9750H 1660Ti still throttling after TS

[Supra2JZTurbo]

Hello, I have read about 20-30 pages worth of throttlestop configurations and I am wondering what I am doing wrong. I am getting throttled down to 3-3.2Ghz while playing BF2042 on medium settings.. I have an Evoo LP5 with a 9750H and 1660Ti. Please review my screenshots and settings and make some recommendations. Thanks in advance.

 

[unclewebb]

This screenshot shows that PROCHOT Offset in the Options window was set to 10. Your other screenshot shows that this is set to 5. It is OK if you are making these changes. If your computer is randomly changing the PROCHOT thermal throttling temperature then I would use the Lock PROCHOT Offset option to prevent this from happening. Set PROCHOT Offset to between 3 and 5.

Your third screenshot shows the core and cache voltages set equal which is not the same as your first screenshot shows. Some of your screenshots show that Speed Shift is enabled and some show it is disabled. It is hard to make recommendations when your screenshots show settings that are not consistent. The voltages in screenshot(11) look appropriate for a 9750H.

When was the last time you opened up and cleaned out your laptop? Have you ever replaced the thermal paste? Your CPU is thermal throttling and slowing down for a reason. You have to improve the cooling if you want better and more consistent performance. Your Nvidia GPU might be close to throttling too.

If you cannot improve cooling then you can reduce the turbo limits to slow your CPU down so it produces less heat. A slower CPU will give you less performance but it might help you avoid thermal throttling which can cause big random drops in performance.

 

[Deleted member 57642]

Be it Power or Thermal throttling - they're fail safe features. Which usually go hand in hand, as in: while your system is over heating - wattage, voltage and frequencies - are lowered till temperatures reach a safe zone. As unclewebb mentioned - might help if you clean the fans and re-paste the CPU/GPU. Tho, not that much - if the design of your laptop is flawed in terms of cooling. Limiting the frequencies can help as well. Even tho, with Turbo Boost - a i7 9750H can go up to 4.5 Ghz - there's not many laptops that can handle this frequency without heating up and triggering thermal-throttling. The base frequency is 2.6 Ghz, if you limit it at 3 Ghz and your CPU doesn't heat-up (and throttle) - you might actually get a better performance in a given game (less FPS but far more stable/consistent) - compared to default setting where it can climb up to 4 Ghz then goes down to 2 Ghz while throttling - only to hover around 3 Ghz then throttle again (rinse and repeat). That being said, after it's cleaned and re-pasted - find the max frequency which doesn't trigger any controlling - which truth be told is the max potential of your laptop - the best setting for consistent performance.

 

[PHVM_BR]

In the TPL window, check Sync MMIO because your system is decreasing the power limits set by you.
You need a repast. Use PTM 7950 (phase change pad).
My laptop with the same i7-9750H I adjust the undervolt with lower values for the core compared to the cache (cache is the limiting factor).
The ideal ratio is between 1:1.5 and 1:2. In my case, -130mV for cache and -250mV for core.
In mine I can run all day with full multicore loads with all cores at 4.0GHz (máx this i7 in full load) with power consumption ~61W.

hwbot.org/submission/5096115_phvm_br_cinebench___r23_multi_core_with_benchmate_core_i7_9750h_8269_cb

 

[unclewebb]

Sync MMIO

The screenshot shows that the MMIO register is locked. MMIO PL1 is locked to 50 and MMIO PL2 is locked to 65.

If a manufacturer has locked the MMIO register in the BIOS, you cannot use Sync MMIO. ThrottleStop cannot change a locked register.

system is decreasing the power limits

It is not power limit throttling, it is thermal throttling. The reason power consumption is decreasing is because the CPU is too hot. It is slowing down to prevent a melt down. Cooling needs to be improved to reach maximum performance.

 

[PHVM_BR]

The screenshot shows that the MMIO register is locked. MMIO PL1 is locked to 50 and MMIO PL2 is locked to 65.

If a manufacturer has locked the MMIO register in the BIOS, you cannot use Sync MMIO. ThrottleStop cannot change a locked register.

I'd never really seen a laptop with MMIO and MSR locked...

In this case not even checking the box Lock MMIO would solve?

It is not power limit throttling, it is thermal throttling. The reason power consumption is decreasing is because the CPU is too hot. It is slowing down to prevent a melt down. Cooling needs to be improved to reach maximum performance.

View attachment 294722

Yes! His PROCHOT is at 90ºC!!! Sorry...

Anyway, I've seen MMIO kick in by decreasing the power limit even at temperatures below PROCHOT.

 

[unclewebb]

I'd never really seen a laptop with MMIO and MSR locked...

Me neither. It is unusual for the BIOS to lock the MMIO power limits. Once locked, ThrottleStop cannot change it.

 

[Supra2JZTurbo]

I was able to repaste my laptop and bought a fan that cools it from the bottom. Playing BF2042 I max 70C on CPU and GPU, however after I exit the game sometimes 5 seconds later my PC will freeze. Currently at -250mv CPU and -125mv Cache. If it's unstable shouldn't it crash during gaming instead of 5 seconds after I close the game?

 

[unclewebb]

Crashes are more likely to happen at light load when an undervolt is too aggressive. Try -120 mV cache and -175 core. That works well for many 9750H CPUs.

I would also try using the Windows High Performance power plan to avoid low frequencies. This is easier to get stable.

 

[PHVM_BR]

The i7-9750H in my laptop running Cinebench R23 multicore with all cores at constant 4.0GHz;
- Original, no undervolt, needs ~100W.
- With -125mV core and cache needs ~75W.
- With -125mV in cache and -175mV in core it needs ~68W.
- With -125mV no cache and -210mV in core needs ~61W.
Lowering more than -210mV in core doesn't change the results.
40% decrease in energy consumption by reducing the temperature from 95/97°C to 77/79°C.

 

[unclewebb]

R23 is not a great stability test. If a game or light load is not stable, the CPU needs more voltage.

 

[PHVM_BR]

R23 is not a great stability test. If a game or light load is not stable, the CPU needs more voltage.

Yes, definitely!
Undervolt stability is really tested at light/random loads and even at IDLE.
In my case it is fully stable up to -130mV in the cache.
Core undervolt does't affect stability (at least in the 8/9th generation).
I've been using -130mV on cache and -250mV on core for over 3 years and never had a problem.

 

[unclewebb]

fully stable up to -130mV

Does the TS Bench report any errors at -130 mV cache? That is a good first test when testing voltages.

 

[PHVM_BR]

Does the TS Bench report any errors at -130 mV cache? That is a good first test when testing voltages.

The first test I do to check undervolt stability is the TS Bench.
With -130mV in the cache there are no errors, neither in fixed load nor in random loads in TS Bench.
With the cache lower than -130mV the test with random loads already indicates errors.
I can run cinebench with up to -145mV in cache, but it is totally unstable in common use.

 

[unclewebb]

I can run Cinebench with up to -145mV in cache, but it is totally unstable in common use.

That is what I found with my desktop CPU. I am not sure why but Cinebench is not a good stability test when adjusting voltages. TS Bench stable and game stable seem to need a similar amount of voltage.

With the cache lower than -130mV the test with random loads already indicates errors.

Adding 10 mV to the CPU cache offset voltage when you first start seeing errors in the TS Bench seems to work well. If you see errors at -135 mV then add 10 mV to that and use -125 mV. That should be fairly stable.

I like all the people that spend hours doing stability testing. I find that the TS Bench can get me some very stable voltage settings within a few minutes of testing. After that you can use your computer normally. If you get any errors while gaming or BSOD, add another 5 mV.

