0.0.4b boost clocks in a more sustained manner and more consistently on the fastest cores.

Bottom line, It's been 4 months since the Zen 2 processors are out, and it's becoming really tiring to have to check every day for the best tweak/setting/driver/bios in order to finally feel we're getting the most out of our processor


----------



## BoMbY (Nov 20, 2019)

Still not using the best core on 1903 with that patch and newest plan.


----------



## zlobby (Nov 20, 2019)

@1usmus - Yuri, what about the mobile variants of Ryzen?

I for example have the 2700U running Win 10 1909 w/ the AMD chipset drivers, which bring the 'Ryzen Balanced' power plan.

Needless to say, the battery life is far from stellar even under low load. With all fairness, laptop doesn't feel sluggish under any task.

Can something be done for the battery life of the mobile Ryzens while maintaining responsiveness?


----------



## Ubersonic (Nov 20, 2019)

jamexman said:


> Exactly the same for me and my 3900x.  Highest boost was with agesa 1.0.0.3 abba 4625mhz. Agesa 1.0.0.4b lowered them to max 4550mhz.


I got max 4.65GHz with both, but the 1usmus plan/settings got me to an occasional 4.7GHz, so it seems to vary by chip/board.


----------



## Tahna (Nov 21, 2019)

What kind of temperature should I be at under load to reach the 4.6 clock speed? Starting to wonder if that's my issue. I'm cooling with an AIO h115i in a NZXT h510 elite case with radiator mounted in the front, fans on the outside toward the glass; bios have the pump at full speed, and when I manually set the fans to 100% my idle temps are around 54-55 C.



TheLostSwede said:


> Care to throw up some screenshots of your UEFI settings? Just plug in a FAT32 formatted USB drive and hit F12 to grab a screenshot.


Here are my settings. Also a SS of my power plan.








http://imgur.com/a/Hlw2qA1




1usmus said:


> Do I understand correctly that your processor also does not receive maximum boost in single-threaded loads?
> 
> *Guys, everyone who needs help, attach to your message a log made using Hwinfo 6.15 in CB15 (single thread).
> 
> P.s. System must be in default + there should not be any background activity during logging.*


Attached are my logs, I ran a single thread, and all thread log. Let me know If I can provide anything else.

Forum wouldn't accept CSV, so here is a dropbox link: https://www.dropbox.com/s/ukan8egygzpfqye/Tahna Hwinfo Logs.zip?dl=0

I've also added a report on my system from HWiNFO if that helps: https://www.dropbox.com/s/btx8sbln4w50f0n/DESKTOP-8TJHVEE.MHT?dl=0

Thanks for the help!


----------



## TKnockers (Nov 21, 2019)

Ryzen 3600x.. with this 1.1 universal version power plan in windows 1909 my all core boost and single core boost are lower than with 1.0 version.


----------



## mat9v (Nov 21, 2019)

3900X on AGESA 1.0.0.4B on Asus X570 Prime Pro
Windows 1909 1usmus universal plan 1.1
Regardless of PBO being disabled or enabled, maximum clock hovers around 4.55Ghz.
Cooling is powerful enough, 420mm Alphacool setup with 6 SilentWings 3 fans, on liquid metal, temps are kept below 60C up to 10 cores of sustained load, even with CB15/20 MT load (24 threads) they never exceed 66C on stock. Anyway, bios have CPPC, and idle power control but not CPPC preferred cores, I suppose it is enabled but hidden.
1 thread load uses core2 (gold one) on CCX0 but using 2 threads see the second thread default to core0 on CCX0 instead of core4 on CCX1 (silver one), increasing thread count to 3 brings core1 to work and further using 4 threads brings core3 to work instead of core4 (silver). So it seems that CPPC does not work correctly.
I suppose that I can't reach 4.6Ghz due to thermal constraints, but I simply can't cool the CPU below 50C, even 1 thread load hovers around 55C, even undervolted by 0.0625 (the lowest stable voltage - offset actually works on this board) I can't get it below 53C. Oh well, on 1.0.0.3 ABBA I could get 4.625Mhz.
Anyway, for now, the best approach for me is per CCX overclocking in BIOS (that actually also works well), I can get CB20 stable at 4.55Ghz(CCX0), 4.50(CCX1), 4.4(CCX2-3) and 1.475V (FIT limit) and gaming stable at 4.6/4.55/4.4Ghz at the same voltage - all due to temperature differences (CB20 MT tops at 93C and gaming rarely jumps over 82C).
I can get 7800p in CB20 out of this configuration - https://drive.google.com/open?id=1s2XPkib51TlRIGxZ3oUo6MyvqGH6ji7R
I can only hope that AMD can get us our 4.6Ghz back with future AGESA version.


----------



## 1usmus (Nov 21, 2019)

Tahna said:


> What kind of temperature should I be at under load to reach the 4.6 clock speed? Starting to wonder if that's my issue. I'm cooling with an AIO h115i in a NZXT h510 elite case with radiator mounted in the front, fans on the outside toward the glass; bios have the pump at full speed, and when I manually set the fans to 100% my idle temps are around 54-55 C.
> 
> 
> Here are my settings. Also a SS of my power plan.
> ...




What i found in your case:

1) Average background activity of your system in this test is 10.8%, which is almost 2.1 times more than normal. That is, your background programs do not allow the processor to work effectively with single-threaded tasks.
2) Average temperature is 64 degrees for a single-thread test. It's a lot. Be prepared for the fact that the processor will already lose 100 MHz due to temperature.
3) Vcore 1.39V , this confirms that there are problems with background activity.

I have a suggestion, re-record the log in safe mode and also make *polling time 50ms*.



Danielsweb said:


> Hi there. See attached log of HWInfo 2.15.3390, logged while running CB R15 using your universal power plan. Screen shots of "About my PC" and "Power Plan" settings here. See this reddit post for details on my hardware config and some other benchmarks I've run on Windows 1903 and 1909 using the .
> 
> I'm curious to see what you think. I was seeing 4625 Mhz peak on preferred cores at some point in my past (could have been 1003ABB or 1003ABBA) but now the highest peak I ever see is 4550 Mhz on preferred core.
> 
> ...



Thanks!  Your system is fine. I like.
If not difficult, set polling time to 50 ms and make logs for the Ryzen Balanced and Universal profiles.



Danielsweb said:


> Hi there. See attached log of HWInfo 2.15.3390, logged while running CB R15 using your universal power plan. Screen shots of "About my PC" and "Power Plan" settings here. See this reddit post for details on my hardware config and some other benchmarks I've run on Windows 1903 and 1909 using the .
> 
> I'm curious to see what you think. I was seeing 4625 Mhz peak on preferred cores at some point in my past (could have been 1003ABB or 1003ABBA) but now the highest peak I ever see is 4550 Mhz on preferred core.
> 
> ...



There are some changes in the new SMU that relate to frequency at a certain temperature. It looks like your 58 degrees are the cause. I have a suggestion. In BIOS, the limit throttling change from *Auto* to *105* degrees.

Please note that this offer is only for this situation and only for this experiment.



Ubersonic said:


> I got max 4.65GHz with both, but the 1usmus plan/settings got me to an occasional 4.7GHz, so it seems to vary by chip/board.



Very cool!
Can you make a log?



zlobby said:


> @1usmus - Yuri, what about the mobile variants of Ryzen?
> 
> I for example have the 2700U running Win 10 1909 w/ the AMD chipset drivers, which bring the 'Ryzen Balanced' power plan.
> 
> ...



I unfortunately do not have a mobile processor for this kind of experimentation, but it seems to me that the main condition is a well-maintained operating system. This will allow the device to work longer, since the cores will not wake up again.



mat9v said:


> 3900X on AGESA 1.0.0.4B on Asus X570 Prime Pro
> Windows 1909 1usmus universal plan 1.1
> Regardless of PBO being disabled or enabled, maximum clock hovers around 4.55Ghz.
> Cooling is powerful enough, 420mm Alphacool setup with 6 SilentWings 3 fans, on liquid metal, temps are kept below 60C up to 10 cores of sustained load, even with CB15/20 MT load (24 threads) they never exceed 66C on stock. Anyway, bios have CPPC, and idle power control but not CPPC preferred cores, I suppose it is enabled but hidden.
> ...



Thanks for your feedback.
I think you're right, at the moment the limit is temperature. I will try to influence AMD in this direction.


----------



## mat9v (Nov 21, 2019)

@1usmus - I suppose that if I were to use distinct programs to generate load, it may just place the load on different CCXes. What I mean is that default Windows behavior is to place threads from the same program as close to each other as possible so it would fill CCX0 before spawning threads on CCX1 - closeness to common L3 cache would be more important then selecting better quality core that MAY boost higher. I think I will test that if I have some time. Use CB15 ST, CB20 ST, CPU-Z ST, 7-zip ST test... hmmm.


----------



## Weshya (Nov 21, 2019)

On a side note (but still relevant) i noticed that on my Desktop PC, under Power & Sleep>Performance and energy, there's a slider that can be used to control the power plan in use (?). Since i really don't know if by choosing another preset (other than the default "better performance") it would replace my current power plan (1usmus Universal) , i decided to make a quick test. 
I noticed that if i choose "Best performance", it behaves as if I've chosen the "High Performance" power plan, BUT retaining the 1usmus universal power plan benefits. 

So i am kind of puzzled as to what this setting has to do on a desktop PC. Is it to fine tune the already chosen power plan under control panel ? 
I suspect that the "better performance=balanced" option should be chosen if our current power plan is 1usmus, or not ?

Running Win'10 1909


----------



## Danielsweb (Nov 21, 2019)

1usmus said:


> Thanks!  Your system is fine. I like.
> If not difficult, set polling time to 50 ms and make logs for the Ryzen Balanced and Universal profiles.
> There are some changes in the new SMU that relate to frequency at a certain temperature. It looks like your 58 degrees are the cause. I have a suggestion. In BIOS, the limit throttling change from *Auto* to *105* degrees.
> 
> Please note that this offer is only for this situation and only for this experiment.



Thank you for the guidance. I ran three different test pairs (odd tests are 1usmus Universal, even tests are Ryzen Balanced). I zipped up the log (50 ms polling) along with some screen shots of BIOS and Power Plan for easy reference of state of each test:

*Tests 1 and 2 -BoostfMaxEn*

I found this setting in SMU options and set it to 105. I realized later F probably means frequency and not Fahrenheit. I did the tests, here are the results, but feel free to ignore - EXCEPT, I did see 4625 Mhz peak on best core in CCX0 during these tests! (The only time I saw it...)

*Tests 3 and 4 - Default*

I decided to run a pair of tests with my default BIOS (note: this is NOT stock). I was just curious.

*Tests 5 and 6 - Platform Thermal Throttle Limit*

I finally found this setting - it was buried under PBO settings, and not in SMU options. I think I got my intent right (leaving PBO off, while increasing the throttle limit) - but considering it was in the PBO area, I'm wondering if it was all moot.

--
I observed some interesting things, so I'm curious what you find, assuming you even have the time to crawl these logs.


----------



## 1usmus (Nov 21, 2019)

Danielsweb said:


> Thank you for the guidance. I ran three different test pairs (odd tests are 1usmus Universal, even tests are Ryzen Balanced). I zipped up the log (50 ms polling) along with some screen shots of BIOS and Power Plan for easy reference of state of each test:
> 
> *Tests 1 and 2 -BoostfMaxEn*
> 
> ...



