Tuesday, October 1st 2024

AMD Announces New AGESA 1.2.0.2, 105W cTDP for 9700X and 9600X, Intercore Latency Improvements

AMD today made four key announcements for its Ryzen 9000 series "Granite Ridge" desktop processors based on the "Zen 5" microarchitecture. These mainly aim to improve upon the products as originally launched in August. To begin with, AMD announced a 105 W cTDP (configurable TDP) mode for the Ryzen 7 9700X and Ryzen 7 9600X processors, with full warranty coverage. This setting can be enabled in the UEFI setup program of a motherboard running its latest version of UEFI firmware, which encapsulates the AGESA ComboAM5 PI 1.2.0.2 microcode. The setting raises the PPT (package power tracking) value of the 9700X and 9600X to 140 W, and treats them as if they were 105 W TDP processors. These chips were originally launched by AMD with 65 W (88 W PPT), and as reviewers quickly found out, unlocking power improves performance at stock clock speeds, as it improves boost frequency residence of these chips.

Next up, is the AGESA PI 1.2.0.2 microcode itself, which introduces the 105 W cTDP mode for the 9700X and 9600X along with warranty coverage, which we just talked about; plus works to improve the core-to-core latency on the Ryzen 9 9900X and Ryzen 9 9950X. These are processors with two CPU complex dies (CCDs), each with either 8 or 6 cores enabled. To the software, this is still a single-socket (1P) CPU with 12 or 16 cores. Although some awareness of the dual-CCD architecture is added to the OS scheduler to help it localize certain kinds of workloads (such as games) to a single CCD, reviewers noted that core-to-core latency on the dual-CCD chips was still too high, which should affect performance when a software's threads are migrating between cores, or if a workload is multithreaded, such as media encoding. AMD addressed exactly this with the new AGESA PI 1.2.0.2 update.
AMD describes the technical aspect of what was causing undesirably high core-to-core latency and erroneous core-parking during multithreaded workloads:
This was mainly due to some corner cases where it takes two transactions to both read, and write, when information is shared across cores on different parts of a Ryzen 9 9000 series processor. However, we've been working on optimizing this since the launch of the 9000 series. In the new 1.2.0.2 BIOS update, we've managed to cut the number of transactions in half for this use case, which helps reduce core-to-core latency in multi-CCD models.
AMD says that reviewers should still expect high values in core-to-core latency benchmarks, but in practice, performance in multithreaded workloads should improve, which can be verified by benchmarking across a typical set of processor benchmarks. The company says:
we've been working on optimizing this since the launch of the 9000 series. In the new 1.2.0.2 BIOS update, we've managed to cut the number of transactions in half for this use case, which helps reduce core-to-core latency in multi-CCD models. While this will show up on some core-to-core latency benchmarks, the real-world improvement is most noticeable in a very specific gaming scenario: in heavily threaded games that don't trigger core parking. Our lab tests suggest Metro, Starfield, and Borderlands 3 can show some uplift, as well as synthetic tests like 3DMark Time Spy.
Next up, the company added official AMD EXPO support for DDR5-8000. With this generation, AMD introduced support for high DDR5 memory speeds using a 1:2 UCLK:MCLK ratio. We recently did a comprehensive study of how the Ryzen 9 9950X handles DDR5-8000, and whether you should use it over the DDR5-6000 sweetspot frequency. You can read all about it in our Zen 5 Memory Scaling article.

In the following weeks, you can expect memory manufacturers to launch new high-speed DDR5 memory kits with AMD EXPO profiles—speeds such as DDR5-6800, DDR5-7200, DDR5-7600, and DDR5-8000. AMD EXPO is similar to Intel XMP, it is an SPD extension that makes it easy for end-users to enable a memory kit's advertised speeds and timings in the UEFI setup program. EXPO covers all the sub-timings and voltages that are unique to Ryzen processors' memory architecture.
Lastly, motherboards based on the AMD X870E and X870 chipsets should be available to purchase from today. AMD Ryzen 9000 series processors are compatible with AMD 600-series chipset motherboards using a firmware update (which can be done using UEFI BIOS Flashback); but the new crop of motherboards based on AMD 800-series chipset support these processors out of the box, besides introducing a few modern I/O features such as 40 Gbps USB4 and Wi-Fi 7 networking.
Add your own comment

