Advice sought for 3900x build, accepted bios settings and varying highest speed recorded in various monitors

[lorry]

I would like peoples thoughts on my Ryzen 3900X set up and bios config please.
I am totally new to modern PCs but have built in the past (20+ years ago now).
I followed and searched for as much info as I could before my build. That went flawlessly, first time test boot outside the case, first time boot when built etc. I know that I am Very raw, and I am looking for support and advice please.
My usage is the usual day-to-day usage and gaming, I am not looking for any mad overclock but do want the best performance that can be expected with regular adjustments in the bios.

Full setup
3900X, Gigabyte Aorus X470 gaming 7 Wi-Fi Rev 1.1, Gigabyte Aorus GeForce® RTX 2070 Super, 32GB (4 x 8GB) Corsair 3200 C16 Dominator Platinum,
Noctua NH DI-15S, Seasonic 1000W Titanium, Samsung Evo 970 1TB NVMe M.2 SSD boot drive, Intel 660P 2TB NVMe M.2 SSD second drive.

latest Bios on Gigabyte site F50, latest chipset on Gigabyte site [19.10.16]
Ryzen Balanced Power plan selected in Win 10.

I Loaded optimized BIOS settings
Enabled XMP
Set Control Performance Boost to auto
In Performance Boost Overdrive there are four settings - I chose Advanced as that gave the best results
Disable, Auto, Enable and Advanced in the Gigabyte Aorus X470 gaming 7 Wi-Fi Rev 1.1 BIOS

During all of these tests the temperature rises to 72c, but settles very quickly back to 41 - 45c at the desktop

Here are my speed results for Cinebench R20, R15 and CPU-Z Benchmark, in each case the multithread results are shown first
Lastly the peak speeds as shown in HWMonitor and Ryzen Master using Advanced setting in PBO.


R20
ADVANCED ENABLE AUTO
7266 6877 6996
499 480 495

R15
ADVANCED ENABLE AUTO
3197 3048 3060
200 196 199


CPU-Z
ADVANCED ENABLE AUTO
8226 8054 8200
530 508 513


HWMONITOR
ADVANCED ENABLE AUTO

0 4599 4549 4549
1 4599 4551 4549
2 4549 4524 4526
3 4549 4524 4501
4 4524 4474 4499
5 4524 4499 4499
6 4524 4249 4349
7 4399 4349 4374
8 4374 4299 4374
9 4374 4299 4326
10 4374 4251 4374
11 4401 4324 4374

RYZEN MASTER
ADVANCED ENABLE AUTO

0 4340 4274 4340
1 4300 4299 4347
2 4227 4189 4219
3 4222 4141 4220
4 4223 4173 4219
5 4166 4137 4212
6 4217 4188 4187
7 4166 4188 4187
8 4184 4188 4187
9 4251 4198 4236
10 4251 4169 4236
11 4222 4175 4211


My questions are these -

Have I got the correct settings as per the currently accepted reasoning amongst those that know?

If not where have I gone wrong please? I have not used the PBO setting within Ryzen Master as my logic says that I have already enabled that in the bios. I see Ryzen Master as a simple means of making adjustments without the need to enter the bios, but if you have them set in the bios then there is no need to use Ryzen Master apart from monitoring, yes?

Why do I see max speed differently between HWMonitor and Ryzen Master of around 200 - 250MHz? I expected some variation but not as high a figure as this.

I know that 72c isn't great and plan to put a second Noctua fan on the cooler at the end of the week and saving for either a 280 or 360 AIO. At desktop, it will be 41 - 45c.
According to HWMonitor I have two cores that reach 4.599 yet in Ryzen Master I barely reach 4.300, that to me doesn't sound right.
It has just passed memtest86, latest version, 4 full passes with zero errors reported.

Thanks for any help or advice that any of you can offer and apologies for the length of this post (I can be quite verbose)

 

[Zach_01]

From what you say your CPU works the best possible way and if you tested all three modes of PBO and found the best for you then thats it. It may vary across CPUs, boards, chipsets, BIOSs to what is the best option. You done your testing and in your setup you found the best. There isnt anything more to it regarding auto boost.
What you can do to further gain performance is to tweak the DRAM/DRAMcontroller/InfinityFabric to higher speeds and maybe tighter DRAM timings.