Thanks for the test.
On your system, the AMD profile is trying to use the wrong core.* I want to draw the attention of users to this nuance.*


----------



## teeradbacesi (Nov 21, 2019)

An interesting article from AMD_Robert on best core selection between Ryzen Master and Windows:


__
		https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/dzjs7i

Bullet 5 seems to apply here:

"Now we’re at the handoff to the OS. This is where things get more complicated. Windows selects and prioritizes the fastest core in the firmware with an additional criterion that there must be a second core in the same CCX that’s nearly as fast. The scheduler rotates between them to ensure one core isn’t shouldering all the single-threaded work all the time. (This is why you will sometimes see a “one thread” task jump back and forth between two different cores.) Additionally, I believe it’s now widely understood in this community that corralling workloads within a CCX, when possible, is optimal for “Zen 2” performance. Windows 10 May 2019 Update also respects this. So, if Windows is going to pick and use a fastest core, it needs a partner within the same CCX to ensure all the criteria are met for optimal performance. This is the best-performing configuration for 1T and lightly-threaded scenarios. "


----------



## 1usmus (Nov 21, 2019)

Weshya said:


> On a side note (but still relevant) i noticed that on my Desktop PC, under Power & Sleep>Performance and energy, there's a slider that can be used to control the power plan in use (?). Since i really don't know if by choosing another preset (other than the default "better performance") it would replace my current power plan (1usmus Universal) , i decided to make a quick test.
> I noticed that if i choose "Best performance", it behaves as if I've chosen the "High Performance" power plan, BUT retaining the 1usmus universal power plan benefits.
> 
> So i am kind of puzzled as to what this setting has to do on a desktop PC. Is it to fine tune the already chosen power plan under control panel ?
> ...



I will check what this setting does


----------



## Tahna (Nov 21, 2019)

1usmus said:


> What i found in your case:
> 
> 1) Average background activity of your system in this test is 10.8%, which is almost 2.1 times more than normal. That is, your background programs do not allow the processor to work effectively with single-threaded tasks.
> 2) Average temperature is 64 degrees for a single-thread test. It's a lot. Be prepared for the fact that the processor will already lose 100 MHz due to temperature.
> ...



Thanks 1usmus, but I am having an issue getting hwinfo to even start in safe mode. Is there a work around for this? I tried everything in this thread I found, but the methods failed to work.

In regular boot mode, I've disabled all backround tasks in the windows privacy settings, closed everything I can and this is where my tasks land. Chrome would be closed upon CB15 test, and hwinfo would be the only other program open besides CB15.


----------



## Danielsweb (Nov 21, 2019)

1usmus said:


> Thanks for the test.
> On your system, the AMD profile is trying to use the wrong core.* I want to draw the attention of users to this nuance.*



That is very interesting. 1usmus universal power plan it is!



Tahna said:


> Thanks 1usmus, but I am having an issue getting hwinfo to even start in safe mode. Is there a work around for this? I tried everything in this thread I found, but the methods failed to work.



Hi Tahna. Try going into Task Manager, Startup tab, and disabling everything you see there. Once done, reboot and re-run your tests. This is what I do, and I find it gives me a reasonable amount of headroom to do all my tests. Some things are still running (e.g., Radeon software, Windows active anti-virus protection, Bluetooth driver, etc.) but nothing that takes over the whole machine. Give this a try and attach new logs.


----------



## Ubersonic (Nov 21, 2019)

Tahna said:


> when I manually set the fans to 100% my idle temps are around 54-55 C


Something is wrong either with your cooler or your CPU mount/settings.  Looking at that it's possible either the cooler isn't making proper contact (or isn't working) or the CPU is running higher voltage than it should.

At 100% fan speed you shouldn't be idling in the 50s, the stock cooler can do better than that at 100%.


----------



## WiredTexan (Nov 21, 2019)

1usmus said:


> I will check what this setting does



I found this article on tenforums which sheds some light on this 'feature'. Still confusing. (The Power Mode bar does disappear if we choose the Windows High Performance plan)

Edit:
This Channel9 video provides a good bit of information on this feature, comparing Power Plan vs Power Mode. Power Mode deals with power throttling background apps. I found that with my Gigabyte Aorus Pro Wifi X570, no matter what setting I used only System Interrupts showed in the task manager as having power throttling enabled. So it may be a no-op feature on a desktop. It could also be showing up by mistake as the setting makes little sense on a desktop.


----------



## Danielsweb (Nov 21, 2019)

teeradbacesi said:


> "For day-to-day system use, our guidance remains unchanged: install any version of Windows from May 2019 (or newer) and keep it up-to-date, grab the current chipset driver from July 7 onwards, and use the latest BIOS from AGESA 1002 onwards. You will see the expected “fastest core” experience. No additional updates are required. If a user wants to confirm with their motherboard as well to remove all doubt, then you can force-enable the following BIOS settings: Global C-States, CPPC, CPPC Preferred Core(s). These settings are available in the AMD CBS menu of virtually any motherboard. Our official guidance is auto/default ON for these settings, but it’s a step you can take out of an abundance of caution."



What I find interesting about this is that yes, this is their guidance. However, at least based on Hwinfo logs from some limited testing on my system, 1usmus was able to demonstrate that the Ryzen Balanced plan is not using the best core as reported by Windows. So personally, I'm going to go ahead and take that extra step and use the 1usmus universal plan. This won't translate into any dramatic difference in performance, but I'll happily take another 2 or 3 fps in my favorite games when I'm not crunching numbers.


----------



## Tahna (Nov 21, 2019)

Danielsweb said:


> Hi Tahna. Try going into Task Manager, Startup tab, and disabling everything you see there. Once done, reboot and re-run your tests. This is what I do, and I find it gives me a reasonable amount of headroom to do all my tests. Some things are still running (e.g., Radeon software, Windows active anti-virus protection, Bluetooth driver, etc.) but nothing that takes over the whole machine. Give this a try and attach new logs.


I'll give this a try, thanks!


Ubersonic said:


> Something is wrong either with your cooler or your CPU mount/settings.  Looking at that it's possible either the cooler isn't making proper contact (or isn't working) or the CPU is running higher voltage than it should.
> 
> At 100% fan speed you shouldn't be idling in the 50s, the stock cooler can do better than that at 100%.


Thanks for the reply. This is what I was afraid of. I feel confident in the mount, but it's still possible something is set wrong. I read another thread with the same AIO (Corsair H115i) / CPU as me, and corsair replaced the AIO which solved the cooling issue completely for them. I'm going to open up my case panels, put on two more fans, and see if that improves the temps.

@Ubersonic how can I make sure the CPU voltage is correct? I haven't messed with anything voltage wise.


----------



## Weshya (Nov 21, 2019)

WiredTexan said:


> I found this article on tenforums which sheds some light on this 'feature'. Still confusing. (The Power Mode bar does disappear if we choose the Windows High Performance plan)



The article you link refers to laptops, whereas i am talking about desktop PC. That's why i am really puzzled as to what this setting is really doing, i could not find any proper documentation either.
It does not seem to replace the current chosen power plan when selecting a different option, but it seems to be fine tuning the current power plan ? I eagerly wait for 1usmus opinion on that.


----------



## WiredTexan (Nov 21, 2019)

WiredTexan said:


> es a good bit of information on this feature, comparing Power Plan vs Power Mode. Power Mode deals with power throttling background apps. I found that with my Gigabyte Aorus Pro Wifi X570, no matter what setting I used only System Interrupts showed





Weshya said:


> The article you link refers to laptops, whereas i am talking about desktop PC. That's why i am really puzzled as to what this setting is really doing, i could not find any proper documentation either.
> It does not seem to replace the current chosen power plan when selecting a different option, but it seems to be fine tuning the current power plan ? I eagerly wait for 1usmus opinion on that.



Yup, most info on this feature will be geared toward laptops. I linked a Channel9 video that compares power plans vs power mode in my original reply and that page provides links to dev documentation. Power Mode deals with throttling power to background processes/apps. The video shows how to see what apps have power throttling enabled, on my setup only system interrupts show this as enabled no matter what power mode I select. Since a desktop doesn't run off a battery I doubt this setting has any affect at all and should not be showing up.  Power Plans, however, make sense because they can save you money! Putting monitors, hard drives, etc to sleep when not in use is a good thing, (for the environment and the wallet), whether on a laptop, tablet or desktop.


----------



## Weshya (Nov 21, 2019)

WiredTexan said:


> Yup, most info on this feature will be geared toward laptops. I linked a Channel9 video that compares power plans vs power mode in my original reply and that page provides links to dev documentation. Power Mode deals with throttling power to background processes/apps. The video shows how to see what apps have power throttling enabled, on my setup only system interrupts show this as enabled no matter what power mode I select. Since a desktop doesn't run off a battery I doubt this setting has any affect at all and should not be showing up.  Power Plans, however, make sense because they can save you money! Putting monitors, hard drives, etc to sleep when not in use is a good thing, (for the environment and the wallet), whether on a laptop, tablet or desktop.



I see on Reddit that Robert got involved in that matter, and is also surprised as to what this setting is doing on a desktop PC. Your findings of throttling background applications seems to agree with my observations in my quick test. So i guess we should leave the default " better performance" so it does not interfere with AMD's or 1usmus power plans.


----------



## 1usmus (Nov 21, 2019)

Weshya said:


> I see on Reddit that Robert got involved in that matter, and is also surprised as to what this setting is doing on a desktop PC. Your findings of throttling background applications seems to agree with my observations in my quick test. So i guess we should leave the default " better performance" so it does not interfere with AMD's or 1usmus power plans.



Maybe I'm not attentive. Please describe your observations

P.s. duty cycle disabled by default in Ryzen Balanced


----------



## Weshya (Nov 21, 2019)

What i have noticed for sure is that setting the slider to "Best Performance" *power mode *in "Power & Sleep>Performance and Energy" apparently changes the minimum processor state to 100%, because i can see that the min clocks are much higher when my PC is idle. It does that while keeping the already chosen* power plan *(in control panel) and in my case, it's your universal custom one. So it does not seem to replace the existing power plan, but rather only changes the aggressiveness/snappiness of the cpu on the chosen power plan  ?

Edit : "Best performance" changes the idle CPU voltage from ~1.0 to ~1.45 here also


----------



## zstoichev (Nov 22, 2019)

AMD Clarifies "Best Cores" vs "Preferred Cores" Discrepancies For Ryzen CPUs
					






					www.anandtech.com


----------



## Tahna (Nov 22, 2019)

Danielsweb said:


> Hi Tahna. Try going into Task Manager, Startup tab, and disabling everything you see there. Once done, reboot and re-run your tests. This is what I do, and I find it gives me a reasonable amount of headroom to do all my tests. Some things are still running (e.g., Radeon software, Windows active anti-virus protection, Bluetooth driver, etc.) but nothing that takes over the whole machine. Give this a try and attach new logs.



Well I think the BG tasks were my issue... I applied your method of disabling all the startup applications, re ran CB15 single core with only Hwinfo open and I saw two cores max out at 4591.7!

@1usmus Here is my updated log with polling rate of 50 and all the bg tasks closed. I think i'm performing well and good now, but can you please verify? https://www.dropbox.com/s/94e7aibskvj7b6j/CB15-11-21-2019 v1.CSV?dl=0


----------



## konjiki7 (Nov 22, 2019)

*@*[B]1usmus[/B]* I've had my 3900x for a while now and just got around to playing with fclocks and memory timing. With PBO off,3800 ram and fclock @ 1900mhz  I saw 539 in the single core cpu-z bench and 8301 in multi core. With your power plan I saw bump in performance and it now score more consistently! Scores hover around 546-547 for single and 8400-8430 now. The system is noticeably more snappy and I also pickup 12 fps in gears 5 too!

I've been reading articles on techpowerup for years but I specifically join this forum to say thank you!



