Updated AMD Ryzen 3000 chipset drivers and power profile

[FinneousPJ]

You could try increasing the BCLK

(Gigabyte X570 AORUS Owners Thread)

www.overclock.net

 

[spectatorx]

Since few releases, this one including, chipset driver installers do not come with power plans anymore. Can anyone else confirm it? Usually these plans were listed next to driver versions.

 

[Vya Domus]

I always thought the power plans were a separate thing that you would had to install from the driver folder manually.

 

[W1zzard]

I always thought the power plans were a separate thing that you would had to install from the driver folder manually.

No, it's supposed to get installed automatically when you install the chipset driver download.

 

[ShurikN]

I've had some many problems with this damned chip, that at this point, I'm just happy to get what I'm getting.
I'm trying to get AMD to have a look at what's going on, as my chip is not behaving like a 3800X, it's behaving like a 3700X.

At least you're getting 4500 now.
But yeah, looking at your results and jesdals' results, your silicon quality is leagues below his. It's just how it is sometimes.

 

[TheLostSwede]

At least you're getting 4500 now.
But yeah, looking at your results and jesdals' results, your silicon quality is leagues below his. It's just how it is sometimes.

In benchmarks only...

This is during a game of BF1...
The CPU is clearly not heavily loaded and should boost much higher, but alas...

 

[HD64G]

In benchmarks only...

This is during a game of BF1...
The CPU is clearly not heavily loaded and should boost much higher, but alas...

View attachment 128325

Did you have any microstutters? Run a benchmark session and check the average and minimum FPS. If all is good and comparable to what others get in performance numbers, then don't try to understand why and how cores are boosting in every app you throw at the CPU. That is a motter of the game engine and dev choice. As the graphs show in @W1zzard 's Zen2 CPUs review, the clocks get lower for every adding thread a program uses. You hit 4.3GHz in 3 cores as I see in the screenshot, what it is not to like?

 

[TheLostSwede]

Did you have any microstutters? Run a benchmark session and check the average and minimum FPS. If all is good and comparable to what others get in performance numbers, then don't try to understand why and how cores are boosting in every app you throw at the CPU. That is a motter of the game engine and dev choice. As the graphs show in @W1zzard 's Zen2 CPUs review, the clocks get lower for every adding thread a program uses. You hit 4.3GHz in 3 cores as I see in the screenshot, what it is not to like?

Not that I noticed. It all felt smooth, but BF1 used to be a pig when it came to CPU utilisation on my Ryzen 7 1700...

As I mentioned elsewhere, I contacted AMD support and I was asked if all my cores run at, at least 3.9GHz during load, to which I replied, how can I tell?
The 3800X should have all the cores running at base clock during load according to what their support guy was telling me, but that's clearly not the case here, with some of them half asleep. And the CPU should boost higher if that's the case, since PBO is enabled, but clearly doing nothing.

Again, my issue is that I have a 3800X, that seems to perform like a 3700X, or worse and I feel like I was sold a bait and switch.

 

[jesdals]

Running 4525mhz with these settings

 

[EarthDog]

You hit 4.3GHz in 3 cores as I see in the screenshot, what it is not to like?

A single core isn't reaching its rated speed is what he keeps saying.

Running 4525mhz with these settings

Screencaps... 1999 anyone?

You can hit F12 to take a screenshot and it saves to a USB stick...

It looks like you customized the P-states, no?

 

[jesdals]

Could not make it save the darn things, but yes its just the p-states - currently with 4525mhz stable. I just got new 3600mhz memory and will return with test with them

 

[EarthDog]

It looks like you have changed quite a bit from stock and simply enabling PBO. A user should simply need to enable PBO to reach and get past those, not tweak to get there.

 

[HD64G]

Not that I noticed. It all felt smooth, but BF1 used to be a pig when it came to CPU utilisation on my Ryzen 7 1700...

As I mentioned elsewhere, I contacted AMD support and I was asked if all my cores run at, at least 3.9GHz during load, to which I replied, how can I tell?
The 3800X should have all the cores running at base clock during load according to what their support guy was telling me, but that's clearly not the case here, with some of them half asleep. And the CPU should boost higher if that's the case, since PBO is enabled, but clearly doing nothing.