33 Comments on AMD Announces New AGESA 1.2.0.2, 105W cTDP for 9700X and 9600X, Intercore Latency Improvements

#1
Daven
Nice regarding the warranty coverage. Not so nice that this whole series feels ‘rushed’.
Posted on Reply
#2
esserpain
It's good that people will be covered under warranty if they choose to enable the 105W mode. However, I can't shake the feeling that this is yet another one of AMD's hacked-together efforts to salvage public morale towards Zen 5. Basically everything they've done to address this launch has felt sloppy, desperate and most of all, incompetent. It's AMD's usual playbook for sure, but if this cluster-F and the resulting hit to Zen 5's sales isn't enough for them to vet their marketing department and fire a lot of people, then nothing will ever be.
Posted on Reply
#3
Dragokar
This is exactly why they should start to iron out such thing before the launch. It is always the same.....and as much as I like the products and the company, they could easily avoid bad PR by doing the R&D and QA properly before they launch. It is not that they would lose so much time, it is usually about 2 months time when they have ditched out all the main buggy things in AGESA and Co.
Posted on Reply
#4
TheLostSwede
News Editor
esserpainIt's good that people will be covered under warranty if they choose to enable the 105W mode. However, I can't shake the feeling that this is yet another one of AMD's hacked-together efforts to salvage public morale towards Zen 5. Basically everything they've done to address this launch has felt sloppy, desperate and most of all, incompetent. It's AMD's usual playbook for sure, but if this cluster-F and the resulting hit to Zen 5's sales isn't enough for them to vet their marketing department and fire a lot of people, then nothing will ever be.
You're aware that this is the "new" marketing department, right? They have already let a lot of people go over the past few years, some real AMD and ATI long timers got kicked out.
DragokarThis is exactly why they should start to iron out such thing before the launch. It is always the same.....and as much as I like the products and the company, they could easily avoid bad PR by doing the R&D and QA properly before they launch. It is not that they would lose so much time, it is usually about 2 months time when they have ditched out all the main buggy things in AGESA and Co.
I hope you put Intel to the exact same standards. I mean, they have two generations of CPUs that are self destructing after all...
I'm not saying AMD has done a great job here, as they clearly rushed things, but it appears to be their typical MO and this is what now, the fourth time they have done it?
Posted on Reply
#5
Intervention
I wish I knew what difference it makes in games. Gigabyte is slacking when it comes to it's B650 Aorus Master as of the time of writing this.
Posted on Reply
#6
Dragokar
TheLostSwedeYou're aware that this is the "new" marketing department, right? They have already let a lot of people go over the past few years, some real AMD and ATI long timers got kicked out.


I hope you put Intel to the exact same standards. I mean, they have two generations of CPUs that are self destructing after all...
I'm not saying AMD has done a great job here, as they clearly rushed things, but it appears to be their typical MO and this is what now, the fourth time they have done it?
I am even stricter on Intel since they pressured and ruled the market for so long.......but yeah, I can't remember a flawless launch from AMD in the last years. Still looking at AM5 for the next upgrade though.
Posted on Reply
#7
robert3892
I'm a bit confused. I've had this update from ASRock for a couple of weeks now.
Posted on Reply
#8
Chane
I tried the new FW3.08 AGESA 1.2.0.2 on my ASRock B650I Lighting, but it has a bug which reduced my rear USB-C 10Gbps port to 480Mbps (USB 2.0) speeds. I flashed it back to FW2.10 AGESA 1.1.0.3 and my full port speed returned. There are a few firmware versions in between, but I didn't bother to see if they had the bug or not. I'll stay on FW2.10 for now.
Posted on Reply
#9
phanbuey
im actually excited for the 9800x3d -finewine strikes again.
Posted on Reply
#10
Geofrancis
as far as i can find there is no actual evidence that it does anything other than look good on synthetic tests. very few tasks require threads to communicate and use more than 8 cores.
Posted on Reply
#11
Minus Infinity
DavenNice regarding the warranty coverage. Not so nice that this whole series feels ‘rushed’.
Not sure about rushed. More likely Server and mobile is their main concern and they also realised power was getting out of hand. It's not like Zen 4 was slow, so getting as small improvement in performance at a fair bit lower power isn't all bad. Also Windoze has shown it self to be a shit show for AMD (AMD must also be partly to blame). Also can't wait to see the looks on those gamers that have been trashing Zen 5 and think 105W TDP will improve performance in games.
robert3892I'm a bit confused. I've had this update from ASRock for a couple of weeks now.
They were probably beta fw, this is now official and with warranty, which there wasn't before.
Posted on Reply
#12
HisDivineOrder
Intel isn't AMD's biggest threat now. AMD's AMD's biggest threat. AMD loves to AMD themselves out of easy wins. AMD really should stop AMD'ing themselves.
Posted on Reply
#13
Chrispy_
I get that the 105W cTDP is there to appease the whiners, but didn't most reviewers who tested the 9700X using PBO at higher TDPs basically see very little gain?

Essentially, 96-97% of the performance that the 105W cTDP delivers is provided at 65W, and for those who want to push the limits there's always PBO+ making predetermined TDPs irrelevant anyway...
Posted on Reply
#14
kapone32
Geofrancisas far as i can find there is no actual evidence that it does anything other than look good on synthetic tests. very few tasks require threads to communicate and use more than 8 cores.
Run HWinfo in the background while palying Space Marine 2. There are some Games where even if Vcache is not supported CPU performance matters.
Posted on Reply
#15
Kirederf
Running this bios on my X670E Hero and so far runs my XMP-8000 kit just fine :)
Posted on Reply
#16
kapone32
KirederfRunning this bios on my X670E Hero and so far runs my XMP-8000 kit just fine :)
Level 1 said that the Memory support has improved with X870E but we don't have reviews yet. That is good what are your timings?
Posted on Reply
#17
AnotherReader
Chrispy_I get that the 105W cTDP is there to appease the whiners, but didn't most reviewers who tested the 9700X using PBO at higher TDPs basically see very little gain?

