• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.
  • The forums have been upgraded with support for dark mode. By default it will follow the setting on your system/browser. You may override it by scrolling to the end of the page and clicking the gears icon.

5800x (and other Zen 3 chips) PBO settings/Temperature fix

Here are a few pictures of my bios. It looks like it's not even showing the cpu fans so I'm not sure how I can control those if there is no readings? Also seems like the case fans 3,4 are DC.. Also for the 3,4 fans I can't seem to control the curve at all. It only allows me to choose smart fan. I'm currently controlling the cpu fans via the corsair software but it not showing up here in bios I'm wondering if something is wrong and that is why the fans keep ramping up in speed randomly. Maybe the sensor corsair is using is not the cpu sensor?
Your BIOS cant show fans that aren't connected directly to the motherboard
 
Came up with something discussing motherboard settings in a PM, and its worth sharing here - help getting the wording accurate for clear understanding would be useful before it goes into the OP
AMD's default is that EDC is 1.5x TDC, at least in the examples i've found listed.

The problem here is that "Thermally constrained" isn't explained properly, in that you can set a value too high for the VRM's and they rely on their own internal throttling which tanks CPU performance massively vs negotiating a lower value - so it seems TDC must be manually set to work correctly, rather than something that automatically triggers based on a temperature readout many boards lack, or don't expose to the end user.

It's worded like it's a time limit, or something that negotiates based on VRM temperatures but seems to behave like a 'dumb' feature instead that needs to be accurate in the beginning, and most boards simply enabling PBO to access settings like the curve undervolt defaults these to maximum "Motherboard limit" values, negating what the users went in there for in the first place.

I get the feeling these features often do not work correctly, because the board manufacturers never enter accurate values for the boards, but instead something that looked good in quick benchmark tests or just straight to AMD's maximums.



Originally from AMD/Gamers Nexus
Package Power Tracking (“PPT”): The PPT threshold is the allowed socket power consumption permitted across the voltage rails supplying the socket. Applications with high thread counts, and/or “heavy” threads, can encounter PPT limits that can be alleviated with a raised PPT limit.

  1. Default for Socket AM4 is at least 142W on motherboards rated for 105W TDP processors.
  2. Default for Socket AM4 is at least 88W on motherboards rated for 65W TDP processors.
Thermal Design Current (“TDC”): The maximum current (amps) that can be delivered by a specific motherboard’s voltage regulator configuration in thermally-constrained scenarios.

  1. Default for socket AM4 is at least 95A on motherboards rated for 105W TDP processors.
  2. Default for socket AM4 is at least 60A on motherboards rated for 65W TDP processors.
Electrical Design Current (“EDC”): The maximum current (amps) that can be delivered by a specific motherboard’s voltage regulator configuration in a peak (“spike”) condition for a short period of time.

  1. Default for socket AM4 is 140A on motherboards rated for 105W TDP processors.
  2. Default for socket AM4 is 90A on motherboards rated for 65W TDP processors.

And how this applies to us:

PPT: Maximum wattage - Volts + Amps combined, mostly relevant to heavy all core loads (This and undervolting arehow to get more MT performance)
EDC: electrical limits of the VRM in Amps - short burst maximums - Like Intels PL2
TDC: long term Amp limit, designed to prevent the VRM's overheating - like Intels PL1

PPT:
Lower to reduce sustained heat from the cooler, in constant heavy loads (like R23/benchmarks)
Raise to increase benchmark scores for all-core max load performance

EDC:
Lower to reduce high voltage/temp spikes at low core count load
Raise to increase low thread, boost performance (Games, 3D benchmarks)

TDC:
Lower to reduce VRM temps in sustained medium loads (like gaming)
Raise to overheat your VRMs :mad: (If set too low, it will limit the other two options as well.)


The best values vary by core count and CCX count, because of how much physical space each CPU design has to spread the heat out over.
Having one value too low could prevent the others reaching the limits you want
 
What about BIOS settings such as, SVM mode, NX mode, PSS support, global c states and CPPC, CPPC preferred cores ? I heard those make huge cpu performance gains especially in games.
 
Came up with something discussing motherboard settings in a PM, and its worth sharing here - help getting the wording accurate for clear understanding would be useful before it goes into the OP
AMD's default is that EDC is 1.5x TDC, at least in the examples i've found listed.

The problem here is that "Thermally constrained" isn't explained properly, in that you can set a value too high for the VRM's and they rely on their own internal throttling which tanks CPU performance massively vs negotiating a lower value - so it seems TDC must be manually set to work correctly, rather than something that automatically triggers based on a temperature readout many boards lack, or don't expose to the end user.

It's worded like it's a time limit, or something that negotiates based on VRM temperatures but seems to behave like a 'dumb' feature instead that needs to be accurate in the beginning, and most boards simply enabling PBO to access settings like the curve undervolt defaults these to maximum "Motherboard limit" values, negating what the users went in there for in the first place.

I get the feeling these features often do not work correctly, because the board manufacturers never enter accurate values for the boards, but instead something that looked good in quick benchmark tests or just straight to AMD's maximums.



Originally from AMD/Gamers Nexus


And how this applies to us:

PPT: Maximum wattage - Volts + Amps combined, mostly relevant to heavy all core loads (This and undervolting arehow to get more MT performance)
EDC: electrical limits of the VRM in Amps - short burst maximums - Like Intels PL2
TDC: long term Amp limit, designed to prevent the VRM's overheating - like Intels PL1

PPT:
Lower to reduce sustained heat from the cooler, in constant heavy loads (like R23/benchmarks)
Raise to increase benchmark scores for all-core max load performance

EDC:
Lower to reduce high voltage/temp spikes at low core count load
Raise to increase low thread, boost performance (Games, 3D benchmarks)

TDC:
Lower to reduce VRM temps in sustained medium loads (like gaming)
Raise to overheat your VRMs :mad: (If set too low, it will limit the other two options as well.)


The best values vary by core count and CCX count, because of how much physical space each CPU design has to spread the heat out over.
Having one value too low could prevent the others reaching the limits you want
Is there any app out there that can test each core and find the overall best values for PPT, EDC, TDC and co? I kinda just tried to choose what seems most stable. My current values are ppt 120 tdc 75A EDC 110A co values are all different but mostly -24 with two others being -17 and -16.
 
What about BIOS settings such as, SVM mode, NX mode, PSS support, global c states and CPPC, CPPC preferred cores ? I heard those make huge cpu performance gains especially in games.
Set the following in your BIOS, under "CPU Features" or "AMD_CBS":
  • Global C-state Control = Enabled
  • Power Supply Idle Control = Low Current Idle
  • CPPC = Enabled
  • CPPC Preferred Cores = Enabled
  • AMD Cool'n'Quiet/PSS Support = Enabled
  • PPC Adjustment = PState 0
  • NX Mode = On (ALWAYS ON ITS LIKE BUILT IN ANTI VIRUS)
If you can't find certain settings, such as "AMD Cool'n'Quiet/PSS Support" or "PPC Adjustment", do not worry, they are of secondary importance. Some motherboard manufacturers just hide them.

Test for yourself i tried them with other settings and lost Score in Cinebench dramatically.

Also i run the 1usmus Universal Powerplan which goes hand in hand with these settings - https://www.techpowerup.com/download/1usmus-custom-power-plan-ryzen-3000-zen-2/
 
Set the following in your BIOS, under "CPU Features" or "AMD_CBS":
  • Global C-state Control = Enabled
  • Power Supply Idle Control = Low Current Idle
  • CPPC = Enabled
  • CPPC Preferred Cores = Enabled
  • AMD Cool'n'Quiet/PSS Support = Enabled
  • PPC Adjustment = PState 0
  • NX Mode = On (ALWAYS ON ITS LIKE BUILT IN ANTI VIRUS)
If you can't find certain settings, such as "AMD Cool'n'Quiet/PSS Support" or "PPC Adjustment", do not worry, they are of secondary importance. Some motherboard manufacturers just hide them.

Test for yourself i tried them with other settings and lost Score in Cinebench dramatically.

Also i run the 1usmus Universal Powerplan which goes hand in hand with these settings - https://www.techpowerup.com/download/1usmus-custom-power-plan-ryzen-3000-zen-2/
What is this for???
 
What is this for???
Sort of a question is this?? You can clearly see its Bios Settings in response to electronicworld's post. also the thread is clearly labeled 5800x & other Zen 3 Chips PBO Settings and temp fix .... :nutkick:Im trying to stay sane but some of your questions are off another planet dude.
 
Sort of a question is this?? You can clearly see its Bios Settings in response to electronicworld's post. also the thread is clearly labeled 5800x & other Zen 3 Chips PBO Settings and temp fix .... :nutkick:Im trying to stay sane but some of your questions are off another planet dude.
Chilly willy man lol. So these settings you mentioned all make an actual difference in gaming performance, like a noticeable 10fps? I've never seen anyone post these before, everyone just says tinker with pbo settings and curve op that's why I'm asking.. Are any of these default and they all must be changed to these values?
 
I made a long post in the generic Zen Garden thread, covering a lot of PBO settings. I'll edit this into the first post as well as a link, but it's worth viewing as it's covering a bit of why these PBO settings are defaulting too high, especially on zen3 CPU's (where they raised the internal hard-coded limits for overclockers, only to find motherboards just default to them all the time)

Ryzen Owners Zen Garden | Page 236 | TechPowerUp Forums
 
@Mussels @freeagent or anyone in the know what PPT/TDC/EDC would you reccomend for R9 5900X?

Iv tried 170/118/140 (I dont think you can go above 140 EDC now with the new AGESA 1.2.0.8 without crashing) I get Kernel Power 41 (Task 63) Crashes on this setting now i'm dialling down to 142/95/140 (What i believe is stock) for 105W TDP CPU's?

PSU seems good. I can monitor my efficiency and power draw in iCue i did this while running OCCT POWER stress test and it stayed above 93% efficiency.
 
@Mussels @freeagent or anyone in the know what PPT/TDC/EDC would you reccomend for R9 5900X?

Iv tried 170/118/140 (I dont think you can go above 140 EDC now with the new AGESA 1.2.0.8 without crashing) I get Kernel Power 41 (Task 63) Crashes on this setting now i'm dialling down to 142/95/140 (What i believe is stock) for 105W TDP CPU's?

PSU seems good. I can monitor my efficiency and power draw in iCue i did this while running OCCT POWER stress test and it stayed above 93% efficiency.

What exactly do you want to do with this 5900X? Chase benchmark scores all day? Or just a solid daily? Yes, 142/95/140 is the default profile for it and is plenty with a bit of curve optimizer sprinkled on top. PPT and EDC are dependent on what your sample+board+BIOS wants, not what other people can do. Something around 160W might give a nice little boost without the V-F curve becoming too steep. With a bit of CO you can come down to say 130/x/120 without any performance loss compared to no-CO stock, stands to reason expanding PPT and EDC a bit in the other direction is fine too.

To help with tweaking, HWInfo will tell you how much PPT/TDC/EDC are limiting you under load. Otherwise there's nothing stopping you from setting 200-240W but no promises the 5900X you have will actually have much to show for it. Lot of heat, still doesn't catch a stock 5950X.

93% seems about right for the AX860i between 200-400W.
 
Yeah pretty much, I use those limits to reach peak sc/mc boost.. fails hard in core cycler though.. but good for everything else :D

You probably wouldn't like how it will make your fans behave..
 
You probably wouldn't like how it will make your fans behave..

got my hearing protection ready, hit me :cool: and 10 layers since it's cold as balls over there
 
got my hearing protection ready, hit me :cool: and 10 layers since it's cold as balls over there
I have to say, those T30s are a really good fan! Even at "just" 2K they are fairly quiet.. they really put iPPC to shame in the db dept. :D

Its not cold anymore :laugh:

Its a good case for air cooling :rockout:

Edit:

Not sure if you have a PA120.. if you dont, you should check out a PS120SE.. I think you would be surprised :)
 
Last edited:
What exactly do you want to do with this 5900X? Chase benchmark scores all day? Or just a solid daily? Yes, 142/95/140 is the default profile for it and is plenty with a bit of curve optimizer sprinkled on top. PPT and EDC are dependent on what your sample+board+BIOS wants, not what other people can do. Something around 160W might give a nice little boost without the V-F curve becoming too steep. With a bit of CO you can come down to say 130/x/120 without any performance loss compared to no-CO stock, stands to reason expanding PPT and EDC a bit in the other direction is fine too.

To help with tweaking, HWInfo will tell you how much PPT/TDC/EDC are limiting you under load. Otherwise there's nothing stopping you from setting 200-240W but no promises the 5900X you have will actually have much to show for it. Lot of heat, still doesn't catch a stock 5950X.

93% seems about right for the AX860i between 200-400W.
I’m not trying to chase benchmarks cooling wise im good the EK block keeps it below throttling even at 200/200/160 I can’t get it stable though, at such high settings even with voltage llc, I also worry about the VRM temps at this extremity’s too,

So basically I’m chasing high single core not MT performance I game a lot and very occasionally for work I do a bit of AUTOCAD, but that’s about it. So single core performance is more what I’m chasing so what I’m asking is where would you advise as a starting point. I’m using 1usmus HYDRA for core optimisation too. I found a good curve with it for my 5800x so I trust it, I’m just trying to find a good starting point regarding ppt/tdc/edc really.
 
Last edited:
I’m not trying to chase benchmarks cooling wise im good the EK block keeps it below throttling even at 200/200/160 I can’t get it stable though, it such high settings even with voltage curve I worry about the VRM temps at this extremity’s too,

So basically I’m chasing high single core not MT performance I game a lot and very occasionally for work I do a bit of AUTOCAD, but that’s about it. So single core performance is more what I’m chasing so what I’m asking is where would you advise as a starting point. I’m using 1usmus HYDRA for core optimisation too. I found a good curve with it for my 5800x so I trust it, I’m just trying to find a good starting point regarding ppt/tdc/edc really.
What pbo and curve ops are you using in your 5800x?
 
What pbo and curve ops are you using in your 5800x?
Core 1 to 8 (HYDRA 1.2F STABLE) Max Boost +150mhz
PPT/TDC/EDC
142/95/125

0 / 1 / 2 / 3 / 4 / 5 / 6 / 7
-10/-0/-20/-18/-12/-24/-16/-22

What exactly do you want to do with this 5900X? Chase benchmark scores all day? Or just a solid daily? Yes, 142/95/140 is the default profile for it and is plenty with a bit of curve optimizer sprinkled on top. PPT and EDC are dependent on what your sample+board+BIOS wants, not what other people can do. Something around 160W might give a nice little boost without the V-F curve becoming too steep. With a bit of CO you can come down to say 130/x/120 without any performance loss compared to no-CO stock, stands to reason expanding PPT and EDC a bit in the other direction is fine too.

To help with tweaking, HWInfo will tell you how much PPT/TDC/EDC are limiting you under load. Otherwise there's nothing stopping you from setting 200-240W but no promises the 5900X you have will actually have much to show for it. Lot of heat, still doesn't catch a stock 5950X.

93% seems about right for the AX860i between 200-400W.
So i just ran HYDRA with 142/95/140

I got the following core offsets

Core 1 to 12 (HYDRA 1.3G) 50mhz boost 142/95/140
0 / 1 / 2 / 3 / 4 / 5 / 6 / 7 / 8 / 9 / 10/ 11
-22/-30/-24/-24/-20/-30/-24/-30/-30/-30/-20/-26

Does that look good to you? Just about to test stability running a core cycle with OCCT will report back when i learn more
 
Last edited:
When I have it installed, I roll back from 1208 to 1203 and I run 240/160/190
I'll add that to the OP

I’m not trying to chase benchmarks cooling wise im good the EK block keeps it below throttling even at 200/200/160 I can’t get it stable though, at such high settings even with voltage llc, I also worry about the VRM temps at this extremity’s too,

So basically I’m chasing high single core not MT performance I game a lot and very occasionally for work I do a bit of AUTOCAD, but that’s about it. So single core performance is more what I’m chasing so what I’m asking is where would you advise as a starting point. I’m using 1usmus HYDRA for core optimisation too. I found a good curve with it for my 5800x so I trust it, I’m just trying to find a good starting point regarding ppt/tdc/edc really.
Remember that PBO values do nothing for stability. They're power limits, NOT voltage limits.

