AMD Curve Optimizer any guides / experience

[tabascosauz]

How do my settings look, I'm completely new to PBO/CO overclocking though after messing around in the bios tonight, these settings look to be the best I have gotten in CPU-Z bench so far, temps all seem to be in check, RAM at 4000mhz and 1:1 IF clock, Ryzen 5500 CPU and some TeamGroup RAMK which I believe is Samsung B-die, though inconclusive

Go to BIOS > AMD CBS and disable TSME. You are penalizing yourself by 7-10ns

Boost Clock Override tops out at 200 and has been for a long time

TSME aside, latency is high for 4000CL16 but Im assuming that's because you haven't touched tRFC yet

Use zentimings if you want to get into mem stuff

 

[DoLlyBirD]

Would bios settings for AMD overclock/CBS etc

Go to BIOS > AMD CBS and disable TSME. You are penalizing yourself by 7-10ns

Boost Clock Override tops out at 200 and has been for a long time

TSME aside, latency is high for 4000CL16 but Im assuming that's because you haven't touched tRFC yet

I can't find any TSME setting in my bios at all, I knocked the TRFC down a tad as it was about 560 using default settings, though wanted to be careful as have had issues lowering it too far too soon in the past with these sticks, though that was on a Ryzen 1600AF when I could only run max 3400mhz stable

 

[tabascosauz]

Would bios settings for AMD overclock/CBS etc

I can't find any TSME setting in my bios at all, I knocked the TRFC down a tad as it was about 560 using default settings, though wanted to be careful as have had issues lowering it too far too soon in the past with these sticks, though that was on a Ryzen 1600AF when I could only run max 3400mhz stable

tRFC gets kinda easier to run "tighter" ns-wise the higher speed you go. Because you need more VDIMM to push lower tRFC, but each kit has a hard lower limit to tRFC (in number not ns) where it won't boot anymore.

If it doesn't do sub 200ns tRFC, it's not B-die. No matter how horrible the bin. Even legacy E-die does 160ns. 140ns can be a little tough for bad B-die but 160ns should be no prob

Some vendors now put TSME on the main page under CBS. For others it should still be under UMC settings or something under CBS. And then under Security I think. MSI should be fine, don't recall it being that hard to find on my Unify-X.

 

[DoLlyBirD]

I have MSI B450m Pro-A Max, it's a turd of a board.. still can't see any resemblance of that setting..

Interesting thing though with the TRFC, tried to run low 300's on my 1600AF and it didn't like it at all though that was likely due to the 1600AF IMC and not the RAM, I'm at 400 now, I shall go deeper down the rabbit hole lol

 

[tjtremor999]

tRFC gets kinda easier to run "tighter" ns-wise the higher speed you go. Because you need more VDIMM to push lower tRFC, but each kit has a hard lower limit to tRFC (in number not ns) where it won't boot anymore.

If it doesn't do sub 200ns tRFC, it's not B-die. No matter how horrible the bin. Even legacy E-die does 160ns. 140ns can be a little tough for bad B-die but 160ns should be no prob

Some vendors now put TSME on the main page under CBS. For others it should still be under UMC settings or something under CBS. And then under Security I think. MSI should be fine, don't recall it being that hard to find on my Unify-X.

View attachment 244473

b-die is the way to go for lowest tRFC,
low tRFC works very well on amd, every -10trfc nets you a good .1ns better latency

here's my patriot 4400cl19 kits

 

[tabascosauz]

b-die is the way to go for lowest tRFC,
low tRFC works very well on amd, every -10trfc nets you a good .1ns better latency

here's my patriot 4400cl19 kits

Yes, but at the same time AIDA is also disproportionately a sucker for tRFC, doesn't quite translate to real performance. Big jumps on tRFC make big gains, but smaller differences below 140ns is not quite as noticeable. Other timings have real impact as well but AIDA ignores them.

Tradeoff between VDIMM and tRFC. 1.56V set on Gigabyte boards is closer to 1.6V real, since all Gigabyte boards overvolt VDIMM between 0.03-0.06V.

I have MSI B450m Pro-A Max, it's a turd of a board.. still can't see any resemblance of that setting..

Interesting thing though with the TRFC, tried to run low 300's on my 1600AF and it didn't like it at all though that was likely due to the 1600AF IMC and not the RAM, I'm at 400 now, I shall go deeper down the rabbit hole lol

View attachment 244474

I'll take a look at my Unify-X BIOS later tonight and send some screenies of CBS menu.