Again, my issue is that I have a 3800X, that seems to perform like a 3700X, or worse and I feel like I was sold a bait and switch.

To load all cores fully you need something else than a random game. Maybe the AC:Odyssey load more than 50% but all other games don't even manage this. In some of your previous posts you seem to managed and reach 4,5GHz for the single-core boost, so why do you keep posting about the clocks?

 

[Xzibit]

It looks like you have changed quite a bit from stock and simply enabling PBO. A user should simply need to enable PBO to reach and get past those, not tweak to get there.

You mean that 12in fan on a stand pointed at his system (in the monitors reflection) is not stock ?

 

[jesdals]

Well its my old core duo setup you can see in the background

 

[TheLostSwede]

To load all cores fully you need something else than a random game. Maybe the AC:Odyssey load more than 50% but all other games don't even manage this. In some of your previous posts you seem to managed and reach 4,5GHz for the single-core boost, so why do you keep posting about the clocks?

Oh, I'm sorry, did I offend you somehow?

I keep posting about, because the CPU clearly doesn't behave as expected. Others here have had it boost to over 5GHz in games when all cores aren't heavily loaded, I'm not even getting close.

 

[eidairaman1]

Oh, I'm sorry, did I offend you somehow?

I keep posting about, because the CPU clearly doesn't behave as expected. Others here have had it boost to over 5GHz in games when all cores aren't heavily loaded, I'm not even getting close.

Let the motherboard maker know along with AMD.

Griping here won't get anything done considering how biased this site is towards AMD to begin with.

 

[TheLostSwede]

Let the motherboard maker know along with AMD.

Griping here won't get anything done considering how biased this site is towards AMD to begin with.

Well, the motherboard maker just released AGESA 1.0.0.3ABB the other day and it did seem to improve things slightly, as posted earlier in this thread. Not sure what else they can do.
But as you can see, there's one 3700X and one other 3800X owner in this thread that are getting much more reliable boost speeds (the latter has the same board) and they're seeing boost speeds in games, whereas I seem to get nada.
But hey, your input really made a difference...

 

[biffzinker]

But as you can see, there's one 3700X and one other 3800X owner in this thread that are getting much more reliable boost speeds

Wonder what the odds are your 3800X was intended to be a 3700X? Mix up in binning or packaging?

 

[HD64G]

Oh, I'm sorry, did I offend you somehow?

I keep posting about, because the CPU clearly doesn't behave as expected. Others here have had it boost to over 5GHz in games when all cores aren't heavily loaded, I'm not even getting close.

Why you suppose I try to persuade you abut something to make AMD look better? I just say that the clocks they declare that your CPU can reach for 1-thread boost is what you get now after the BIOS and chipset update. So, why bother anymore with a problem that doesn't exist after those updates? Just wondering. No hard feelings I hope.

 

[TheLostSwede]

Wonder what the odds are your 3800X was intended to be a 3700X? Mix up in binning or packaging?

Yeah, that's what it feels like at least.

Why you suppose I try to persuade you abut something to make AMD look better? I just say that the clocks they declare that your CPU can reach for 1-thread boost is what you get now after the BIOS and chipset update. So, why bother anymore with a problem that doesn't exist after those updates? Just wondering. No hard feelings I hope.

Again, only in benchmarks...
Everyone else that have posted results here, get it during gaming or software load, not just during benchmarking.
I have yet to see it boost past 4.3GHz in any game or any application.
I don't know about you, but to me, that doesn't feel like getting what I paid for, especially not when there are people with 3700X and 3600X boosting higher and more frequently, during actual usage.

 

[HD64G]

Again, only in benchmarks...
Everyone else that have posted results here, get it during gaming or software load, not just during benchmarking.
I have yet to see it boost past 4.3GHz in any game or any application.
I don't know about you, but to me, that doesn't feel like getting what I paid for, especially not when there are people with 3700X and 3600X boosting higher and more frequently, during actual usage.

Have you tried setting the voltage to a lower number (1,2-1,3V) than the one given by the BIOS? It might allow higher all-core boost in games as I have seen in some videos about Ryzen 3X00 CPUs. Try that through the Ryzen Master. Works better in setting the voltage than the BIOS for now at least.