System configuration 
3900x - Cooled by Custom loop
EVGA 1080Ti  - Cooled by Custom loop
ASROCk Taichi bio v2.50
g-skill royal 3600 2x16gb @ 3800 xmp profile timings
Fclock @ 1900mhz
PBO - disabled
win1909 latests updates
1usmus universal power plan 1.1 : )*


----------



## mat9v (Nov 22, 2019)

konjiki7 said:


> *@*[B]1usmus[/B]* I've had my 3900x for a while now and just got around to playing with fclocks and memory timing. With PBO off,3800 ram and fclock @ 1900mhz  I saw 539 in the single core cpu-z bench and 8301 in multi core. With your power plan I saw bump in performance and it now score more consistently! Scores hover around 546-547 for single and 8430-8450 now. The system is noticeably more snappy and I also pickup 12 fps in gears 5 too!
> 
> I've been reading articles on techpowerup for years but I specifically join this forum to say thank you!
> 
> ...


Hey would you care to check Neon Noir benchmark? You have almost the same config as I and I can't get it to run faster then 30fps. CPU load is really high on all cores, but they don't heat up and stay below 45C while GPU is loaded below 30%.


----------



## konjiki7 (Nov 22, 2019)

mat9v said:


> Hey would you care to check Neon Noir benchmark? You have almost the same config as I and I can't get it to run faster then 30fps. CPU load is really high on all cores, but they don't heat up and stay below 45C while GPU is loaded below 30%.


This is what I'm getting for what its worth... During the bench FPS are between 140-160 and frame times are 7ms. (Cpu temps peaked at 57c gpu load was around 97%) Our setups are very similar even down to the 4k tv + monitor. lol

My gut says start with clean drivers(if you haven't already) then double check your bios settings...


----------



## mat9v (Nov 22, 2019)

I did 
I uninstalled Nvidia drivers, did DDU uninstall. Did bios reset and loaded defaults.
I don't really want to reinstall Windows just to check this.








						neon noir fail.jpg
					






					drive.google.com
				



Look at above screenshot - CPU load is stupid high but cores are barely warm - 45C?, GPU load is low - why?
All benchmarks results are way above average on my setup, but this one? down in a gutters.


----------



## konjiki7 (Nov 22, 2019)

I would check for redundant PBO and Auto OC features. I know the ASrock bios had these features enabled by default in forefront of the bios and nested away in AMD PBO folder. I know Steve from Gamers Nexus had some weird result between different x570 mobo's.


----------



## mat9v (Nov 22, 2019)

Damn, I just on a hunch did the following:
bcdedit /set Useplatformclock No
and restarted 
Now this stupid demo is working correctly.
11400p at 1080p high quality 9200p at ultra quality.


----------



## X570-3900X-DE (Nov 22, 2019)

@*1usmus thanks a lot for the new version... you made my day perfect... did see first time 4.650 wow*

So for you guys.. did a few test runs... i am so happy....

So first the Speed proof... by the way Gigabyte X570 Xtreme F10 Bios updated today... so i did play the hole day...


so i did a few test and did see that PBO Auto was on so the speed was less... did turn PBO off. see some more tests...

so I did set the setting system power and sleep to performance after and i did get more score...

well did the tests with HWinfo on and then the test record with this off

and sorry for the bad english...i hope you did understand what i try to show and tell


----------



## Artex (Nov 23, 2019)

Artex said:


> I have a similar spec'd machine and I'm curious what the PBO setting should be set to as well.  I too cannot boost passed 4.2Ghz with the power profile, and my temps hover in the mid-40s under 10% load with my AIO Corsair H115 Platinum for cooling.
> 
> Ryzen 3900x - haven't touched OC settings outside of the 1usmus instructions, or Ryzen Master settings.
> x570 Auros Extreme Mobo
> ...



Still not quite there yet.. PBO is disabled, all other background processes disabled.    Missing anything??  Temps are in the low-mid 50s during C15/C20.


----------



## X570-3900X-DE (Nov 23, 2019)

did you upgrade the BIOS to F10 not F10c... that helped me also, its up 2 days i think

and check the settings in start, settings power and sleep or so called i did that to performance also, there was a post on side 3 i think

i  did also mod the Ram timings with ram calculator now, but will post that tomorrow... as to late here, need to sleep...

hey by the way Version F10 will have all the setting you need to support 1.1 that is also new with F10 so I think you will boost more also









						X570 AORUS XTREME (rev. 1.0) Support | Motherboard - GIGABYTE Global
					

Lasting Quality from GIGABYTE.GIGABYTE Ultra Durable™ motherboards bring together a unique blend of features and technologies that offer users the absolute ...




					www.gigabyte.com
				




see its up from the 21th

so hope you fix it, will talk later


----------



## Artex (Nov 23, 2019)

X570-3900X-DE said:


> did you upgrade the BIOS to F10 not F10c... that helped me also, its up 2 days i think
> 
> and check the settings in start, settings power and sleep or so called i did that to performance also, there was a post on side 3 i think
> 
> ...



Agesa 1.0.0.4b  + F10C.  I'm running 64GB of Corsair Dominator Platinum @ 1800Mhz but I haven't done the RAM calc.


----------



## willgart (Nov 23, 2019)

I'm still not lucky,
windows continues to use the first 2 cores while the second best core is not the core 2 but the 4 in my case.
the core 1 appear to be good, as per hwinfo (not based on the ryzen master tool) but the core 2 is ranked 4, not 2

I'm using the latest windows insider version and my Asus bios has been updated to.
I'm still not able to keep my cores down when running single thread benches.


----------



## Wickedt (Nov 23, 2019)

Read this









						AMD: No, Windows Scheduler Isn't Selecting Wrong Ryzen 3000 Cores to Boost
					

Ryzen Master and CPPC just choose their favorites differently.




					www.tomshardware.com


----------



## MikeDDS06 (Nov 23, 2019)

@X570-3900X-DE Did you achieve 4650 with any negative voltage offset or just stock?  I'm on Aorus Pro Wifi and still experimenting.  I'm getting one core at 4600 and very similar CPU-z scores as you.  I can definitely get better scores with PBO maxed out and -0.075 offset using 1usmus universal.


----------



## willgart (Nov 23, 2019)

Wickedt said:


> Read this
> 
> 
> 
> ...


ok, I see, the system get the best average... 
but wait... its a single core test! 
why spreading this to 2 cores?

by the way, I'm using a 3700x and during the R20 single core tests, if I got 4250mhz, I'm (not) happy!!!! 
the system dont push the core to its limit (4.4ghz, but also from a % point of view)  and still switch too much between the cores
so the temperature is not raising (63deg in average during the single core test)

well... maybe AMD should provide more control on the starting frequency and the frequency / temperature drop behavior. (like we control the fan speed)


----------



## TylerTr (Nov 23, 2019)

willgart said:


> ok, I see, the system get the best average...
> but wait... its a single core test!
> why spreading this to 2 cores?
> 
> ...


Similar issue with my 3700x. Freqs have been more stable with this power plan, but doesn’t click over 4.250ghz in single threaded work loads with similar temps Might hit the max 4.4 for a millisecond, just enough for hwinfo to catch it. So, let’s hope something comes along and fixes that


----------



## X570-3900X-DE (Nov 23, 2019)

MikeDDS06 said:


> @X570-3900X-DE Did you achieve 4650 with any negative voltage offset or just stock?  I'm on Aorus Pro Wifi and still experimenting.  I'm getting one core at 4600 and very similar CPU-z scores as you.  I can definitely get better scores with PBO maxed out and -0.075 offset using 1usmus universal.


Did it with Auto settings did not play with the CPU volts.
Yes i did try with 75 more clocks the other day but was not happy with F10C as Mem OC always crashed...






Artex said:


> Agesa 1.0.0.4b  + F10C.  I'm running 64GB of Corsair Dominator Platinum @ 1800Mhz but I haven't done the RAM calc.


I would try to update the bios, it helped me a lot, hope this will show you also more speed.

Here are the settings I made with the new F10 bios of the Gigabyte Xtreme

so this is with the fast setting from Memory Calculator32GB G.Skill Trident Z Neo DDR4-3600 DIMM CL16 Dual Kit  CL16-16-16-36 (F4-3600C16D-32GTZN) at 3800 with low settings, did a few runs this night so 4650-1 is from the night and the rest from now when i just booted up...


----------



## Danielsweb (Nov 23, 2019)

willgart said:


> ok, I see, the system get the best average...
> but wait... its a single core test!
> why spreading this to 2 cores?



The argument is that using a pair of cores is better for managing temperatures than running only on one core, and that using the same pair within the same CCX yields better performance than switching between CCXs, even if on the same die (CCD).

Whether any of that is true or not, I'm not certain. For my part, I think we're discussing trivial differences in performance.


----------



## willgart (Nov 23, 2019)

Danielsweb said:


> The argument is that using a pair of cores is better for managing temperatures than running only on one core, and that using the same pair within the same CCX yields better performance than switching between CCXs, even if on the same die (CCD).
> 
> Whether any of that is true or not, I'm not certain. For my part, I think we're discussing trivial differences in performance.


right, but this also means there is a lack of control and configuration available to us.
both AMD ans MS should give us advanced tools to manage these type of configuration.


----------



## mat9v (Nov 23, 2019)

willgart said:


> right, but this also means there is a lack of control and configuration available to us.
> both AMD ans MS should give us advanced tools to manage these type of configuration.


That part is almost entirely in the MS ballpark - only they control scheduler behavior and it should be there that we should control how system schedules threads on different cores. On the other hand it requires a lot ok knowledge to configure that correctly and there would be a lot of ground to misconfigure and curse MS for low performance 
So for most users it would be useless/dangerous to ever mess with.


----------



## willgart (Nov 23, 2019)

ok guys, I conducted additional tests on my Ryzen 3700x by forcing the affinity mask of cinebench R20
and my bench jump from 460 to 488 points!
so letting windows selecting the best 2 cores = 460 points
forcing using the AMD star core only = 488points

the average clock is 4275mhz vs 4250mhz.

conclusion: for a single core selecting 2 cores to spread the temp, is not the best solution, a single thread app = single core, no need for more.


----------



## Wickedt (Nov 23, 2019)

willgart said:


> ok guys, I conducted additional tests on my Ryzen 3700x by forcing the affinity mask of cinebench R20
> and my bench jump from 460 to 488 points!
> so letting windows selecting the best 2 cores = 460 points
> forcing using the AMD star core only = 488points
> ...



Im just curious the way to set affinity? Is it in the CB R20 settings?


----------



## willgart (Nov 23, 2019)

Wickedt said:


> Im just curious the way to set affinity? Is it in the CB R20 settings?


no, use the task manager, go in the detail section.
right click the process and set the affinity. 
but do it just after starting the benchmark, because apparently there is like a reset of the setup when we start it.
and after that, you'll have a single core running in a perfectly flat line and constant frequency
and no more heat.
so the argument raised by MS may be applicable... but not sure when and with which CPU.


----------



## robinjoo1 (Nov 23, 2019)

hey im using a ryzen 5 3600 with universal power plan by 1usmus
and PBO enabled +200Mhz
i get these results in cpu-z bench is it good ??


----------



## Tahna (Nov 23, 2019)

Just an update for everyone. I was having a ton of issues, but after installing the latest F10 BIOS on the Auros Elite, all issues appear to be resolved. 

Previously my  temps were spiking into the 50-60's and all the cores were firing off with just basic bg tasks, discord, chrome open, but now after the F10 BIOS + the appropriate settings from @1usmus instructions, I'm getting temps in the high 30's, with over half of my cores asleep. To also mention, windows and all my programs started up significantly faster then before as well.





Thank you so much!!! @1usmus This is awesome!


----------



## X570-3900X-DE (Nov 24, 2019)

yes F10 did add the functions we needed to make it fit, did you make CPU-z test? would be cool to see what you get in benchmark.


----------



## TheLostSwede (Nov 24, 2019)

X570-3900X-DE said:


> @*1usmus thanks a lot for the new version... you made my day perfect... did see first time 4.650 wow*
> 
> So for you guys.. did a few test runs... i am so happy....
> 
> ...