It is better to set things in UEFI than RyzenMaster. I also use it only for occasional monitoring. I also use mainly HWiNFO for monitoring. What you see at RM and HWiNFO is different cause each uses different methode to report speeds, temps, voltages.
ex: https://www.hwinfo.com/forum/threads/effective-clock-vs-instant-discrete-clock.5958/

And remember that max boost clocks (especially single core) only happen for very short periods of time, like bursts. At HWiNFO you will almost never see the reported "max clock" at "current clock" readings.
72C for that CPU is ok given the number of cores/consumption it has. It can be improved but you already far from Tj of 95C. Absolute nothing to worry about. Of course if you manage to drop the max temp another ~5C ( to get below 70 and close to mid 60s) the CPU could sustain little higher clocks at full load or at heavy multitheaded loads at general. Consider improving the CPU cooler and case air flow before spending a good amount of money for AIO cooler (280mm minimum). I have a 280mm AIO feeding its radiator with 23~24C air and my max 100% load temp is 61~62C but I'm 50Watts short to 3900X so... The AIO's max fans speed is 2200rpm but I only use them up to 1300~1400rpm (custom fan curve from 850rpm ~32C up to 1350rpm ~62C). Typical gaming load 50~52C, ~1100rpm.

 

[lorry]

@Zach_01 thank you for your input and the link, more reading when I am back on the PC (currently Prime95ing it).
On Reddit I was told this
"
CPU Cooling: the boost frequency of the Zen 2 processors is very dependent on temperature. AMD calculated their rated boost clocks at 50°C.

Depending on the processor, maximum boost will go down with temperature:
- 3900/3950 - 75 MHz per 10°C
- 3800/3700 - 50 MHz per 10°C
- 3600/3500 - 35 MHz per 10°C

That's why some people with poor cooling may see lower frequencies. This includes case airflow and high ambient temperatures."
From this article https://www.techpowerup.com/review/1usmus-power-plan-for-amd-ryzen-new-developments/

I am losing 225MHz off of the 4.6 max with a stress test in Prime95 of 80c then. As
I'm running Prime 95 currently, now five hours in and all is fine. It was running at 4.0MHz, temp 80c, PPT, CPU power, SOC power, EDC (CPU) all pretty much maxed out. Then about an hour in - It Had maxed out all of its power limits, no surprise there, it's a stress test after all.
All of a sudden, four of the five power limits Suddenly dropped, as did the temperature (by 20c!!!), Plus the speed on All 12 cores jumped from 4.0 to 4.2
PPT dropped to 72% of 142W
CPU power dropped to 77.85W
SOC power dropped Well low! down to 13.98W
Only the EDC(CPU) remains at 100% of 140A
Temperature dropped from 80 to 58.95c
Speed on all cores is now 4.210MHz
That then climbed back up to the old levels, then dropped again, then rose in a continual cycle.
THe Core VID increases at that time from 1.2V to 1.33V

 

[Zach_01]

Thank for link... Interesting article.
I did install the first 1usmus power plan v1.0 a few days after release. Now I got v1.1 for Win10 v1909.

I knew that ZEN2's boost behavior is temp related, but did not know specifics...

I am losing 225MHz off of the 4.6 max with a stress test in Prime95 of 80c then.

Prime 95 stress test, all cores?
But 3900X's boost 4.6GHz is for single core, not all core boost. All ZEN2 CPUs boost at (all core load clocks) somewhere between 3.9 and 4.2GHz. You all ready hitting 4.6GHz single core as you saw with HWiNFO so you are fine...

 

[lorry]

it certainly is 100% maxing out all cores all of the time. Lowest is 3.975 and that is effective across all cores and the highest being 4225 and all cores are within 25MHz of each other, so effectively the same across all 12 cores really. I am just using the Ryzen balanced power plan, as I hadn't heard of 1usmus power plan until this afternoon, but as soon as Prime95 ends (or I get bored, 6 hours now), Is it a straightforward .exe file?

 

[Zach_01]

The installation proccess is pretty straight forward. Extract and run install.bat. And when finish automatically sends you to power plan settings. What needs to be done in order to work is some UEFI/BIOS settings.