Essentially, 96-97% of the performance that the 105W cTDP delivers is provided at 65W, and for those who want to push the limits there's always PBO+ making predetermined TDPs irrelevant anyway...
Only workloads that resulted in relatively low clock speeds at the 65 W TDP saw significant performance increases with PBO. In TPU's review, Blender was the standout with a 15% increase at the cost of more than doubled power consumption. Given that result, the impact of the 105 W setting is unlikely to be significant enough to warrant the higher power consumption.
Posted on Reply
#18
IceLancer
robert3892I'm a bit confused. I've had this update from ASRock for a couple of weeks now.
Asus is probably sponsoring this article. They are last to reach to the party and now trying to sponsor them self up.
Posted on Reply
#19
Geofrancis
kapone32Run HWinfo in the background while palying Space Marine 2. There are some Games where even if Vcache is not supported CPU performance matters.
thats nothing to do with inter ccd latency.
Posted on Reply
#20
watzupken
This is evidence that AMD rushed the release of a product that is clearly not ready. I assume they did this to try and beat Intel because they anticipate a competitive product from them. Instead of helping them, it backfired.
Posted on Reply
#21
Bwaze
I don't think this is trying to fix "rushed" product that left untapped performance at the release.

I think this is purely a response to their bold claims of performance uplifts compared to previous generation, and not delivering them.

And I also think all this will not be enough. Sure, you can "overclock" the power limited CPUs, but that won't help their bigger brothers one little bit.

And "Intercore Latency Improvements" won't fix the big difference between what they promised and what they released. But it will provide some nice graphs, improvements in very select scenarios. And I'm sure AMD will show those as if it applies to whole range of performances.

It will of course fall on reviewers to check their claims and re-review the CPUs.
Posted on Reply
#22
Kaleid
kapone32Level 1 said that the Memory support has improved with X870E but we don't have reviews yet. That is good what are your timings?
hardware unboxed said don't bother in their recent motherboard review as there's nothing to gain. It's perfectly optimized for 6000mhz as it is.
Posted on Reply
#23
Broken Processor
Fixing issues that should never have been seen by retail. AMD had no competition in fact the opposition was on the back foot but somehow AMD still managed to score an own goal. AMD needs to grow up, learn to win and stop making me nervous.
Posted on Reply
#24
LittleBro
Geofrancisas far as i can find there is no actual evidence that it does anything other than look good on synthetic tests. very few tasks require threads to communicate and use more than 8 cores.
If you're referring to X3D cache, then you're wrong. X3D cache is exposed to CPU cores in the same manner as regular L3 cache. In other words, 3D cache is in fact regular L3 cache but stacked vertically (three times) rather than being placed planarly.

It has already been proven (multiple times) that the larger the L3 cache (3D cache) is, the bigger is the benefit for tasks that intensively utilizes RAM for caching. For example, take a look at how Ryzen X3D chips scale with different RAM modules compared to regular non-X3D chips. The less it is required to access the RAM, the lesser is system's dependendance on it.
KirederfRunning this bios on my X670E Hero and so far runs my XMP-8000 kit just fine :)
That's because X670(E) uses the same chipset silicon as X870(E) - the Promontory 21 (+ Promontory 21).
kapone32Level 1 said that the Memory support has improved with X870E but we don't have reviews yet. That is good what are your timings?
It has been improved through AGESA updates. ASUS now lists "up to 8000 MT/s" speeds even with X670(E) and B650(E) mobos:
rog.asus.com/motherboards/rog-strix/rog-strix-x670e-f-gaming-wifi-model/spec/
rog.asus.com/motherboards/rog-strix/rog-strix-b650e-f-gaming-wifi-model/spec/
Before the release of Zen 5, there were listed speeds "up to 6800 MT/s". 2 years old motherboards could not physically improve support over time, thus, AGESA updates along with new Zen 5 CPUs being the only logical reasons for sudden support of memory speeds up to 8000 MT/s.

AMD tries to play marketing here, to play us to buy new boards - to think that we get support for something new only with newer boards. Don't get fooled.
8000 MT/s on Zen 4/5 is only a very little (meaning negligible) bit faster than 6000 MT/s. That's because of P'o's memory controller unable being to run in 1:1 mode beyond 6400 MHz.
Only with 7800 MT/s and more you're actually starting to overcome latency penalties caused by running in out of synch mode (2:1).
Posted on Reply
#25
Kirederf
kapone32Level 1 said that the Memory support has improved with X870E but we don't have reviews yet. That is good what are your timings?
I'm running a Corsair Dominator kit 2x24GB 8000C38. This one.
LittleBroThat's because X670(E) uses the same chipset silicon as X870(E) - the Promontory 21 (+ Promontory 21).
Yes I know; I'm fully aware of that. I was just curious if my board was able to do it. Previously it did not. 8000MT/s was promised before but it never actually ran great. :)
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Nov 23rd, 2024 05:17 EST change timezone

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts