AMD Releases Balanced Power Plan for Windows; Optimized for Ryzen Processors

[Raevenlord]

In another Community Update from Robert Hallock, some more developments on the platform have been announced, after the last one's commitment to upcoming updates. AMD has done good on their promise for an optimized power profile for Windows systems that better leverages Ryzen's design and features.AMD's SenseMI technology allows the processor to fine-tune voltages and frequency on-the-fly, with a much higher granularity and lower latency than any software-based solution - such as Windows 10's power plans. These transitions between frequencies and voltages are governed by "P-States", which are frequency/voltage combinations requested by the operating system.

It so happens that Windows 10's Balanced power plan delays changes towards faster P-states - which bring increased frequency and voltage and hence, power consumption - so as to save more power. However, this means that there is an increased delay (latency) between the moment more processing power is required of the Ryzen processor and the moment the processor is allowed to change P-states to deliver it. Add to this the fact that Ryzen takes a significant performance hit with core-parking enabled, and Windows 10's balanced power plan attempts to park all logical processors beyond the first 10% whenever possible means that most of Ryzen's cores will have to be unparked before they can process any kind of workload - and this in itself incurs in an increased latency and, therefore, performance penalty.





AMD's "Ryzen Balanced" power plan works by reducing the timers and thresholds for P-state transitions to improve clockspeed ramping, which lets the processor's SenseMI technology do its work; and disables core parking altogether (which really shouldn't be a problem, considering Ryzen's energy-efficient design.) AMD says that the performance gains are actually on par with the High Performance plan in various games, on a computer configured with an AMD Ryzen 7 1800X, a Gigabyte GA-AX370-Gaming5, 2x 8 GB DDR4-2933, a GeForce GTX 1080 (378.92 driver), and Windows 10 x64 (build 1607).



AMD says there are other games they've seen benefits in (Total War: WARHAMMER, Alien: Isolation, Crysis 3, Gears of War 4, Battlefield 4, Project Cars and other unnamed ones). AMD says that not every game behaves in a way where a change in power plans has an impact on the Ryzen processor, but there is definitely a considerable number of them to warrant a change.

It really is commendable to see AMD so invested with its community updates, improving a platform that had some quirks on launch day (and still has, though fewer in number.)

View at TechPowerUp Main Site

 

[TheLaughingMan]

So I get gaming improvements without losing power savings feature. Sold!

 

[HD64G]

So, windows was or wasn't a problem in the way the os handled the CPU loads?

Great move to introduce a tool from AMD themselves to solve what MS should handle from start.

 

[Ed_1]

If you look at what they changed, it's no longer balance plan IMO.
They raised the min processor state from 5% to 90%, so its almost HP in that regard.

 

[newtekie1]

If you look at what they changed, it's no longer balance plan IMO.
They raised the min processor state from 5% to 90%, so its almost HP in that regard.

I'm pretty sure that is the point. By setting it to 90%, you essentially take the OS out of deciding the P-States. The OS is too slow at switching the P-States and is too biased towards the low ones. The processor and the built in SenseMI will then handle the P-States.

It would be cool if @W1zzard could do a quick test to check idle clock speeds and power consumption using the Stock Balanced plan, the AMD Ryzen Balanced plan, and the High Performance plan.

 

[JATownes]

If you look at what they changed, it's no longer balance plan IMO.
They raised the min processor state from 5% to 90%, so its almost HP in that regard.

They raised the WINDOWS min processor state...Ryzen is a different beast. All power management is handled by a (purportedly self learning) processor on the die itself (SenseMI). This should allow the hardware itself to regulate its own power management and not rely on software for it, thereby bypassing Windows.

Unless I'm completely misinterpreting what SenseMI is, which is completely possible.

JAT

Edit: Ninja'd by Newtekie

 

[Ed_1]

They raised the WINDOWS min processor state...Ryzen is a different beast. All power management is handled by a (purportedly self learning) processor on the die itself (SenseMI). This should allow the hardware itself to regulate its own power management and not rely on software for it, thereby bypassing Windows.

Unless I'm completely misinterpreting what SenseMI is, which is completely possible.

JAT

Edit: Ninja'd by Newtekie

That's marketing PR, you can do same thing on any CPU, Intel etc, yeh you get a small improvements but like I said its more a HP power plan. meaning clocks will jump to max instead of stepping through them with demand.

Test?
https://www.pcper.com/news/Processors/AMD-Releases-Ryzen-Balanced-Power-Plan-Test-Results-Inside

 

[lightofhonor]

Ran some tests last night using a power meter and found that, even when forcing no clock change or downvolts, Ryzen... uh... finds a way.

Minimum reported power usage at idle:

63.2w on Balanced (50% core park)
64.4w on BIOS forced max clock speed (Ryzen w/ .00025v reduction)
64.7w on Ryzen Balanced
65.0w on High Performance
67.1w on BIOS Fixed Voltage (Ryzen)


1.8w swing between Balanced and HP is pretty good.

 

[_JP_]

So, more or less what happened with bulldozer (disabling core parking patch). Good on AMD to optimize it for everyone this easily
Heh, I'll do my fine tuning manually trough the registry like before, same effect but I get to customize it

 

[thesmokingman]

That's marketing PR, you can do same thing on any CPU, Intel etc, yeh you get a small improvements but like I said its more a HP power plan. meaning clocks will jump to max instead of stepping through them with demand.

Test?
https://www.pcper.com/news/Processors/AMD-Releases-Ryzen-Balanced-Power-Plan-Test-Results-Inside

Not sure what your beef is or agenda but they clearly explain what is happening. The consumption differences are small, but the effect in performance is not.

Since Windows power management (not the scheduler) is not yet Ryzen aware, its default settings result in overly aggressive core parking when driving a Ryzen CPU. Until a lower level change can take place, AMD has released a custom Ryzen Balanced Power Plan that tweaks some of the P-state transition values and a few other settings to help realize the performance gains previously seen by folks shifting to the High Performance mode while keeping idle power consumption much closer to that of the Balanced plan. Here are AMD’s claimed performance gains (vs. Balanced) with their new Ryzen Balanced Power Plan

Bottom line it's been explained pretty well here:

I'm pretty sure that is the point. By setting it to 90%, you essentially take the OS out of deciding the P-States. The OS is too slow at switching the P-States and is too biased towards the low ones. The processor and the built in SenseMI will then handle the P-States

 

[Ed_1]

Not sure what your beef is or agenda but they clearly explain what is happening. The consumption differences are small, but the effect in performance is not.



Bottom line it's been explained pretty well here:

My "beef" is calling this balanced optimized power plan, I have done the same on many CPU, no magic here anyone can edit power plan to get this, its so small improvement.
As for wattage usage, it should be extremely minimal when system is idle, only when some partial load would it go up anything noticeable.

This is a band aid/hack IMO until they fix it properly in OS or micro-code.

This could also be a side affect of having so many cores/threads but used on a low load app that only uses a handful. So you end up with low utilization on each core/thread so clocks don't ramp up fast.

 

[HD64G]

My "beef" is calling this balanced optimized power plan, I have done the same on many CPU, no magic here anyone can edit power plan to get this, its so small improvement.
As for wattage usage, it should be extremely minimal when system is idle, only when some partial load would it go up anything noticeable.

This is a band aid/hack IMO until they fix it properly in OS or micro-code.

This could also be a side affect of having so many cores/threads but used on a low load app that only uses a handful. So you end up with low utilization on each core/thread so clocks don't ramp up fast.

Just don't compare new gen CPUs like Ryzen with tens of sensors on die with previous ones. Win10 is too old tech of sw to compare with latest tech hw features.

 

[evernessince]

So, windows was or wasn't a problem in the way the os handled the CPU loads?

Great move to introduce a tool from AMD themselves to solve what MS should handle from start.

Windows was and still is the problem. AMD stated in a press release that Windows wasn't causing issues but that was mostly ass kissing. While it isn't causing issues, it most certainly isn't optimal.

 

[theGryphon]

Windows was and still is the problem. AMD stated in a press release that Windows wasn't causing issues but that was mostly ass kissing. While it isn't causing issues, it most certainly isn't optimal.

How can anyone blame Windows for not understanding the intricacies and peculiarities of a completely new CPU architecture and optimizing its operation accordingly by itself!!?

If any OS can do that, its developer should win a special Nobel prize because that would be an earth-shattering development in artificial intelligence.

Of course AMD won't say it was Window's or Microsoft's fault. They would be the laughing stock with such a ridiculous claim. In fact it's only AMD's fault not doing all these tests BEFORE marketing the product and not issuing optimizations such as this (and probably more that's on the way) on day 1 (heck, day 0).

 

[Uğur Gümüşhan]

I always want my hardware to adapt to the old software. Hardware can change, old software wont be compiled again or updated often.

 

[Bruno_O]

How can anyone blame Windows for not understanding the intricacies and peculiarities of a completely new CPU architecture and optimizing its operation accordingly by itself!!?

If any OS can do that, its developer should win a special Nobel prize because that would be an earth-shattering development in artificial intelligence.

Of course AMD won't say it was Window's or Microsoft's fault. They would be the laughing stock with such a ridiculous claim. In fact it's only AMD's fault not doing all these tests BEFORE marketing the product and not issuing optimizations such as this (and probably more that's on the way) on day 1 (heck, day 0).

Totally agree, but I'd like to add that AMD prob didn't do that for lack of knowledge nor good will, but most likely $$ restraints and pressure for release (more $$ involved). As a 1700 owner, I'm quite happy with my purchase, specially because this thing is cooler and more power efficient than the equivalent Intels (heck, it even beats 4 core Intels), and as my PC is actually the HTPC, < power means < noise = win.

 

[HD64G]

Some ignorance around here...

HW will always get ahead of SW and SW will always try to catch up with HW. Just because HW introduces new features and abilities and THEN code gets patched to take advantage of them. Don't try to make MS seem good and AMD bad for the windows not being able to take advantage of Ryzen's totally new arch. It is proven now that windows wasn't ready to show Ryzen's true potential in all cases and needed some patches, updates or even this script that AMD made themselves.

 

[theGryphon]

Some ignorance around here...

HW will always get ahead of SW and SW will always try to catch up with HW. Just because HW introduces new features and abilities and THEN code gets patched to take advantage of them. Don't try to make MS seem good and AMD bad for the windows not being able to take advantage of Ryzen's totally new arch. It is proven now that windows wasn't ready to show Ryzen's true potential in all cases and needed some patches, updates or even this script that AMD made themselves.

Talk about ignorance...

Why is it MS's responsibility for their OS to be READILY optimized for a completely new CPU architecture??

Really, you're contradicting even yourself: "HW will always get ahead of SW and SW will always try to catch up with HW. Just because HW introduces new features and abilities and THEN code gets patched to take advantage of them. "
This is correct, and it was never the OS developer's RESPONSIBILITY to optimize their OS for a new CPU architecture BY THEMSELVES. What happens typically, which is what also happened here, the CPU developer INFORMS the OS developer and CONTRIBUTES to said patches so everything works as it should. AMD can't expect anyone else but themselves to know all the ins and outs of their new CPU architecture.

AMD dropped the ball a little here, and I'm not trashing them for that, it's just the fact of the matter, as it is that they have limited resources to make everything perfect from day 1.

 

[Vayra86]

FWIW Intel's Core arch was far from perfect on launch day and even in subsequent refreshes there was a host of issues, some even left unresolved entirely. Now this applied mostly to Intel's own chipset features, but still, it goes to show that every CPU launch has some hiccups.

Business as usual. Everything that is new will require some time and usage to reach its full potential. Once you launch a product, you get massive amounts of data to act on and support findings to improve a piece of software or hardware.

 

[HD64G]

Talk about ignorance...

Why is it MS's responsibility for their OS to be READILY optimized for a completely new CPU architecture??

Really, you're contradicting even yourself: "HW will always get ahead of SW and SW will always try to catch up with HW. Just because HW introduces new features and abilities and THEN code gets patched to take advantage of them. "
This is correct, and it was never the OS developer's RESPONSIBILITY to optimize their OS for a new CPU architecture BY THEMSELVES. What happens typically, which is what also happened here, the CPU developer INFORMS the OS developer and CONTRIBUTES to said patches so everything works as it should. AMD can't expect anyone else but themselves to know all the ins and outs of their new CPU architecture.

AMD dropped the ball a little here, and I'm not trashing them for that, it's just the fact of the matter, as it is that they have limited resources to make everything perfect from day 1.

I didn't about Win10 needing to be ready for Ruzen prior to the launch, or even in the 1st month after that. Is anything that I wrote wrong? If not, MS is the one responsible after the Ryzen's launch to make their OS operate optimal when using those CPUs and vice versa. Point is, MS left AMD make this small script and they didn't. Kudos to AMD, meh for MS from my side of view.

 

[Ed_1]

I didn't about Win10 needing to be ready for Ruzen prior to the launch, or even in the 1st month after that. Is anything that I wrote wrong? If not, MS is the one responsible after the Ryzen's launch to make their OS operate optimal when using those CPUs and vice versa. Point is, MS left AMD make this small script and they didn't. Kudos to AMD, meh for MS from my side of view.

Sorry, that's just wrong, its not MS fault, its up to AMD to supply fix/code for "there" CPU, its all on there hands.
If I got a new fangled GPU would it be upto MS for drivers and support, of course not.

Anyway, all this should of been taken care of months before release.
Also for last two gen Intel uses HW for speedstep tech, not relying on the OS, which ends up much faster latency response.

 

[theGryphon]

I always want my hardware to adapt to the old software. Hardware can change, old software wont be compiled again or updated often.

Old software is baggage for new hardware as is old hardware for new software. Expecting new HW support old SW makes only myopic sense and hinders progress if granted.

All in all, I'm not bashing AMD at all, and true that all new CPU architectures including Intel's had initial hiccups and everything got optimized as best they could in time. Same thing with AMD, which I'm rooting for. I'm on a mobile workstation now and can't see myself building a desktop in the near future (unless I win the lottery, lol), and I'm eagerly waiting for 8-core Ryzen parts inside a mobile workstation / desktop replacement notebook

 

[Frick]

FWIW Intel's Core arch was far from perfect on launch day and even in subsequent refreshes there was a host of issues, some even left unresolved entirely. Now this applied mostly to Intel's own chipset features, but still, it goes to show that every CPU launch has some hiccups.

Business as usual. Everything that is new will require some time and usage to reach its full potential. Once you launch a product, you get massive amounts of data to act on and support findings to improve a piece of software or hardware.

I know my G3220 and Windows 10 stock ramps up the clocks way to slowly. Disabling Speedstep makes a massive difference in everyday use.

I always want my hardware to adapt to the old software. Hardware can change, old software wont be compiled again or updated often.

 

[sweet]

I always want my hardware to adapt to the old software. Hardware can change, old software wont be compiled again or updated often.

Best sarcasm I've ever read for a long time

 

[thesmokingman]

Sorry, that's just wrong, its not MS fault, its up to AMD to supply fix/code for "there" CPU, its all on there hands.
If I got a new fangled GPU would it be upto MS for drivers and support, of course not.

Anyway, all this should of been taken care of months before release.
Also for last two gen Intel uses HW for speedstep tech, not relying on the OS, which ends up much faster latency response.

How the ? do you know AMD didn't address this with MS already? Do you think they create something new without giving feedback to their partners? And your "beef" is with what they call it, lmao. Who cares what your beef is? What the hell is this with MS on a platform BS. MS sucks ass. They keep screwing customers over every chance they get and they don't give a flying five. How many times do they need to break Windows 10 this month? Then steal how much more of your info? And you expect them to be on top of any new hardware, gimmie a break.