 

[electrowl]

The i7-9750H in my laptop running Cinebench R23 multicore with all cores at constant 4.0GHz;
- Original, no undervolt, needs ~100W.
- With -125mV core and cache needs ~75W.
- With -125mV in cache and -175mV in core it needs ~68W.
- With -125mV no cache and -210mV in core needs ~61W.
Lowering more than -210mV in core doesn't change the results.
40% decrease in energy consumption by reducing the temperature from 95/97°C to 77/79°C.

Interesting data, I'm using 9750H as well so i would like to share some data
Im using Hp Pav Gaming 15, it only allows short burst before the 45w limit lock(on 1650 model)
the 1660Ti Max Q variant of this model dont have the PL lock, hence able to boost longer without being restricted

So i set it to all core 3.4ghz to be accurate as possible
-200mV core -125mV cache~42.7w
-210mV core -125mV cache~41.7w

above 210mV, i need to bump the cache same value in order to see the wattage difference
-215mV core -130mV cache ~41.2w
-220mV core -135mV cache~40.7w
-225mV core -140mV cache Crash!

So far base on the results, every 10mV reduction, its using 1W less
For daily usage, im using all core 3,6ghz with -215mV -130mV,
i might revert to -210mV -125mV, for long term stability, since the difference max load is only 0.5W

That is what I found with my desktop CPU. I am not sure why but Cinebench is not a good stability test when adjusting voltages. TS Bench stable and game stable seem to need a similar amount of voltage.


Adding 10 mV to the CPU cache offset voltage when you first start seeing errors in the TS Bench seems to work well. If you see errors at -135 mV then add 10 mV to that and use -125 mV. That should be fairly stable.

I like all the people that spend hours doing stability testing. I find that the TS Bench can get me some very stable voltage settings within a few minutes of testing. After that you can use your computer normally. If you get any errors while gaming or BSOD, add another 5 mV.

Hi, unclewebb
Same as OP, recently been reading 20 pages thread maximizing undervolt
Used to set -150mV for both core and cache before settling on your guide with -215mV cache and -130mV cache
Appreciate if you would check my setting to see if anything left unchecked or improve?
Thanks a lot

The R23 run able to boost 3.6ghz using 50w for a while before lowers down to 3,58ghz 45w PL lock
I noticed the higher boost clock i set, 3.8ghz-4ghz the boost duration period shortens

 

[unclewebb]

Sometimes you can go beyond the 45W limit by checking the MMIO Lock box. Have you tried doing that? Clear the Sync MMIO box first and push the Apply button. Lock MMIO is better than Sync MMIO.

If that does not get you beyond the 45W long term limit then there is not much else you can do.

 

[PHVM_BR]

Interesting data, I'm using 9750H as well so i would like to share some data
Im using Hp Pav Gaming 15, it only allows short burst before the 45w limit lock(on 1650 model)
the 1660Ti Max Q variant of this model dont have the PL lock, hence able to boost longer without being restricted

So i set it to all core 3.4ghz to be accurate as possible
-200mV core -125mV cache~42.7w
-210mV core -125mV cache~41.7w

above 210mV, i need to bump the cache same value in order to see the wattage difference
-215mV core -130mV cache ~41.2w
-220mV core -135mV cache~40.7w
-225mV core -140mV cache Crash!

So far base on the results, every 10mV reduction, its using 1W less
For daily usage, im using all core 3,6ghz with -215mV -130mV,
i might revert to -210mV -125mV, for long term stability, since the difference max load is only 0.5W


Hi, unclewebb
Same as OP, recently been reading 20 pages thread maximizing undervolt
Used to set -150mV for both core and cache before settling on your guide with -215mV cache and -130mV cache
Appreciate if you would check my setting to see if anything left unchecked or improve?
Thanks a lot

The R23 run able to boost 3.6ghz using 50w for a while before lowers down to 3,58ghz 45w PL lock
I noticed the higher boost clock i set, 3.8ghz-4ghz the boost duration period shortens

Why do you limit your multipliers to one and two cores?
This will make you lose performance in daily use.