• Global C-state Control = Enabled
• Power Supply Idle Control = Low Current Idle
• CPPC = Enabled
• CPPC Preferred Cores = Enabled
• AMD Cool'n'Quiet = Enabled
• PPC Adjustment = PState 0

I've seen better boost behaviour but most important the plan tries to keep things in one CCX to reduce latencies. And 3900/3950 with 4CCX sees the most benefit of this power plan.

 

[lorry]

i shall most certainly have a read through the various links then
Thank you

And thank you for those settings, that was exactly what I was going in hunt of

quick question, how much difference is there between balanced and performance in terms of speed and extra power used?

 

[Zach_01]

I never really test things between Ryzen balanced and performance power plans.
Prior to 1usmus's plan I use the RyzenBalanced plan as AMD recommended. Its time consuming to test these things and the results maybe inconsistent due to a wide and large variety of parameters affecting the conclusion. For instance you dont know what win backround is doing at any given time.
For me in order to test these things you need at least a few days with each and do the excact same things every day for the excact same time, so... not!

If you dont know already the video below gives you a nice info about ZEN2 memory subsystem structure and function. Everyone seeking to tweak the system for best performance should know this.

 

[ERazer]

I didn't bother with OC, set the DOCP and everything else to default and constantly hitting 4.6 boost and when I transcode in Handbrake all cores at 4.1-2@ 75c, I dont deal RyzenMaster.

 

[lorry]

I never really test things between Ryzen balanced and performance power plans.
Prior to 1usmus's plan I use the RyzenBalanced plan as AMD recommended. Its time consuming to test these things and the results maybe inconsistent due to a wide and large variety of parameters affecting the conclusion. For instance you dont know what win backround is doing at any given time.
For me in order to test these things you need at least a few days with each and do the excact same things every day for the excact same time, so... not!

If you dont know already the video below gives you a nice info about ZEN2 memory subsystem structure and function. Everyone seeking to tweak the system for best performance should know this.

Yes I know that vid but no harm in watching again, Tomorrow though, I'm too tired to take it in tonight

I didn't bother with OC, set the DOCP and everything else to default and constantly hitting 4.6 boost and when I transcode in Handbrake all cores at 4.1-2@ 75c, I dont deal RyzenMaster.

I don't have an Asus board though, I said

 

[Zach_01]

Ehh... DOCP, XMP... different name for same thing.

Yes, OC with Zen2 has become more irrelevant than ever. DRAM OC/tweak is the only thing left for some performance gains, but nothing too impressive...

 

[lorry]

The installation proccess is pretty straight forward. Extract and run install.bat. And when finish automatically sends you to power plan settings. What needs to be done in order to work is some UEFI/BIOS settings.

• Global C-state Control = Enabled
• Power Supply Idle Control = Low Current Idle
• CPPC = Enabled
• CPPC Preferred Cores = Enabled
• AMD Cool'n'Quiet = Enabled
• PPC Adjustment = PState 0

I've seen better boost behaviour but most important the plan tries to keep things in one CCX to reduce latencies. And 3900/3950 with 4CCX sees the most benefit of this power plan.

I could not find the cool n quiet function anywhere? Although it does say in the MB manual that it is set to enabled by default. Any ideas as to where it might reside?

Also could not find PPC adjustment, again - ideas as to where it might hide please?

Other than that the power plan is installed and selected

 

[Zach_01]

Prior to latest UEFI (F10 final 1.0.0.4 B) for my board I was also missing those 2. When was first introduced the 1.0.0.4 B AGESA (F10a/c = beta) those 2 also missing. Only the latest final F10 1.0.0.4 B add them, and was enabled/PState 0 by default.
In the article says that users dont see some them should not worry cause by default are Enabled like your manual says, but I'm not so sure about that, cause vendors start adding them after the release of 1usmus's power plan... so this looks to me a bit sketchy...

Anyway, even I hadn't have those 2 from the biginning using 1usmus's v1.0 power plan, I did see the effects of it. Light and non all core workloads... loading mostly the higher quality cores and trying to keep most loading at 1 CCX.Before this plan loads where all over the place(cores/threads)
You can determine this before/after by looking the individual core/thread avg effective core clocks (HWiNFO), after some normal every day usage (browsing, videos, gaming)
So, dont worry about it and keep your board's UEFI updated with latest version. Latest Win10 ver. and latest chipset drivers from AMD.