76.4ns is terrible memory latency, that's not running 1:1 with the IF. Even at 3600MHz you should be close to 70ns, if not below with that RAM.
If I were you, I'd go check your UEFI settings.
I'm also pretty certain that the RAM can run at 3800MHz without breaking a sweat, but that takes some more tinkering.



willgart said:


> right, but this also means there is a lack of control and configuration available to us.
> both AMD ans MS should give us advanced tools to manage these type of configuration.


Why? They don't have any obligation to do so.
It's nice that you and maybe another 0.0001% of their market wants those tools, but it ain't gunna happen.
Most people would just break things tinkering with things like that and who gets the blame then? AMD and Microsoft of course, so that's a big no go as an official tool.


----------



## willgart (Nov 24, 2019)

because you think that the entire world is playing with the bios?
overclock and try to push the PC to the limit???
who installed ryzen master? and hwinfo etc???
so yes, AMD and MS can provides tools or API to allows some fans to play with the system.
I dont care about the mass and the default config.
I care about what I can do myself, and I dislike to be locked.


----------



## X570-3900X-DE (Nov 24, 2019)

TheLostSwede said:


> 76.4ns is terrible memory latency, that's not running 1:1 with the IF. Even at 3600MHz you should be close to 70ns, if not below with that RAM.
> If I were you, I'd go check your UEFI settings.
> I'm also pretty certain that the RAM can run at 3800MHz without breaking a sweat, but that takes some more tinkering.


 i did get 74.5 with the fast settings from the memory calculator with it was custom settings not XMP. how should i check the settings?

i will check again the settings, maybe I did use the wrong sheet


----------



## mat9v (Nov 24, 2019)

X570-3900X-DE said:


> i did get 74.5 with the fast settings from the memory calculator with it was custom settings not XMP. how should i check the settings?
> 
> i will check again the settings, maybe I did use the wrong sheet


You probably have the memory speed set correctly but you also have to set Infinity Fabric speed the same as exactly half of memory speed. If you have memory 3800 you have to set Infinity Fabric speed to 1900.
In most bioses you can do that in AMD CBS menu.
There is a small problem that most ZEN2 CPUs can't handle IF speed that high, 2 of mine tops at 3733 (1866) MHz so you may have to lower memory speed to match and tighten timings to compensate. In most cases it is a better choice for gaming performance as well unless your memory is able to run above 4000.


----------



## X570-3900X-DE (Nov 24, 2019)

ok will try and see...

well i did put 1900 clk but not make any big change...still 74.1ns - 73,9, 74.0ns did 3 runs speed is the same in aida64 as on the memory10 -13 pics


----------



## willgart (Nov 24, 2019)

X570-3900X-DE said:


> ok will try and see...
> 
> well i did put 1900 clk but not make any big change...still 74.1ns - 73,9, 74.0ns did 3 runs speed is the same in aida64 as on the memory10 -13 pics


Try 1866mhz
its the maximum supported speed, higher and there is a drop in memory access.


			https://www.pcgamesn.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/amd-ryzen-memory-decoupling-580x326.jpg


----------



## X570-3900X-DE (Nov 24, 2019)

here my settings for the memory

yes 1866 is 64.1ns... speed is about the same read a little more, did put the fast setting like this...

so did a few test so you can see and yes you are right... its faster over all in CPU-Z also

so thanks a lot for telling me and your help !!!

Cinebench20 was 7337 with 1900mhz now max 7381 with 1867mhz as PBO off no OC


----------



## TheLostSwede (Nov 25, 2019)

X570-3900X-DE said:


> i did get 74.5 with the fast settings from the memory calculator with it was custom settings not XMP. how should i check the settings?
> 
> i will check again the settings, maybe I did use the wrong sheet


There are three settings that matter and I don't think you've found the third.
System Memory Multiplier and FCLK Frequency you seem to have worked out, but you need change the Infinity Fabric Frequency and Dividers setting under DDR and Infinity Fabric Frequency/Timings in the AMD Overclocking menu as well (which is under XFR Enhancements and then you need to select Accept).
It seems like you might've found it already though, but only for 1866MHz, so try increasing it a bit more and you might get a smidgen more performance.
You can take screenshots in the UEFI by plugging in a FAT32 formatted USB drive and pressing F12, just as a future reference.



willgart said:


> Try 1866mhz
> its the maximum supported speed, higher and there is a drop in memory access.
> 
> 
> https://www.pcgamesn.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/amd-ryzen-memory-decoupling-580x326.jpg


Nope, 1900MHz works just fine, but you have to manually set it.


----------



## X570-3900X-DE (Nov 25, 2019)

so not sure what is better.... it showed its close just the ns were 74 in 1900 vs 64 in 1866, you can see my tests what i had with 1900 a few post up

yes F12 in Bios works thanks, did not know that.

I will do more tests this evening here... just maybe you could post some sheets of your speeds so we can compare it


----------



## willgart (Nov 25, 2019)

X570-3900X-DE said:


> so not sure what is better.... it showed its close just the ns were 74 in 1900 vs 64 in 1866, you can see my tests what i had with 1900 a few post up
> 
> yes F12 in Bios works thanks, did not know that.
> 
> I will do more tests this evening here... just maybe you could post some sheets of your speeds so we can compare it


you can found a lot of youtube video on the subject of the ram speed.
check the Linus tech tips one.
in most case, having a lower frequency but also a lower CAS is better
if you have a CAS of 19 at 1900mhz, but 18 at 1800mhz, you can have a better performance at 1800 than 1900.


----------



## Weshya (Nov 25, 2019)

New AMD Chipset drivers are now out ! (v.1.11.22.0454) [25.11.19]

1usmus can you confirm whether AMD has taken into account your findings on their power plan ?

Edit : New AMD Ryzen Master is also out


----------



## X570-3900X-DE (Nov 25, 2019)

cool so more test after


----------



## willgart (Nov 25, 2019)

Weshya said:


> New AMD Chipset drivers are now out ! (v.1.11.22.0454) [25.11.19]
> 
> 1usmus can you confirm whether AMD has taken into account your findings on their power plan ?
> 
> Edit : New AMD Ryzen Master is also out


with initial test,I found that its better now. (more test to do with default bios config for example, not tweaked one)
apparently now the cores are sleeping quickly then before. which reduces the temperature at IDLE for me.
I'm still below the target values I expect from my 3700X, with PBO maxed, I cant reached 4200 during R20 single core tests (but apparently, I'm able to go up to 4350 with Windows background activity)

and for info hwinfo64 has been updated too. and the preferred cores has changed.


----------



## X570-3900X-DE (Nov 25, 2019)

i did a quick boot and only see 4300mhz... so i changed to universal and right a way 4550...... did a new test as i could not get 1900 to run... so only 1867 is stable...

so still happy with what i see with PBO off and no OC on the CPU.


----------



## Weshya (Nov 25, 2019)

I personally noticed worst performance (or so i think) somewhat by using the newest chipset + AMD balanced power plan (CPPC + CPPC Preferred Cores enabled)
Not even 1 core is boosting at 4.2 (Ryzen 3600) after 5 minutes of having boot in Windows, without opening any application (apart from the automatic start up ones and HWiNFO obviously)




When i apply 1usmus universal power plan (CPPC + CPPC preferred cores enabled), i immediately see more core boosting at 4.2 + better use of fastest cores after only some minutes after booting into Windows





Another strange fact i noticed, is that when i disable in BIOS CPPC preferred cores but i keep CPPC enabled + use the AMD balanced power plan, i have the same boosting behavior as when i have CPPC + CPPC preferred cored enabled + 1usmus universal  (More cores boosting at 4.2 + better use of correct fastest cores) .

At the end, i may be wrong but i tried three times this procedure and i was able to reproduce it every time.

Once again , i have no clue as to which setting i should stick to in order to get the most out of my Ryzen 3600...


----------



## X570-3900X-DE (Nov 25, 2019)

i also felt that using 1usmus Universal Power Plan was the better way to go... did you check the setting in the power plan

this here 


Weshya said:


> On a side note (but still relevant) i noticed that on my Desktop PC, under Power & Sleep>Performance and energy, there's a slider that can be used to control the power plan in use (?). Since i really don't know if by choosing another preset (other than the default "better performance") it would replace my current power plan (1usmus Universal) , i decided to make a quick test.
> I noticed that if i choose "Best performance", it behaves as if I've chosen the "High Performance" power plan, BUT retaining the 1usmus universal power plan benefits.
> 
> So i am kind of puzzled as to what this setting has to do on a desktop PC. Is it to fine tune the already chosen power plan under control panel ?
> ...



i did go on best performance


----------



## Weshya (Nov 25, 2019)

X570-3900X-DE said:


> i also felt that using 1usmus Universal Power Plan was the better way to go... did you check the setting in the power plan
> 
> this here
> 
> ...



Ok after further testing, when i set the *"Power Mode" to "Best Performance" + 1usmus universal* power plan i have more core boosting at the max 4.2 and faster + unused cores are in sleep mode as it should (checked with Ryzen Master). I also noticed a tad higher Vcore voltage when idle , compared to "Better Performance".

So this slider definitely does something to fine tune the existing power plan , transforming 1usmus power plan into a "High performance 1usmus universal plan" one could say  ?




P.S : When i choose *AMD Balanced power plan + Power Mode on "Best Performance"*, i notice more cores are boosting as well to the max 4.2 but less cores are in sleep mode compared to when it's on "Better performance"





So i guess i am also going to keep the "Best Performance"


----------



## X570-3900X-DE (Nov 25, 2019)

did you check if your BIOS has PBO setting i had to turn mine off to get higher boost, did not like the auto setting


----------



## Weshya (Nov 25, 2019)

X570-3900X-DE said:


> did you check if your BIOS has PBO setting i had to turn mine off to get higher boost, did not like the auto setting



I have PBO on disabled on BIOS


----------



## X570-3900X-DE (Nov 25, 2019)

good me too, i also keep the Best performance very happy with the total results, so not sure what else you could check. The rest that was needed is set in the bios and its the latest?

maybe the other guys can help as maybe one has the same CPU then


----------



## Weshya (Nov 25, 2019)

X570-3900X-DE said:


> good me too, i also keep the Best performance very happy with the total results, so not sure what else you could check. The rest that was needed is set in the bios and its the latest?
> 
> maybe the other guys can help as maybe one has the same CPU then



I am just sharing my thoughts/findings here after the new AMD chipset drivers and trying to figure out what are the best settings finally to have : ) Thank you nevertheless


----------



## X570-3900X-DE (Nov 25, 2019)

that the list i made, maybe there is something you can try

to find the best setting was also my goal here, i got a few good ideas here and help.


----------



## 1usmus (Nov 26, 2019)

Weshya said:


> New AMD Chipset drivers are now out ! (v.1.11.22.0454) [25.11.19]
> 
> 1usmus can you confirm whether AMD has taken into account your findings on their power plan ?
> 
> Edit : New AMD Ryzen Master is also out




Ryzen Master did not change the algorithm for determining core ranks.
Also, I do not see any changes in the power profiles. "Duty cycle" is also disabled by default for Ryzen Balanced. That is, the problem was presented to the public not as a *bug* but as a *features*.
Perhaps they did not have time.


----------



## X570-3900X-DE (Nov 26, 2019)

please keep up the good work, thanks again


----------



## willgart (Nov 26, 2019)

for me, the new drivers had finally an impact.
after few hours of activity on my PC, I can see (using hwinfo) that my 2 fastest cores hit the 4.4ghz, the 2 next 4.35 followed by 4.32 and 4.3ghz (its a ryzen 3700x)
this is following the AMD core ranking for my cores.
in single core tests, Windows still use the 2 best cores (the best average I mean)
so there is some improvement for me.


----------



## 1usmus (Nov 26, 2019)

Artex said:


> Still not quite there yet.. PBO is disabled, all other background processes disabled.    Missing anything??  Temps are in the low-mid 50s during C15/C20.