Can't help you much if you don't provide your zentimings. I'm confident you can do 145ns or better, but you should expect to bump VDIMM for it. tRFC isn't free.

ZenTimings

ZenTimings is a simple and lightweight app for monitoring memory timings on Ryzen platform.

zentimings.protonrom.com

 

[Dia01]

I honestly can't locate the TSME setting in my bios either???

 

[Deleted member 202104]

Would bios settings for AMD overclock/CBS etc

I can't find any TSME setting in my bios at all, I knocked the TRFC down a tad as it was about 560 using default settings, though wanted to be careful as have had issues lowering it too far too soon in the past with these sticks, though that was on a Ryzen 1600AF when I could only run max 3400mhz stable

I'll take a look at my Unify-X BIOS later tonight and send some screenies of CBS menu.

Can't help you much if you don't provide your zentimings. I'm confident you can do 145ns or better, but you should expect to bump VDIMM for it. tRFC isn't free.

ZenTimings

ZenTimings is a simple and lightweight app for monitoring memory timings on Ryzen platform.

zentimings.protonrom.com

On my Unify it's under Overclocking/Advanced DRAM Configuration

 

[tabascosauz]

On my Unify it's under Overclocking/Advanced DRAM Configuration

View attachment 244479

Should also mention, Asus and MSI BIOS have search function in the top right (except 16MB MSI slim BIOS). Makes it much easier to look for stuff.

 

[Dia01]

Can't locate TSME on the main page or in Advance under AMD CBS which the only sub item is DRAM Memory Mapping

 

[jesdals]

I had to dig deep under my bios AMD CBS settings to find the TSME setting

b-die is the way to go for lowest tRFC,
low tRFC works very well on amd, every -10trfc nets you a good .1ns better latency

here's my patriot 4400cl19 kits
View attachment 244475

Heres mine same type of Patriot - like your settings though

 

[Octopuss]

What's TSME?

 

[tabascosauz]

What's TSME?

A memory encryption method part that used to be part of AMD's "PRO" suite. Renoir and Cezanne APUs have it but AFAIK zero difference on regular desktop chiplet Ryzen bc they don't support it. The 5600G/5700G aren't PRO but I guess AMD just considers all APUs now to have the security features. Non-X Matisse used to be PRO (3700/3900) but Vermeer doesn't seem to be.

Memory encryption: AMD SME, TSME and SEV (mricher.fr)

Theoretically good for security, but instant 7ns ish latency penalty, so if pushing the APU UMC, it should be off

 

[Octopuss]

I am confused. Is it relevant to 5000 series or not?

 

[tabascosauz]

I am confused. Is it relevant to 5000 series or not?

Not for what you have

 

[Mussels]

I am confused. Is it relevant to 5000 series or not?

To the PRO and G models, yes. To regular 5000 series, no. I had to look it up as well.

 

[t0aster]

If you do have the option, then yeah. In my case once out of the box is hard to return it unless there are real problems with it (remember PBO is actually overclocking).

My 5950X was unstable on core 4, (I'm running that one in -15, core 2 and 3 are running -20 and everything else at -25).

What power supply do you have? Could it be the PSU not delivering appropriate power.

I just saw this and I gotta give my advice, because old threads do get views.
AMD are easy to get an RMA from. I have to send back a couple 5000 series CPU's because of low performance. If I buy an $800 CPU I want an $800 chip. I love AMD but there is a wide performance margin between a dud 5950X and a good one. They only guarantee 4900mhz, if I don't get 5000+ then I'm not gonna be happy plain and simple. Maybe someone else will be content with that, but I spend wayy too much money building systems. If they didn't take em back, I would end up paying to replace them.
My point tho is AMD are pretty easy to return to as long as you have the invoice.
They never asked me if I overclocked the CPU, and I doubt they care. They use language like that to deter people. And it works to some degree I'm sure. But it's impossible for them to refuse a return for that reason. Any AIB board would nullify the warranty because they all have pbo+ enabled by default.

Here's what they ask for. First, you request an rma and you give them the serial number and describe the problem. They may try to talk you through some troubleshooting steps.
I let em know that I have done all the troubleshooting to avoid that.
Then they send you an email asking what motherboard and bios you were using. They have you send a picture of the cpu installed in the socket with a piece of paper with the reference number in the shot. And again ask you what troubleshooting steps were taken.