 

[cucker tarlson]

Let the motherboard maker know along with AMD.

Griping here won't get anything done considering how biased this site is towards AMD to begin with.

finally willing to admit that.

 

[enmanueljeffren]

Community Update #5: Let’s Talk Clocks, Voltages, and Destiny 2

Hello! Thank you for all of the interest and excitement around 3rd Gen AMD Ryzen™ Processors. We have some important updates today on our voltages, clockspeeds, and Destiny 2! We diagnosed and resolved the issue causing software monitoring tools to report high voltages and clockspeeds at the...

community.amd.com

Well, it did, f-all for me.
No higher clocks and their new power profile got me stuck again around 4.2-4.3GHz so this is clearly a dud...
This is loading one CPU core at 100% and then leaving the system at idle.

Actually, it seems to sort of work, but you have to select the Better Performance Power mode, or the CPU doesn't throttle.
If y you select Best performance, Nox Vidmate VLC it stays at high Voltages and high frequencies all the time, which doesn't seem quite right to me.

Still not 1MHz above 4.4GHz, even with PBO enabled

View attachment 128130

View attachment 128131

I was about to get 3700X myself, but then all posts with different issues started to show up and... I don't even know now, might just end up with 3600(non X). Some of their SKUs makes no sense.

 

[tabascosauz]

Not that I noticed. It all felt smooth, but BF1 used to be a pig when it came to CPU utilisation on my Ryzen 7 1700...

As I mentioned elsewhere, I contacted AMD support and I was asked if all my cores run at, at least 3.9GHz during load, to which I replied, how can I tell?
The 3800X should have all the cores running at base clock during load according to what their support guy was telling me, but that's clearly not the case here, with some of them half asleep. And the CPU should boost higher if that's the case, since PBO is enabled, but clearly doing nothing.

Again, my issue is that I have a 3800X, that seems to perform like a 3700X, or worse and I feel like I was sold a bait and switch.

I can't help but feel that the 3800X is in a bit of a pinch this generation. This time around, it's not the top dog - that title belongs to the 3900X and soon to be 3950X. And this time, it's really feeling the clock constraints of 7nm. If anything, from a marketing standpoint, the 3800X should have the frequency crown, not the 3900X and 3950X, which should logically be clocked slightly lower for the reward of another CCX.

At the same time, the 3700X is a much more potent SKU than its counterparts were last and last last generation. The frequency gap is much smaller between the two compared to Ryzen 2000 and 1000, where 3.6GHz is actually pretty respectable. The 1700 and 2700 felt more like Core-S/T processors than anything, sacrificing steady state performance to meet an artificially imposed TDP (the 1700 being an even lower end product due to having an extra SKU (1700X) as buffer between it and the 1800X). This time around, with the 3800X, it really doesn't have much to gain over the 3700X. In addition, with the wild game that is 7nm consistency, that gap is narrowed even further.

I was about to get 3700X myself, but then all posts with different issues started to show up and... I don't even know now, might just end up with 3600(non X). Some of their SKUs makes no sense.

That's not the problem...if you don't want to put up with Ryzen 3000's current issues, don't buy Ryzen 3000 before AMD and the vendors fully iron out these issues that come with a new platform. What makes you think a 3600 is going to be any smarter than a 3700X at managing idle clocks, voltages and boost speeds? It's still governed by the same Matisse logic. What makes you think a 3600 is going to be any less susceptible to AMD's typical wild silicon lottery?

Now, if you want to get a CPU with great value, then the 3600 is for you. But don't make it about the 3600 being somehow a more solid product than the other SKUs.


EDIT: Here is my HWInfo as of the 8/1/19 chipset drivers and F42a BIOS, 1.0.0.3ABB. Cores 5 and 6 (two of the slowest according to Ryzen Master) like to do this 0.2V idle thing, whereas the rest never dip below 0.9V.

EDIT 2: Core 0 hit 0.2V briefly right after I took the screenshot, so maybe it's random? Anyways, on Ryzen balanced VCore never actually comes below 0.9V anyways.