Have you tried the new chipset drivers?
I also want to advise you to remove RM or drivers using *Revo Uninstaller Pro*. This program allows you to find all traces in the registry and files. Very useful for Ryzen users.



willgart said:


> for me, the new drivers had finally an impact.
> after few hours of activity on my PC, I can see (using hwinfo) that my 2 fastest cores hit the 4.4ghz, the 2 next 4.35 followed by 4.32 and 4.3ghz (its a ryzen 3700x)
> this is following the AMD core ranking for my cores.
> in single core tests, Windows still use the 2 best cores (the best average I mean)
> so there is some improvement for me.



this is great news


----------



## Weshya (Nov 27, 2019)

1usmus said:


> Ryzen Master did not change the algorithm for determining core ranks.
> Also, I do not see any changes in the power profiles. "Duty cycle" is also disabled by default for Ryzen Balanced. That is, the problem was presented to the public not as a *bug* but as a *features*.
> Perhaps they did not have time.


Thank you for your reply.  Is "Duty Cycle" available when choosing Ryzen Balanced + Best performance power mode, or at least in "AMD High Performance" power plan ?  In any case, this power mode slider definitely changes the behavior of the power plan in use.

Edit : It would be great to know how this power mode slider affects your universal power plan too. You haven't observed any change at all when using the "Best Performance" ? Am i the only one to notice even more aggressive core boosts among other things ?


----------



## Artex (Nov 27, 2019)

Gonna call this a win!


----------



## X570-3900X-DE (Nov 27, 2019)

Weshya said:


> "Best Performance" ? Am i the only one to notice even more aggressive core boosts among other things ?




I did say this also that it was better...to go to best performance. So its worth to check



Artex said:


> Gonna call this a win!
> 
> View attachment 137729


should be a little higher... check the setting in the power plan go to best performance, i did gain there also i am max 7381 with 1867mhz as PBO off no OC.
Please kill all tasks that are not needed to make sure you get the real thing...

i would recommend also that you use 1usmus memory calculator for ryzen, that also again me more there and on the rest tests... you can see my test in some post above, I hope you get to it also, as i was very happy to see 4650 first times...

as you have the same board and same CPU should be close then, you did take F10 not other F10C, F10A or so BIOS


----------



## Artex (Nov 27, 2019)

X570-3900X-DE said:


> I did say this also that it was better...to go to best performance. So its worth to check
> 
> 
> should be a little higher... check the setting in the power plan go to best performance, i did gain there also i am max 7381 with 1867mhz as PBO off no OC.
> ...


Thanks! I will definitely try the calc and power settings.  I'm just happy to see these cores boosting to 4.6.  I did update to the F10 bios from F10C.


----------



## X570-3900X-DE (Nov 27, 2019)

yes i was also very happy the first time.. as before all i never got more then 4400 or so if i was lucky. if you need to see my BIOS check here... maybe some stuff you missed



now i get 4650 on a few cores... from time to time... the other setting in the plan kicked it up

let me know if you need more help then


----------



## panni (Nov 28, 2019)

Hey @1usmus thank you for all you're doing for the community.

I've just read about the 1.1 version of your power plan (got a 3700X on a Gigabyte X570 AORUS Pro, still 1.0.0.3 ABBA, 1903).
After doing a binary comparison of your initial release of the power plan ("1usmus Ryzen Power Plan.pow") with the new one ("1usmus Ryzen Power Plan pre-1909.pow"), it's exactly the same (SHA1: 5730d3b21e88c9c0d4c4b8d4cb385a12c3e092a3).

Did I interpret the article wrongly or has the non-universal power plan not changed *at all*?

If this is intended, that might not be how the users see it, as I've seen people looking for ways to delete duplicated power plans - which happens after using your first release, then install.bat of the 1.1 release. Perhaps that should be clarified?


Thanks


----------



## willgart (Nov 28, 2019)

panni said:


> Hey @1usmus thank you for all you're doing for the community.
> 
> I've just read about the 1.1 version of your power plan (got a 3700X on a Gigabyte X570 AORUS Pro, still 1.0.0.3 ABBA, 1903).
> After doing a binary comparison of your initial release of the power plan ("1usmus Ryzen Power Plan.pow") with the new one ("1usmus Ryzen Power Plan pre-1909.pow"), it's exactly the same (SHA1: 5730d3b21e88c9c0d4c4b8d4cb385a12c3e092a3).
> ...


hey, quick question for you...
I also have a Ryzen 3700x and what I dont understand is the lack of power during benchmarks.
for example, with R20, my 2 cores used by windows are reaching 4250 mhz only,  (score 470)
and in multithread, I can get between 3800 and 3900 mhz. (score of 4500)
and so my results out of the box are lower than the other benchmarks
based on the different articles on the subject, I expected to have 4000 to 4100mhz on all cores during benchmark

can you share the frequency you get out of the box?
and for me the PBO maxed out did not change anything at all.
is it the same for you?

after, when I manually overclock, I can push all the cores to 4250mhz and hwinfo , after few hours of activity, show that 2 cores reached 4400 mhz. so its possible to be high, but the benches cant do it!

I'm not sure if the problem is the cpu or the MB (asus tuf gaming x570 wifi for me)


----------



## nko (Nov 29, 2019)

Guys i've got a question about temperature.
My set is: MSI B450 Tomahawk Max (last stable bios and last AMD Chipset update) and AMD Ryzen 7 3700x

And i have a big difference (something like +/-10°c) between Ryzen Master CPU temperature report and MSI Bios (and other tools like HWinfo, AIDA64,... )
And more annoying, temperature report by those tools and bios is pretty unstable constantly moving between a large range of -5°c +5°c around the middle value.

That's a quite annoying problem at least for bios, more than the apparently "wrong value", those temperature are used to adjust fan curves settings and with those fast fluctations fan speed in quite unstable even with a 0.3 latency (maximum possible setting in my bios)

Some of you also encounter this kind of problem ? Do you have a solution ?

Thank you for reading and thank you for your answer

.


----------



## X570-3900X-DE (Nov 29, 2019)

same here temps reading is not easy not sure tool are right... i have 2 die and get different all over, i gave up

ok i got mine on water, maybe you set it on value % min and max if that goes and say after this 50C go on this % value

if you could set the value as you like you just say do this % after this temp, i had my last system pump on this setting with the tems on CPU


----------



## willgart (Nov 29, 2019)

nko said:


> Guys i've got a question about temperature.
> My set is: MSI B450 Tomahawk Max (last stable bios and last AMD Chipset update) and AMD Ryzen 7 3700x
> 
> And i have a big difference (something like +/-10°c) between Ryzen Master CPU temperature report and MSI Bios (and other tools like HWinfo, AIDA64,... )
> ...


I'm seeing the same issue
the temperature is jumping 10deg, slow down 10deg in 5 sec and jump again etc... a constant cycle.
and the ryzen master tool dont display these changes.
I'm using the default ryzen cooler, and I can see that the fan speed is following with small variations, so both are linked (the fan make it cooler).
this occurs as soon as there is a little activity, and because there is no perfect idle case in windows, this jumps always occurred ;-)


----------



## Artex (Nov 29, 2019)

willgart said:


> I'm seeing the same issue
> the temperature is jumping 10deg, slow down 10deg in 5 sec and jump again etc... a constant cycle.


Seeing this issue verbatim - jumps 10 degrees, drops slowly in a few-degree increments and then jumps 10 degrees over again.


----------



## willgart (Nov 29, 2019)

Artex said:


> Seeing this issue verbatim - jumps 10 degrees, drops slowly in a few-degree increments and then jumps 10 degrees over again.


ok, finaly when windows is really in IDLE mode, no more background process running after the startup (ie waiting 15/30min) its now stable.
no more up/down.
so it took some times to windows to terminate all its startup activities.


----------



## nko (Nov 29, 2019)

For me this temperature instability is constant even after windows startup, computer in idle (0% - 1% CPU usage) or in charge.
And this is the same with all performance plan (windows, ryzen, or 1usmus universal), no difference on this.
This had certainly something to do with the way bios read the temperature sensor with that CPU... Quite strange... and quite annoying


----------



## willgart (Nov 29, 2019)

nko said:


> For me this temperature instability is constant even after windows startup, computer in idle (0% - 1% CPU usage) or in charge.
> And this is the same with all performance plan (windows, ryzen, or 1usmus universal), no difference on this.
> This had certainly something to do with the way bios read the temperature sensor with that CPU... Quite strange... and quite annoying


maybe its related to the idle temp and fan curve setup. now I'm below 50deg with normal usage of my PC (word, mails, browser...) and no more spikes.

another element I found, the PCH temperature and fan (fan on the motherboard for the x570 chipset) was low after the reboot and it appear to be higher and constant,
I was around 800rpm and now 1700rpm. its like the x570 chipset is now stable.
so maybe its related to the temp of other elements on the motherboard, when too cold, there are some variations causing variation to the CPU, once the warmup phase done, all the components are stable and so the CPU too.


----------



## 529th (Nov 29, 2019)

1usmus said:


> Thread planning policy used for short-term threads in heterogeneous systems has been changed. Also we force scheduler to use the best cores (if possible) .
> By default, the auto option is enabled there. That is, windows may use the best cores, or it may not.



How can I force the scheduler to use the best core?


----------



## willgart (Nov 29, 2019)

529th said:


> How can I force the scheduler to use the best core?


its already the case.
but, in fact the system search for the best 2 cores, (the best side by side sharing the same cache)
so even a single thread is spread to 2 cores by default.
in my case its the best core 2 and 4 (as per the AMD ranking) which are mainly used
during tests, the core 2 deliver the same performance has my core #1. so even if its ranked 2 its the same result.


----------



## X570-3900X-DE (Nov 30, 2019)

i am still not sure if the tools show right... i got 20c jumps, well I will not look to much for that better. As I did new tests and the system gained more... just did change my monitor but don't think that is why... ok i did text with XMP and XMP off but for some reason it like the XMP setting with custom value more...

so crazy how much more have...

when I started i here had CPU-Z 543 single 8392 Multi, now i have 555 single and 8516 so i think the temps are not the issue..


----------



## Wickedt (Dec 1, 2019)

I would love for somebody to write a program to get the temp from HWInfo and the top 3 processes from windows at that temp.
These CPU'S are weird as hell, but they kick major butt in anything they touch.

hmmmm maybe grab the top 2 cores frequency too.


----------



## korzychxp (Dec 4, 2019)

I have Ryzen 3600X. It can't do 4400Mhz on cinebench single core.

usmus power plan didn't help.

Windows 1909 update ruined RAM latency (AIDA test) for about 1-1.5ns.

1909 Update ruined game performance - in Far Cry Primal i have 2 fps less in benchmark.

I have newest bios for B450 A Pro.

Even +200 boost override doesn't work. Anyone can help? Please PM me if we can't discuss it here.


----------



## willgart (Dec 4, 2019)

korzychxp said:


> I have Ryzen 3600X. It can't do 4400Mhz on cinebench single core.
> 
> usmus power plan didn't help.
> 
> ...


same issue with my 3700x
I'm not able to push a single core during benchmarks using PBO and other auto tuning options in place. (no matter the overclocking option I try, the PBO config, VRM setup etc etc etc... I pushed everything to the max but no change!!! and most of the time its worst)
I dont know if the problem is the CPU or the MB.
its like the system didnt try at all to push the core used.
but if I let my PC active for few hours and I do normal activities, HWinfo64 records a spike at 4350mhz  and sometimes 4375mhz. but never during the benchmarks.
and based on the 3700x reviews, I'm far below what they reached in R20 and other benchs.

currently my best setup is:
slightly overclocked RAM
CPPC and other 1usmus recommandations activated
Ryzen Balanced plan selected, the 1usmus one gives me lower performance.