Your stability is going to be the undervolt curve being too low and unstable at load transitions (low/zero load, crashing at idle etc) - or it's going to be DRAM/IF stability related.
Stress tests will never show undervolt related instabilities, because they're unstable at LOW load, not high load. They lower voltages at all power states.

Post a zentimings screenshot, if you havent altered your SoC or IOD voltages that'll explain instability even if you have the undervolt disabled.



People with the EDC limit - do your boards/that BIOS have this feature?
Buildzoid mentioned it. "Enabled" loosens AMD's EDC limits.

1683966732661.png


Part-specific EDC throttling could explain the issue, where it's limiting one specific part, rather than the value for the whole
 
Last edited:
I'll add that to the OP


Remember that PBO values do nothing for stability. They're power limits, NOT voltage limits.

Your stability is going to be the undervolt curve being too low and unstable at load transitions (low/zero load, crashing at idle etc) - or it's going to be DRAM/IF stability related.
Stress tests will never show undervolt related instabilities, because they're unstable at LOW load, not high load. They lower voltages at all power states.

Post a zentimings screenshot, if you havent altered your SoC or IOD voltages that'll explain instability even if you have the undervolt disabled.



People with the EDC limit - do your boards/that BIOS have this feature?
Buildzoid mentioned it. "Enabled" loosens AMD's EDC limits.

View attachment 295700

Part-specific EDC throttling could explain the issue, where it's limiting one specific part, rather than the value for the whole
Thanks @Mussels , I contacted the guy i got the 5900X from he swapped it me for another brand new one. Even let me test it on his test bench, This one is now stable. Has a modest CO negative offset -16 all cores and -6 on the 2 CPPC Cores.

RAM is Optimised using DCFR Feature on Hydra 1.3G with XMP disabled, running 3600mhz and CL14-15-15-15-30 @ 1.45V (1.43 in BIOS)
 
Proper TDC setting (maximum for VRMs, not how the ratio of ppt/edc/tdc affects performance) requires knowing your Mboard's VRM components. So for example my board has 12 physical CPU vrms in a tripled-up, 4-phase design. The VRMs are rated for 50 amp, which should theoretically give a 600amp limit. But, VRMs are typically best at their 50% load (and Mboards typically built for such). The board is built to handle a 5950x, which even at a 250w, 1.35v load would demand ~185 amps. At 185 amps across 12 units, this works out to ~15.4Amp per VRM. Well within tolerances and within a "VRM efficient load" point. The Vishay ViC634 datasheet also shows that ~15 amps per unit at 500khz with 12v input is the ideal efficiency point, wasting roughly half a watt as heat. So as it looks my motherboard was literally built to handle an overclocked 5950X with the VRM bank operating entirely inside of the optimal efficiency zone.
With all of this taken into account I can know for certain that the motherboard itself is physically no limiting factor for my 5800x's performance, and I can play with EDC/TDC and never have to think about VRM stress or heat influenced performance limits. The limits solely rest on my CPU and how well it can be cooled.

As someone once said, knowledge is power.
 
limitaiton isn't the board
limitation is the thermal density of the chip
unless you are using direct-die cooling you just can't get the heat out of the chip fast enough beyond 150w
 
limitaiton isn't the board
limitation is the thermal density of the chip
unless you are using direct-die cooling you just can't get the heat out of the chip fast enough beyond 150w
^ That
 
@MaddoggMiranda
unless your using win7 and/or pre 5xxx series cpu, the 1usmus power plan is improving nothing vs what win already has.
 
Back
Top