An issue I did have was with a GPU I bought off Craigslist last year. I needed the kid I bought it from to do the RMA and they would only mail it to the address where he ordered it from. It was a 6800xt with a pad thermal pad so it died right away and I still had the guys number. He was a good kid luckily and It wasn't an issue. But that policy sucks when so many people are having to buy off scalpers

So of course you can't say the chip isn't fast enough, you need to say it's defective in some way, IE it reboots when you load a game.
And I don't advise sending back a chip that is fairly decent to try and hit the lottery. Honestly tho, if you get a 5950X that doesn't wanna boost to 5000mhz you hit the silicon lottery backwards and if it's gonna bother you then send it back.

 

[Octopuss]

Anyone using CoreCycler here?
I keep getting this when I try to run it:

I just replaced the included outdated Prime95 version with 30.7.

What's going on?

 

[Ibizadr]

Anyone using CoreCycler here?
I keep getting this when I try to run it:
View attachment 245778
I just replaced the included outdated Prime95 version with 30.7.

What's going on?

Happens to me when replaced prime95. Try to use the original version you replace

 

[Mussels]

Anyone using CoreCycler here?
I keep getting this when I try to run it:
View attachment 245778
I just replaced the included outdated Prime95 version with 30.7.

What's going on?

I mean you kinda answered it yourself, you broke it with the new P95

 

[Octopuss]

Yea well. The author encourages people to do so, so I was perplexed for a while until I found an an acknowledged issue on GitHub from november about it. Guess it will take some time.

Oh and I've just noticed the script defaults FFT size to huge, which is a nonsense for this purpose, isn't it? Shouldn't smallest or small be used instead?

 

[tabascosauz]

Yea well. The author encourages people to do so, so I was perplexed for a while until I found an an acknowledged issue on GitHub from november about it. Guess it will take some time.

Oh and I've just noticed the script defaults FFT size to huge, which is a nonsense for this purpose, isn't it? Shouldn't smallest or small be used instead?

No. Maybe if you had a static OC on 12900K. We have boost algorithm here. The point is not to hammer the core. The lighter the load the higher boost clock the PB algorithm allows - the point is to run a workload that is reasonably heavy but allows boost clocks to push as high as they possibly can, to gauge whether the current undervolt settings are stable at those theoretical max clocks.

In any case even on Huge FFT, it's heavy enough. I don't think I've seen any game run per-core power up past 20W.

That said, in my testing with 1h15m per core, FFT size selection generally doesn't make a huge difference to clocks in corecycler. I leave it on Huge for a good spread. Possibly because default config and the most effective configs all run SSE instructions so maybe without AVX the algorithm treats FFT sizes pretty equally. AVX testing is not very useful in CC, at least for initial tests - you can test AVX after you've worked out some settings with SSE.

 

[Octopuss]

But the config file also says
# Moderate: 1344K to 4096K - special preset, recommended in the "Curve Optimizer Guide Ryzen 5000"
# Heavy: 4K to 1344K - special preset, recommended in the "Curve Optimizer Guide Ryzen 5000"
# HeavyShort: 4K to 160K - special preset, recommended in the "Curve Optimizer Guide Ryzen 5000"

So I am really confused here.

 

[tabascosauz]

But the config file also says
# Moderate: 1344K to 4096K - special preset, recommended in the "Curve Optimizer Guide Ryzen 5000"
# Heavy: 4K to 1344K - special preset, recommended in the "Curve Optimizer Guide Ryzen 5000"
# HeavyShort: 4K to 160K - special preset, recommended in the "Curve Optimizer Guide Ryzen 5000"

So I am really confused here.

Apologies, I said Huge FFT - my config is 1h15m All FFT.

What's there to be confused about? Moderate, Heavy and HeavyShort are just 3 extra profiles to choose from with different FFT ranges. I have no idea about this "Ryzen 5000 guide" but they look just fine, just remember to set the appropriate runtime.

Don't get bogged down in names - look at the FFT size you want to test, then look at the recommended test lengths for said FFT profile up the page. Set something that'll test the entirety of the range you want to test, and set it to run at least 3 iterations per core. Boost is unpredictable so 1 or 2 cycles is not enough to prove stability.

Default 6min Huge FFT is generally enough to eliminating crashing/BSOD in day-to-day. After running 3-5 iterations per core with 0 errors, I'd be pretty confident about running it daily. But if you are a stickler for stability, don't be afraid of longer custom testing, just do two cores at a time overnight.

 

[Octopuss]

Yea, extra profiles, different sizes, not sure what to choose and why Up until now I always chose the smallest size when running p95 manually, but now I'm not sure after what you told me in relationship with the Huge preser.

I left everything on default and set it to only cycle through one core. If it passes 12 hours, I'd move onto the next. I guess that does enough iterations.