----------



## Calmmo (Dec 7, 2019)

I  finally gave this a try, custom plan vs ryzen balanced is giving me a small boost in pretty much every benchmark.  I've seen 4650 once in regular use and once also reported in 3dmark




Now if only PBO actually worked and didn't give reduced scores in every single bench..!..


----------



## X570-3900X-DE (Dec 7, 2019)

nice, close to mine...


----------



## HoloTheWise (Dec 9, 2019)

Does anyone happen to know if there are still benefits to be gained using 1usmus' updated power plan on the latest chipset/bios/OS updates? Or have all the changes been corrected and merged upstream?

Windows 10 v2004 - OS Build 19037.1 (12/06/2019)
Asus X570 C8H - Bios v1201 (12/03/2019)
AMD X570 Chipset Drivers - v1.11.22.0454 (11/25/2019)

The updates are newer than the publication of the v1.1 power plan so I'm a bit lost as to which to use (amd balanced vs 1usmus balanced).


----------



## willgart (Dec 9, 2019)

HoloTheWise said:


> Does anyone happen to know if there are still benefits to be gained using 1usmus' updated power plan on the latest chipset/bios/OS updates? Or have all the changes been corrected and merged upstream?
> 
> Windows 10 v2004 - OS Build 19037.1 (12/06/2019)
> Asus X570 C8H - Bios v1201 (12/03/2019)
> ...


with all the updates from Asus and AMD I got.
now I'm using the AMD standard or high performance plans, they performs better than the 1usmus one

in CPU-Z I get 504 to 510 points in single thread, while I got 470 with the 1usmus plan. (3700X used)
also I can see a big difference in the core used during the tests

but at the end, no matter the setup, a manual overclocking performs better ;-)
I change the thermal paste and use the AMD stock cooler, I can reached 4350mhz to all cores which works most of the time (R20 failed above 4300mhz)


----------



## X570-3900X-DE (Dec 9, 2019)

my 3900X is still better with the 1.1 universal plan


----------



## L1GHTNING (Dec 10, 2019)

Currently I use ryzen 5 3600 @4.350ghz @1.30v override on cinebench r20 I get 3957 points if I leave it auto and use the 1usmus profile maybe could be better? I'm worried just cuz the cpu running 4.350 and 1.30v all the time even if I leave it


----------



## X570-3900X-DE (Dec 10, 2019)

well my 3900x is on stock setting so hard to tell... and to have the profil work you need the right setting in the bios also


----------



## willgart (Dec 10, 2019)

L1GHTNING said:


> Currently I use ryzen 5 3600 @4.350ghz @1.30v override on cinebench r20 I get 3957 points if I leave it auto and use the 1usmus profile maybe could be better? I'm worried just cuz the cpu running 4.350 and 1.30v all the time even if I leave it


no, the 1usmus plan may make the CPU running smoother with reduced switches between cores (which causes some latencies and slowness)
the CPU will not be at the max speed all the time. the 1usmus plan dont change the way the cpu works and the power transmitted.
but with all the updates received in the recent weeks, I recommend to test the different setups. on my 3700x, the 1usmus plan reduces the performance compared to the AMD plans
but your cpu will be safe until you push it at the bios level or using the ryzen master tool to overclock it.


----------



## EddieZ (Dec 30, 2019)

Jism said:


> On Ryzen Univeral power plan, this thing constantly keeps the CPU core voltage at around 1.45V. Even in 2129Mhz. This is bullshit.
> 
> Even the balanced plan of windows itself nicely puts the CPU into 0.890mv instead of 1.45v. Are you kidding me? If you make a power plan please test it properly and dont cram this up your system without monitoring it's abilitys. Ryzens are proned to suffer from degradation fast and having it in idle on 1.45V / 2129Mhz (CPU-Z, Ryzen 2700X) is just asking for problems.
> 
> Windows balanced is proper enough for me.


If you change the minimum processor to less then 99% it will turn down the voltage...Don't know if this kills the intended behaviour though...


----------



## YetAnotherRussian (Jan 18, 2020)

Hi guys! I've done the registration here just to write this.

I've been using 1usmus power plan for a while, and maybe found a bug somewhere here.

Let's start from the system config:

hw: Ryzen9 3900X, 16Gb mem @ 3600Mhz (2x8Gb), Gigabyte Aorus x470 Ultra Gaming (bios ver. F50 AGESA 1.0.0.4B). SMT is on. SVM is on. All CPU overclocks disabled - stock base clock 3.8Ghz @ all cores
sw: Windows 10 Pro 1903 (yep, Microsoft's scheduler patch is there)

I work on software development side. Here I can give the detailed steps on how to make 1smus Universal plan less effective than the Windows 10 stock "AMD Ryzen Balanced":

0) Install 1smus power plan pack (latest)
1) Enable  Windows 10 stock "AMD Ryzen Balanced" plan, and leave the control panel power settings opened
2) Create a decent *single-core* load without AVX/AVX2, e.g. use any single-threaded software (u may use some benchmarks, mining software, use LAME encoder, archiver, 4k video decoder on cpu, or any other), it should stress single core 50-100%





3) Start any software that is able to handle 12 threads, and *preferrably* is capable on setting affinity itself - more about affinity*: *Thread Affinity Mask
In this case, affinity is set as DWORD "0x555555" or 5592405 (all the even virtual cores, 12 threads) through my C# .NET 4.8 app. This truly doesn't matter, you may use this app in benchmark mode (sse2 or sse42 build preferrable, and pass the affinity mask to it), or just use something that is able to work on 12 threads, then manually affine to odd or even threads through task manager (depending in which virtual core the load from Step 2 lives).

When you can see a descent output on task manager graphs (to identify that cores that you target are busy), enable 1smus Universal plan (this one is recommended for 3900X & Win 10), and watch the virtual cores load.

Swithcing the plan to 1smus immediately creates affinity failure - one thread which has been "affined", goes to already busy "preferred core" leaving it's native thread idle, thus resulting to a significant performance drop for a 12-threaded app. Same result, if you stop the load, then change the plan, then start the load with affinity. Affinity is wrong for one virtual core, it's forced to already busy preferred core.





I've checked, then re-checked, then tested and re-tested. This issue is stable as heck!

My vision is that preferred cores should not be overloaded by 2 different heavy "users" at once, if there are idle physical cores left, that's an errorneous behavior. Boost clock (if enabled) on preferred core will NEVER compensate a 100% idle core power.


----------



## Wickedt (Jan 18, 2020)

YetAnotherRussian said:


> Hi guys! I've done the registration here just to write this.
> 
> I've been using 1usmus power plan for a while, and maybe found a bug somewhere here.
> 
> ...




I would be very curious to see some benchmark results with CB20 with the 1usmus plan vs AMD plan. I beleive his plan was working well before the newest chipset drivers from AMD, also did you do the changes in Bios, or reset back to normal for testing?


----------



## YetAnotherRussian (Jan 19, 2020)

No bios changes made especially for that test. The only changes (against the stock ones) I have on CPU side is : SVM off=>on, Boost on=>off

Before upgrading to F50 I did a full bios reset, and ofc the chipset drivers were updated (board manufacturer's requirement).

CB20 results below. I see no issues with the particular test btw.


----------



## stimpy88 (Mar 5, 2020)

It would be nice to get a roundup post from 1usmus.  New chipset drivers and power plans, changes to fastest core logic in Ryzen Master etc... Plus Windows 10 v2004 is very much in the mix now.


----------



## ddmeltzer8 (Mar 11, 2020)

Windows keep changing from 1usmus universal to its own high perf. power plan whenever i wakes from sleep!
Could someone shed some light over this?
Thanks.


----------



## Wickedt (Mar 11, 2020)

YetAnotherRussian said:


> No bios changes made especially for that test. The only changes (against the stock ones) I have on CPU side is : SVM off=>on, Boost on=>off
> 
> Before upgrading to F50 I did a full bios reset, and ofc the chipset drivers were updated (board manufacturer's requirement).
> 
> CB20 results below. I see no issues with the particular test btw.



From what i can see, the 1usmus power plan and high performance are within margin of error differences.


----------



## MonsterMod (Apr 15, 2020)

I'm setting up my new computer I just built and I installed 1usmus power plan a while ago but I just got around to making the BIOS changes and switching to it tonight. I was just wondering which power plan I should use because there are two...

1usmus Ryzen Power Plan
1usmus Ryzen Universal

I remember reading that when it was updated there was another power plan added for people that have a Windows update. I'm sorry I can't remember which update and I don't have the info right now because everything I'm going is spread out over two computers and my phone.  Windows on my new computer is fully up to date. Right now I'm using the 1usmus Ryzen Power Plan.


----------



## heky (Apr 15, 2020)

As far as i know with the latest version of Windows and 2nd gen. Ryzen, you have to use the Universal plan. Or the latest AMD High Performance plan that comes with the latest drivers. The difference between these 2 plans is negligible.


----------



## Wickedt (Apr 15, 2020)

heky said:


> As far as i know with the latest version of Windows and 2nd gen. Ryzen, you have to use the Universal plan. Or the latest AMD High Performance plan that comes with the latest drivers. The difference between these 2 plans is negligible.


Your 100% right, the other plan is for older ryzens, below 2700X


----------



## MonsterMod (Apr 15, 2020)

heky said:


> As far as i know with the latest version of Windows and 2nd gen. Ryzen, you have to use the Universal plan. Or the latest AMD High Performance plan that comes with the latest drivers. The difference between these 2 plans is negligible.





Wickedt said:


> Your 100% right, the other plan is for older ryzens, below 2700X



Thanks both of you for the info and fast reply, I just changed my power plan to the Universal plan.


----------



## Wickedt (Apr 15, 2020)

MonsterMod said:


> Thanks both of you for the info and fast reply, I just changed my power plan to the Universal plan.


Interesting post here.

__
		https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/g0jktf


----------



## Assimilator (Apr 15, 2020)

MonsterMod said:


> I'm setting up my new computer I just built and I installed 1usmus power plan a while ago but I just got around to making the BIOS changes and switching to it tonight. I was just wondering which power plan I should use because there are two...
> 
> 1usmus Ryzen Power Plan
> 1usmus Ryzen Universal
> ...



From the installer:



> Use "1usmus Ryzen Power Plan", if you have a Zen 2 processor, runnning Windows 10 May 2019, Oct 2018, and earlier.
> Use "1usmus Ryzen Universal", with any processor running Windows 10 Nov 2019 Update or later.



@1usmus would be useful if you updated the plan descriptions to include the above information. Even better if you only installed the appropriate one depending on the OS version (you can run wmic os get BuildNumber and if the result is 18363 or greater, it's Win10 1909 or later; else it's Win10 1903 or earlier).


----------



## Megatron (May 7, 2020)

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/612647199737774104/669860910659141672/Powerplan_V4.rar
		


I'm using this, select Ryzen 1.0.0.4b if you have a bios based on Agesa 1.0.0.4b

Gigabyte have been on 1.0.0.4b since November:








						X570 AORUS ELITE (rev. 1.0) Support | Motherboard - GIGABYTE Global
					

Lasting Quality from GIGABYTE.GIGABYTE Ultra Durable™ motherboards bring together a unique blend of features and technologies that offer users the absolute ...




					www.gigabyte.com


----------



## Assimilator (May 7, 2020)

Megatron said:


> https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/612647199737774104/669860910659141672/Powerplan_V4.rar
> 
> 
> 
> ...



What is the benefit of this plan over 1usmus's one? Who created it?


----------



## Megatron (May 7, 2020)

I haven't tried the one linked to the start of this thread but I was assuming it was just a later version.  I got the link from overclockers.co.uk but its been posted on german forums too, so seems legit.  The difference between this v4 and any other is that (1) the min processor state is 1% and (2) it downclocks to 1.2Ghz sometimes and 0.92v.  I've tried it in games and its buttery smooth getting capped @ 144fps in div 2 and >100 fps in a long street (just a side note, I'm running 3733MT/s and I found it necessary to lock the IF speed @ max or you get 3 second lags).  The default power plan for USB was to not allow powersaving but I changed that with no ill effects.  I have noticed a benifit of running PCI-e link management power to disabled just in general not specifically for this powerplan.