Too bad your laptop has the power limit blocked...You have a lot of thermal space....Have you tried checking the Lock box on the MMIO?

I tested the i7-9750H without undervolt "just for science" and in multicore from 3.6ghz its efficiency is horrible.
Cinebench R23 without undervolt:
- 75W clock is 3.65GHz
- 90W clock is 3.85GHz
- 100W clock is maximum 4.00GHz

My processor can go up to -130mV in cache with total stability.
With -135mV it starts to show errors in the TS Bench tests with random load.

 

[electrowl]

Why do you limit your multipliers to one and two cores?
This will make you lose performance in daily use.

Too bad your laptop has the power limit blocked...You have a lot of thermal space....Have you tried checking the Lock box on the MMIO?

I tested the i7-9750H without undervolt "just for science" and in multicore from 3.6ghz its efficiency is horrible.
Cinebench R23 without undervolt:
- 75W clock is 3.65GHz
- 90W clock is 3.85GHz
- 100W clock is maximum 4.00GHz

My processor can go up to -130mV in cache with total stability.
With -135mV it starts to show errors in the TS Bench tests with random load.

What are the settings you recommend then?
Using the default value for one and two cores?

I tried it back then using 4GHz for one and two core, but rarely noticed it take advantage and boost past 3.6GHz
So i ended up setting the same value for all core

Yea i just tried the Lock box on MMIO, it doesn't change anything unfortunately
Like you said the efficiency 3.6ghz onwards are terrible, more on diminishing return
so technically 45W 3.6Ghz kinda the sweet spot for thermal, noise, and efficiency

I tested 4GHz R23, it needs 70W, compared to your 61W, even on the same -210mv
Your chip is more efficient

On -130mV cache, do you notice on wattage reduction going from -210mV to -250mV core? By every -10mV increment
I don't notice any difference above -215mV core, unless i increase the cache, but yea no more headroom for cache

 

[PHVM_BR]

I tested 4GHz R23, it needs 70W, compared to your 61W, even on the same -210mv
Your chip is more efficient

The difference in consumption is very large... very strange!

On -130mV cache, do you notice on wattage reduction going from -210mV to -250mV core? By every -10mV increment
I don't notice any difference above -215mV core, unless i increase the cache, but yea no more headroom for cache

I set cache with -130mV and core with -250mV, but core from 210 or 220mV doesn't change anything. I leave it at -250mV just to make sure I'm getting the most out of it...

hat are the settings you recommend then?
Using the default value for one and two cores?

I tried it back then using 4GHz for one and two core, but rarely noticed it take advantage and boost past 3.6GHz
So i ended up setting the same value for all core

Several tasks, the vast majority of common use, use one or two cores and clock limiting in this case will only make your system worse since for single/dual core your system will not be limited neither by power nor by temperatures.

Probably in other loads, even full load multicore, your processor will be able to exceed 3.6mhz and maybe even reach the 4ghz with undervolt, even with the power limited to 45W.
The load in cinebench is very heavy, in the cpu stress test of AIDA64 your i7 can certainly go higher, in games too, for example...

As your laptop is already limited by the power limit I recommend you to leave all the clocks at the maximum as original.
Redundant to also limit the clocks.

 

[PHVM_BR]

I tested 4GHz R23, it needs 70W, compared to your 61W, even on the same -210mv
Your chip is more efficient

The difference in consumption is very large... very strange!

Check Power Options in Windows Control Panel. Under Change Advanced Power Settings > PCI Express, change it to Maximum Power Savings.
This should reduce its consumption and I don't notice a drop in performance on my system.

 

[electrowl]

Check Power Options in Windows Control Panel. Under Change Advanced Power Settings > PCI Express, change it to Maximum Power Savings.
This should reduce its consumption and I don't notice a drop in performance on my system.

Hi, i just checked the power settings, turns out its not using balance or high performance profile but HP own profile
and the PCI Express default settings already own maximum power savings