CPU per core frequency monitoring

[Dux]

Can someone recommend me program that can track all per core CPU frequencies. I know OCCT can do that but it shows some weird results when i try per core overcloking in ryzen master on 5900x. Hwinfo displays only frequencies for 6 cores. Anything else out there?

 

[Mindweaver]

CPU-Z might work. I haven't used it in awhile I can't remember if it has a log.

 

[NoJuan999]

Ryzen Master displays the frequency of each core under the Cores section.
If you are using Ryzen Master to OC you should be able to see them there.

 

[Dux]

Ryzen Master displays the frequency of each core under the Cores section.
If you are using Ryzen Master to OC you should be able to see them there.

That's exactly my problem. Ryzen master is not reporting frequencies correctly, or i am doing something wrong. I just sent a bug report to AMD and here is copy/paste of report.

"Simultaneous multithreading OFF, per CCD overcloking. Set different frequency on at least one core in CCX compared to other cores. Ryzen master will report that frequency is what you have set it to. But programs like OCCT and CPU-Z will report that the highest clocked core really does run at frequency you have set it to, while other cores in CCD drop in frequency. Tested with cinebench R20 to confirm. All cores in CCD 0 and CCD1 set to 4.5GHz. OCCT and CPU-Z report all core at 4.5GHz. Cinebench score almost 6500 with hyperthreading off.

CCD0 and CCD1 core C01 and C07 set to 4.7GHz, others to 4.6Ghz. OCCT and CPU-Z show those 2 cores at 4.7GHz. Others with significant drop despite ryzen master showing 4.6GHz on them. Tested with cinebench R20. Significant drop in score compared to all cores at 4.5GHz. Around 5700score. But should be higher if Ryzen master was reporting correctly. "

This is on R9 5900X



Edit. I just found this. Basically, AMD says no per core overcloking on ZEN 3. I'm suprised that Ryzen master let's you mess around with that then. Confusing.

 

[rethcirE]

Core Temp 1.16 has a very basic System Info option that lists each Core, thread, bus speed, voltage, and frequency. I am not sure if this is accurate enough or loggable, but it is a free program.

Core Temp

Core Temp is a compact, no fuss, small footprint, yet powerful program to monitor processor temperature and other vital information.

www.alcpu.com

 

[NoJuan999]

Edit. I just found this. Basically, AMD says no per core overcloking on ZEN 3. I'm suprised that Ryzen master let's you mess around with that then. Confusing.

Well that's a shame.
Hopefully they will support it in future AGESA / BIOS versions.

 

[Toothless]

Hwinfo does per core clocks and temps.

 

[thesmokingman]

Edit. I just found this. Basically, AMD says no per core overcloking on ZEN 3. I'm suprised that Ryzen master let's you mess around with that then. Confusing.

The design of the CCX layout should be self explanatory?? There's only one CCX now, thus only one multiplier on a chip with one CCD. And btw for the record, there NEVER was per core overclocking on Zen. You could do per CCX previously but obviously since all 8 cores are now combined into one CCX, it is what it is. Only on two CCD chips is there option for two multipliers.

 

[seth1911]

HwInfo

 

[Vayra86]

Can someone recommend me program that can track all per core CPU frequencies. I know OCCT can do that but it shows some weird results when i try per core overcloking in ryzen master on 5900x. Hwinfo displays only frequencies for 6 cores. Anything else out there?

MSI Afterburner + RTSS does it all. Logging it is optional. On screen display is tweakable.

 

[NoJuan999]

The design of the CCX layout should be self explanatory?? There's only one CCX now, thus only one multiplier on a chip with one CCD. And btw for the record, there NEVER was per core overclocking on Zen. You could do per CCX previously but obviously since all 8 cores are now combined into one CCX, it is what it is. Only on two CCD chips is there option for two multipliers.

I was under the impression that the 5800x has only 1 CCX BUT the 5900x and 5950x CPUs have 2 CCX's.
Which is why the 5800x tends to run hotter.