----------



## nko (May 11, 2020)

I'm personaly now using plan from this reddit thread, and it clearly reduce temperature of my  3700X and oscillation of my fans.
Don't really noticed performance changed with this plan, but really effect on temp.

--> Ryzen 3700x high iddle temps and fan speed oscillation


----------



## 529th (May 29, 2020)

tl:dr

Is there a list of EVERY single Processor Power Management attribute that has changed and it's value before and after the change that's been implemented in the AMD power plans AND 1usmus plans?

Thanks!


----------



## Megatron (May 31, 2020)

@nko thanks for the tip, its definitely working to lower the volts, clocks and temps @ idle.


----------



## Megatron (Jun 6, 2020)

https://www.amd.com/en/support/chipsets/amd-socket-am4/x570  Updated chipset drivers.
Revision Number
2.04.28.626
File Size
50 MB
Release Date
6/3/2020

Left screenshot was 2.04.04.111, right 2.04.28.626.  I can't see much between them.


----------



## Wickedt (Jun 6, 2020)

Megatron said:


> https://www.amd.com/en/support/chipsets/amd-socket-am4/x570  Updated chipset drivers.
> Revision Number
> 2.04.28.626
> File Size
> ...



That chipset was for the win10 may update, do you have it installed yet?
BTW, I pretty much live on Division 2 LOL


----------



## Megatron (Jun 6, 2020)

No I have not installed it yet.  I have slipstreamed an SSD and I believe I've copied my important appdata and my document folders (alot of programs are installed on spinning rust and survive reinstalls (also backup my start menu and use classic shell).  I've not encountered any issues with the new drivers and they don't have any warning but I can believe that's why they have appeared.

I've avoided the latest AMD drivers for my RX vega as apparently they cause random black screen.  How do u know I got Division 2?


----------



## Wickedt (Jun 6, 2020)

Megatron said:


> No I have not installed it yet.  I have slipstreamed an SSD and I believe I've copied my important appdata and my document folders (alot of programs are installed on spinning rust and survive reinstalls (also backup my start menu and use classic shell).  I've not encountered any issues with the new drivers and they don't have any warning but I can believe that's why they have appeared.
> 
> I've avoided the latest AMD drivers for my RX vega as apparently they cause random black screen.  How do u know I got Division 2?


4 or 5 comments up, you were talking about frame rates


----------



## Megatron (Jun 6, 2020)

Oh ok, lol.


----------



## 529th (Jun 21, 2020)

1usmus said:


> Thread planning policy used for short-term threads in heterogeneous systems has been changed. Also we force scheduler to use the best cores (if possible) .
> By default, the auto option is enabled there. That is, windows may use the best cores, or it may not.



I've enabled all attributes to be visible in the power plan settings.  I've noticed 'activity window' seems to have an effect on gaming performance when the values are changed.  Was 30,000 microseconds the default window even when not enabled?  And is it also the same on an Intel system?  Is there a tree of other settings in the 'Processor Power Settings' that are dependent on 30,000 microseconds?

Does disabling 'Processor performance autonomous mode' change the 'activity window' to some default state, whether being dynamic or static?

I've also wondered if that window of activity has an effect on the input lag chain with peripherals.

Thanks for your time


----------



## Marucins (Jun 23, 2020)

Can this profile, after a system update, cause Windows 10 to spill (damage)?

Previously, I had this plan enabled - it worked.
But when I started installing the drivers from nvidia and updating the system, after 2 days the system crashed. I couldn't even restore it. In the meantime I was doing OC RAM. I'm using an EDC= 1 bug.


----------



## Megatron (Jun 23, 2020)

Use memtest for dos before loading windows when RAM overclocking.  I use test #7 exclusively, it takes less than 5min.  Just as a precaution so I don't do what happened to you.


----------



## Wickedt (Jun 23, 2020)

Marucins said:


> Can this profile, after a system update, cause Windows 10 to spill (damage)?
> 
> Previously, I had this plan enabled - it worked.
> But when I started installing the drivers from nvidia and updating the system, after 2 days the system crashed. I couldn't even restore it. In the meantime I was doing OC RAM. I'm using an EDC= 1 bug.


The new windows update for may is full of issues, and would have caused this if you updated to it, if you are one of the systems with the issues they've listed.. Nvidia updates cause issues also.


----------



## 529th (Jun 24, 2020)

What is Power Efficiency Class 1 and how does it differ from the other similar PPM settings?  In this review: https://www.techpowerup.com/review/1usmus-custom-power-plan-for-ryzen-3000-zen-2-processors/  It's mentioned in the pic.

In the registry there are 2 similar registry entries.
One is defined as: "Specify how much processors should favor energy savings over performance when operating in autonomous mode"

the other: "Specify how much Processor Power Efficiency Class 1 processors should favor energy savings over performance when operating in autonomous mode"

EDIT: is one for AMD and the other for Intel?


----------



## Wickedt (Jun 24, 2020)

529th said:


> What is Power Efficiency Class 1 and how does it differ from the other similar PPM settings?  In this review: https://www.techpowerup.com/review/1usmus-custom-power-plan-for-ryzen-3000-zen-2-processors/  It's mentioned in the pic.
> 
> In the registry there are 2 similar registry entries.
> One is defined as: "Specify how much processors should favor energy savings over performance when operating in autonomous mode"
> ...











						Processor power management options
					

The Windows 10 processor power management (PPM) algorithms implement OS-level functionality that allows the OS to efficiently use the available processing resources on a platform by balancing the user's expectations of performance and energy efficiency.



					docs.microsoft.com


----------



## 529th (Jun 24, 2020)

Wickedt said:


> Processor power management options
> 
> 
> The Windows 10 processor power management (PPM) algorithms implement OS-level functionality that allows the OS to efficiently use the available processing resources on a platform by balancing the user's expectations of performance and energy efficiency.
> ...



I've had that link the past few days when searching, and read it.  What exactly am I missing?


----------



## Wickedt (Jun 24, 2020)

529th said:


> I've had that link the past few days when searching, and read it.  What exactly am I missing?



Has to do with maximum processor frequency in efficiency class 1.

Processor Power Efficiency Class describes the relative power efficiency of the associated processor.

Lower efficiency class numbers are more efficient than higher ones (e.g.efficiency class 0 should be

treated as more efficient than efficiency class 1). However, absolute values of this number have no

meaning: 2 isn't necessarily half as efficient as 1.

This seems weird to me, because of how power efficient Ryzen CPUs are, but i believe this is all about laptop CPUS,


----------



## GuitarHome (Aug 14, 2020)

Hi guys, I apologize for my English. I have a B450 Bios F50 on a Ryzen 7 3700x. I just enabled in the bios: Global C-state Control, CPPC Preferred Cores, and AMD Cool'n'Quiet. I had only one CPPC option, but I didn't, I only enabled CPPC Preferred Cores, am I right? I installed the power plan and I'm using the Universal plan. Are these in theory the best combinations? Thank you


----------



## 529th (Aug 14, 2020)

GuitarHome said:


> Hi guys, I apologize for my English. I have a B450 Bios F50 on a Ryzen 7 3700x. I just enabled in the bios: Global C-state Control, CPPC Preferred Cores, and AMD Cool'n'Quiet. I had only one CPPC option, but I didn't, I only enabled CPPC Preferred Cores, am I right? I installed the power plan and I'm using the Universal plan. Are these in theory the best combinations? Thank you



If your aim is for gaming then no.  If for gaming then turn off Global C states, and AMD Cool'n'quiet'.  Enable any CPPC option.


----------



## GuitarHome (Aug 15, 2020)

It is just to play at the best possible performance. Should I turn off global C and AMD Cool'n'quiet 'states, and enable the two options that appear in my CPPC bios? CPPC Preferred Cores and CPPC. Which power plan should I use? Thank you very much friend. I use a 240hz monitor and I want as many fps as possible and the most stable ever.


----------



## 529th (Aug 15, 2020)

GuitarHome said:


> It is just to play at the best possible performance. Should I turn off global C and AMD Cool'n'quiet 'states, and enable the two options that appear in my CPPC bios? CPPC Preferred Cores and CPPC. Which power plan should I use? Thank you very much friend. I use a 240hz monitor and I want as many fps as possible and the most stable ever.



Yes, disable Global C states and AMD Cool'n'Quiet, and enable the CPPC options.

I wouldn't use that power plan.  It's only designed to stop all other cores so that one core is being used and can boost to it's max potential as I've observed with Cinebench single thread.  You can get around 515-520 single thread scores with Cinebench R20 but there is a HUGE increase in latency.  Use High Performance.  The only thing useful in his power plan is the "Processor autonomous activity window"  Keep that at 45000.  Enable "Processor performance autonomous mode".  Keep both heterogeneous modes at "Automatic".  Disable "Processor idle disable"  That should get you started in the right direction.


----------



## GuitarHome (Aug 15, 2020)

529th said:


> Yes, disable Global C states and AMD Cool'n'Quiet, and enable the CPPC options.
> 
> I wouldn't use that power plan.  It's only designed to stop all other cores so that one core is being used and can boost to it's max potential as I've observed with Cinebench single thread.  You can get around 515-520 single thread scores with Cinebench R20 but there is a HUGE increase in latency.  Use High Performance.  The only thing useful in his power plan is the "Processor autonomous activity window"  Keep that at 45000.  Enable "Processor performance autonomous mode".  Keep both heterogeneous modes at "Automatic".  Disable "Processor idle disable"  That should get you started in the right direction.





Hello friend, thank you very much, I did as you indicated. As for the power plan, I have not found where to set the values that I passed on. But do I have that "Ultimate performance" plan that is activated by CMD, basically using it? Thank you


----------



## 529th (Aug 15, 2020)

GuitarHome said:


> Hello friend, thank you very much, I did as you indicated. As for the power plan, I have not found where to set the values that I passed on. But do I have that "Ultimate performance" plan that is activated by CMD, basically using it? Thank you



You can use Ultimate.  I would only edit values in the Ultimate Performance power plan.  Leave the others alone, unless you want to change things but use Ultimate for gaming, and then when you are done gaming go back to Balanced.


----------



## Max(IT) (Aug 20, 2020)

Is there any performance test of 1usmus Universal plan vs AMD High Performance after the latest update?
because as far as I can see, there are no differences...


----------



## biffzinker (Aug 20, 2020)

Max(IT) said:


> Is there any performance test of 1usmus Universal plan vs AMD High Performance after the latest update?
> because as far as I can see, there are no differences...


What latest update? Are you referring to AMD’s chipset driver package?


----------



## Max(IT) (Aug 20, 2020)

biffzinker said:


> What latest update? Are you referring to AMD’s chipset driver package?


Yep. This thread and initial evaluations were from many months ago. I was just wondering if situation changed for the better and now the (great) job by 1usmus is not needed anymore.

I did my tests today and in my configuration the 1usmus Universal Plan is still better ...

Cinebench R20 results are quite similar (50 points MT and 4 points ST aren't noticeable), but as far as clock speeds are involved, with AMD Ryzen High Performance my 3900X struggles to reach 4.5 GHz in single thread and it is limited to 4017 MHz in multithread, while with 1usmus plan I can reach 4567 MHz (ST) in the two better cores and 4100 MHz in multithread test.
During normal "Windows operations" I could reach even the advertised 4616 MHz. Never happened with AMD Power plan.

The question now is: how is it possible ?
Respect for 1usmus, but how AMD software engineers are less capable than him ?

As usual AMD is disappointing on the software side... (Radeon 5700XT drivers are a good example).


----------



## stimpy88 (Aug 20, 2020)

This thread should be deleted.  After numerous calls for 1usmus to update, and months of simply ignoring them, this thread just serves as a place for confusion and outdated information.

We should just forget about this, move on and simply use AMD's latest power plans, and be done with it.


----------



## Max(IT) (Aug 20, 2020)

stimpy88 said:


> This thread should be deleted.  After numerous calls for 1usmus to update, and months of simply ignoring them, this thread just serves as a place for confusion and outdated information.
> 
> We should just forget about this, move on and simply use AMD's latest power plans, and be done with it.


did you read my post ?

I'm still experiencing better results with 1usmus power plan


----------



## stimpy88 (Aug 21, 2020)

Max(IT) said:


> did you read my post ?
> 
> I'm still experiencing better results with 1usmus power plan


And yet other people have reported that AMD's power plan settings are identical to his...

@1usmus - I formally invite you, for the second time in nearly 6 months, to confirm if you still stand by your power plans, settings and recommendations, now that we have a new version of Windows 10, multiple new AGESAs, multiple new BIOSs, and multiple new AMD chipset drivers.  A simple yes or no would suffice.


----------



## Max(IT) (Aug 21, 2020)

stimpy88 said:


> And yet other people have reported that AMD's power plan settings are identical to his...
> 
> @1usmus - I formally invite you, for the second time in nearly 6 months, to confirm if you still stand by your power plans, settings and recommendations, now that we have a new version of Windows 10, multiple new AGESAs, multiple new BIOSs, and multiple new AMD chipset drivers.  A simple yes or no would suffice.


other people are free to use what they want.
But 1usmus plan still works, so there is no reason to ask him to delete this thread.


----------



## Ja.KooLit (Aug 21, 2020)

let him be. 1usmus plan is only for guidance and free to use. No need to lock thread. Let others post here their experiences instead of locking and creating another thread.

No need to force him to update since he also have priorities. We should be thankful for sharing to community and not sell his program for $$$$$. Its not an open source but still a free to use


----------



## stimpy88 (Aug 21, 2020)

Max(IT) said:


> But 1usmus plan still works, so there is no reason to ask him to delete this thread.


According to you.

I read your post, but simply cannot take any conclusions from it because I have no idea HOW you came to your conclusions.

You need to break down exactly how your system is configured, motherboard make and model, hardware configuration, BIOS version, BIOS settings, AGESA version, which version of Windows, what patch level, what software and drivers are installed, and comparisons between 1usmus's plans. and AMDs latest etc.

Then maybe we can work out if these power plans still actually do anything different from AMDs power plans.

And maybe you now realise that what I stated above is a hell of a lot of work, and if 1usmus simply just responded, then he would be able to set the record straight instantly, as only he knows the full ins and outs of his powerplan, and _why_ he chose the settings he did, as well as AMDs, and _why_ they work as they do.  I also know that he has a special knowledge of AMS's AGESA and what impact the newer versions have made to power management etc, clocking, and thermal management, which may have a fundamental effect on the information in this thread.


----------



## Max(IT) (Aug 21, 2020)

stimpy88 said:


> According to you.
> 
> I read your post, but simply cannot take any conclusions from it because I have no idea HOW you came to your conclusions.
> 
> ...



Actually in my system specs you could find most of the information needed, and I have the latest version of BIOS and drivers available.
My report above was quite detailed about my CPU's behavior.
With AMD High Performance power plan I cannot reach advertised turbo boost speed, while I can do that with 1usmus Universal Plan.
Difference in CB20 results are narrow, but still better with 1usmus plan.


----------



## stimpy88 (Aug 21, 2020)

Max(IT) said:


> Actually in my system specs you could find most of the information needed, and I have the latest version of BIOS and drivers available.
> My report above was quite detailed about my CPU's behavior.
> With AMD High Performance power plan I cannot reach advertised turbo boost speed, while I can do that with 1usmus Universal Plan.
> Difference in CB20 results are narrow, but still better with 1usmus plan.


I'm confused, as I'm using the latest AMD power plan, included with the latest chipset drivers, and my 3900X system is also boosting up to 4.6GHz, on a fresh clean install of Windows 10 2004 Build 19041.450...

Your post does not state what version/build of Windows your running, which is important, I also cannot see what motherboard you have, or BIOS version, or AGESA version.  You also do not state if it was a clean install of Windows, and you do not state whether you re-installed Windows between installing the AMD chipset drivers (which you also fail to mention the version number), and using 1usmus's power plan.

Without this information, and proper testing, I can only see that your findings work for YOUR use case/system, and yet mine functions perfectly fine with the latest AMD drivers and power plan.  Which one of us is right?


----------



## Max(IT) (Aug 21, 2020)

stimpy88 said:


> I'm confused, as I'm using the latest AMD power plan, included with the latest chipset drivers, and my 3900X system is also boosting up to 4.6GHz, on a fresh clean install of Windows 10 2004 Build 19041.450...
> 
> Your post does not state what version/build of Windows your running, which is important, I also cannot see what motherboard you have, or BIOS version, or AGESA version.  You also do not state if it was a clean install of Windows, and you do not state whether you re-installed Windows between installing the AMD chipset drivers (which you also fail to mention the version number), and using 1usmus's power plan.
> 
> Without this information, and proper testing, I can only see that your findings work for YOUR use case/system, and yet mine functions perfectly fine with the latest AMD drivers and power plan.  Which one of us is right?


Are you using a proper browser ? Or maybe you are using a mobile browser ?

Under my name there is a "System Specs" button where you can find information about my hardware, and I already said I'm using latest BIOS (1004, 3 days old...) and latest AGESA available. And latest AMD chipset drivers from AMD website.
The only thing I didn't mention was Windows 10 version, which is 1909.

I don't understand what do you mean with "fresh installation". Clearly I'm not going to re-install Windows every time I update my drivers  

edit: just to be sure I just updated window to version 2004, and I’ve got almost the same results. My score is perfectly fine, so the system is working as expected. But 1usmus  power plan is just working slightly better on my PC. TBH the difference seems to be reduced with Windows 2004. I will check for a few days.


----------



## stimpy88 (Aug 22, 2020)

Max(IT) said:


> Are you using a proper browser ? Or maybe you are using a mobile browser ?
> 
> Under my name there is a "System Specs" button where you can find information about my hardware, and I already said I'm using latest BIOS (1004, 3 days old...) and latest AGESA available. And latest AMD chipset drivers from AMD website.
> The only thing I didn't mention was Windows 10 version, which is 1909.
> ...


I'm sorry, but I cannot accept your argument based on the fact that you are incapable of performing a proper a/b comparison, and you call me crazy for expecting you to be able to back your argument up with proper facts.  You simply cannot use an out of date OS that may have been installed on your system for a year or more, with god knows anything running in the background, and all sorts of configuration and driver issues, and saying that "IT WORKS FOR ME, AND YOU ARE WRONG".  You do understand that Microsoft has been making changes to the OS regarding the CPU scheduler, and much of that work was completed with Build 2004, which you are not even using?

I will say that its good for you that your system with an out of date OS, and not working properly with the latest AMD drivers and power plan, (which were no doubt installed over the top of the previous AMD drivers, which were installed over the ones before that) but mine _does_ work properly, and I have done nothing to configure it, other than installing a computer in the correct way, using the latest available OS and drivers.

And the fact that you do not understand what a "fresh installation of Windows" means, is very telling of your technical abilities.  Do you even know how to build a Windows installation image, wipe your system and install it from scratch?  If not, you simply cannot lecture anyone on the validity of your arguments, as you are proceeding from a false assumption, based on a bad foundation.

I just saw your edit, so how did you install 2004?  And which build number is it?


----------



## Max(IT) (Aug 22, 2020)

stimpy88 said:


> I'm sorry, but I cannot accept your argument based on the fact that you are incapable of performing a proper a/b comparison, and you call me crazy for expecting you to be able to back your argument up with proper facts.  You simply cannot use an out of date OS that may have been installed on your system for a year or more, with god knows anything running in the background, and all sorts of configuration and driver issues, and saying that "IT WORKS FOR ME, AND YOU ARE WRONG".  You do understand that Microsoft has been making changes to the OS regarding the CPU scheduler, and much of that work was completed with Build 2004, which you are not even using?
> 
> I will say that its good for you that your system with an out of date OS, and not working properly with the latest AMD drivers and power plan, (which were no doubt installed over the top of the previous AMD drivers, which were installed over the ones before that) but mine _does_ work properly, and I have done nothing to configure it, other than installing a computer in the correct way, using the latest available OS and drivers.
> 
> ...


Dude, you are making a lot of baseless assumptions.
First of all: keep your evaluations for yourself. I am a (well paid) IT professionals since 1990, and I dont need lectures by a no-one on the web. Especially one not even able to read system specs from an user profile 

I know how to unistall and then upgrade AMD chipset drivers, and NOT, you don't need to make a new Windows installation every time you upgrade drivers. That's idiotic.

AMD explains everything here:

https://www.amd.com/en/support/kb/faq/chipset-install

No need to wipe Windows to update drivers (they are stating you don't need to uninstall the previous version... but I'm doing it nonetheless).

BTW you are the one claiming 1usmus power profile isn't valid, so the proof of validity is on you.


----------



## stimpy88 (Aug 23, 2020)

Max(IT) said:


> Dude, you are making a lot of baseless assumptions.
> First of all: keep your evaluations for yourself. I am a (well paid) IT professionals since 1990, and I dont need lectures by a no-one on the web. Especially one not even able to read system specs from an user profile
> 
> I know how to unistall and then upgrade AMD chipset drivers, and NOT, you don't need to make a new Windows installation every time you upgrade drivers. That's idiotic.
> ...


OK, there is no point continuing this with you.


----------



## Max(IT) (Aug 23, 2020)

stimpy88 said:


> OK, there is no point continuing this with you.


indeed. Your intervention wasn't requested since the beginning, as you asked for the thread to be deleted


----------



## stimpy88 (Aug 23, 2020)

Max(IT) said:


> indeed. Your intervention wasn't requested since the beginning, as you asked for the thread to be deleted


As I said, Mr IT "expert", there is no point continuing this with you.


----------



## Max(IT) (Aug 23, 2020)

stimpy88 said:


> As I said, Mr IT "expert", there is no point continuing this with you.


"continuing" ? You never started...

You just made wrong assumptions based on your ego...


----------



## uzig718 (Aug 29, 2021)

I apologize for bumping an old thread, however I figured it'd be better for me to reply here than to start a new thread elsewhere, and possibly in the wrong place.

I'm trying to find a way to have my RAM in my Acer Nitro 5 laptop to run at 3200mhz, (Ballistix 16gb x2 3200mhz) however Nitro 5 laptops (or their bios more specifically) do not supposed XMP.

Can I use this software to bump up my RAM's voltage from 1.2v to 1.35 which would (or should, I'm assuming), bump up the speed from 2666mhz to 3200mhz? I have Thaiphoon Burner and DRAM Calculator and trying to figure out exactly what to do in order to set my speed and/or voltage of my RAM to 3200mhz or 1.35v.

The stock RAM chips my laptop came with are 3200mhz and do run at 3200mhz so I know it supports it, but the stock RAM chips run at 3200mhz at 1.2v without XMP. I have another Nitro 5 with an Intel CPU and those same RAM chips (the stock ones) which are 3200mhz, run at only 2933mhz because that's the speed that Intel CPU's are max supported for. So my new Nitro 5 with AMD Ryzen 5800h, I just need to manually enable XMP somehow or change the voltage to 1.35v.

CPU-Z does state my RAM is running at 2666mhz, and that it's 1.2v, and at 1.35v it would run at 3200mhz. (Or more specifically, 1600mhz x2)

Any help or a link to a guide on how to do this would be greatly appreciated!


----------