This change also means that AMD can now produce CPUs with up to eight cores using only a single CCX and the accompanying I/O die—this is exactly how the Ryzen 7 5800X is configured. Meanwhile the top of the stack, the Ryzen 9 5950X, which is a 16-core, 32-thread CPU, has two eight-core chiplets alongside that same I/O die. The likes of the Ryzen 9 5900X meanwhile has a pair of chiplets each with six active cores.

Manual overclocking to 4.6GHz at 1.3V produced the biggest uplift in Cinebench R20, with a score of 9,062, which is even faster than 16-core, 32-thread 3950X manages. Just let that sink in a second: the improvements AMD has made to this chip make up for a difference of four cores compared to the previous generation. That's pretty impressive. Unfortunately the single core performance still suffers under this overclocking regime, and the performance dropped by seven percent to 594.
Perhaps per CCX or per core overclocking will change this after the fact. But, for now, it just isn't worth overclocking these chips.

AMD Ryzen 9 5900X review

The Ryzen 9 5900X moves AMD out of Intel's shadow to take centre stage.

www.pcgamer.com

If I am mistaken please let me know, so I am not misinformed or misinforming others.

 

[xman2007]

The design of the CCX layout should be self explanatory?? There's only one CCX now, thus only one multiplier on a chip with one CCD. And btw for the record, there NEVER was per core overclocking on Zen. You could do per CCX previously but obviously since all 8 cores are now combined into one CCX, it is what it is. Only on two CCD chips is there option for two multipliers.

Then how do you get a single core boost of say 4.8/9ghz whilst the other cores are running lower than that?

 

[thesmokingman]

I was under the impression that the 5800x has only 1 CCX BUT all the other released 5000 CPUs have 2 CCX's.
Which is why the 5800x tends to run hotter.

The 5600x and 5800x are single CCD chips. The 5800x may run hotter because it runs at the same TDP as the two larger chips the 5900x and 5950x. Do the math per core the 5800x runs with a higher TDP. I would have thought that was why ppl wanted a 5800x, to be less limited by power design limits?

Then how do you get a single core boost of say 4.8/9ghz whilst the other cores are running lower than that?

You don't control single core boosting, AMD's algorithms do. When you switch to manual all core overclock, you effectively disable that. Read up on the Curve Optimizer, that will allow you to boost single core and raise the all core boost. But doing things the old way isn't a benefit anymore, like manual all core oc'ing.

 

[NoJuan999]

The 5600x and 5800x are single CCD chips. The 5800x may run hotter because it runs at the same TDP as the two larger chips the 5900x and 5950x. Do the math per core the 5800x runs with a higher TDP. I would have thought that was why ppl wanted a 5800x, to be less limited by power design limits?

You don't control single core boosting, AMD's algorithms do. When you switch to manual all core overclock, you effectively disable that. Read up on the Curve Optimizer, that will allow you to boost single core and raise the all core boost. But doing things the old way isn't a benefit anymore, like manual all core oc'ing.

I edited my last post.
And I tend to agree that Manual OCing Ryzen 3000 and mosty likely 5000 CPUs isn't worth the effort.
I run my 3700x with PBO instead of a manual OC because a Manual OC does Not benefit my CPU except in Multicore Benchmarks.

 

[Dux]

The design of the CCX layout should be self explanatory?? There's only one CCX now, thus only one multiplier on a chip with one CCD. And btw for the record, there NEVER was per core overclocking on Zen. You could do per CCX previously but obviously since all 8 cores are now combined into one CCX, it is what it is. Only on two CCD chips is there option for two multipliers.

I have a 12 core chip. So 2 CCD chips. It is confusing that when you go into Ryzen Master advanced settings you can without problem set per core frequency. It even lets you adjust all of them by moving just one slider, or each core separately. That is the confusing part. That it lets you do that. Even when you click apply it shows that each core is at that frequency you set it to. But it doesn't work like that.