EDIT
Those settings now are sitting under CPU Advanced settings.

 

[lorry]

Prior to latest UEFI (F10 final 1.0.0.4 B) for my board I was also missing those 2. When was first introduced the 1.0.0.4 B AGESA (F10a/c = beta) those 2 also missing. Only the latest final F10 1.0.0.4 B add them, and was enabled/PState 0 by default.
In the article says that users dont see some them should not worry cause by default are Enabled like your manual says, but I'm not so sure about that, cause vendors start adding them after the release of 1usmus's power plan... so this looks to me a bit sketchy...

Anyway, even I hadn't have those 2 from the biginning using 1usmus's v1.0 power plan, I did see the effects of it. Light and non all core workloads... loading mostly the higher quality cores and trying to keep most loading at 1 CCX.Before this plan loads where all over the place(cores/threads)
You can determine this before/after by looking the individual core/thread avg effective core clocks (HWiNFO), after some normal every day usage (browsing, videos, gaming)
So, dont worry about it and keep your board's UEFI updated with latest version. Latest Win10 ver. and latest chipset drivers from AMD.

EDIT
Those settings now are sitting under CPU Advanced settings.

Thank you I must have missed that

One more/last thing for now, what is this 'max cpu boost clock override' please?
Seems to go from 0 to 200MHz ? Should I enable that to the 200?

 

[Zach_01]

Thank you I must have missed that

One more/last thing for now, what is this 'max cpu boost clock override' please?
Seems to go from 0 to 200MHz ? Should I enable that to the 200?

Feel free to set it to 200MHz by all means. The internal monitor/manager of the CPU will do its thing.
The are three possible results by this +200MHz for 1core/low thread loads.
1) You may gain some MHz
2) Do nothing at all
3) Loose some MHz.

Again its a lottery like almost everything else. (CPU silicon quality, board's setup/UEFI, windows scheduler/manager etc.. etc...)

Mine when I was at 1.0.0.3 ABBA did not make any difference (Disabled, Enabled, Auto, Advanced 0MHz or 200MHz)
With 1.0.0.4 B when set it to Enable/Auto does nothing and when at Advanced I loose 25~50MHz from highest clocking cores. So I keep it Enabled.

In any case you cant physical hurt your CPU. If the CPU sees headroom it will boost more by it self. This is not static OC.

This is me after 3+ hours of just browsing (chrome with 20+ opened tabs) and watching videos.

 

[lorry]

Feel free to set it to 200MHz by all means. The internal monitor/manager of the CPU will do its thing.
The are three possible results by this +200MHz for 1core/low thread loads.
1) You may gain some MHz
2) Do nothing at all
3) Loose some MHz.

Again its a lottery like almost everything else. (CPU silicon quality, board's setup/UEFI, windows scheduler/manager etc.. etc...)

Mine when I was at 1.0.0.3 ABBA did not make any difference (Disabled, Enabled, Auto, Advanced 0MHz or 200MHz)
With 1.0.0.4 B when set it to Enable/Auto does nothing and when at Advanced I loose 25~50MHz from highest clocking cores. So I keep it Enabled.

In any case you cant physical hurt your CPU. If the CPU sees headroom it will boost more by it self. This is not static OC.

This is me after 3+ hours of just browsing (chrome with 20+ opened tabs) and watching videos.

View attachment 138511

Ah Great to know! I'll set it and see what happens then. Thank you for your explanations, that above all else is great for me, as it's the knowledge that I'm more interested in

The installation proccess is pretty straight forward. Extract and run install.bat. And when finish automatically sends you to power plan settings. What needs to be done in order to work is some UEFI/BIOS settings.

• Global C-state Control = Enabled
• Power Supply Idle Control = Low Current Idle
• CPPC = Enabled
• CPPC Preferred Cores = Enabled
• AMD Cool'n'Quiet = Enabled
• PPC Adjustment = PState 0

I've seen better boost behaviour but most important the plan tries to keep things in one CCX to reduce latencies. And 3900/3950 with 4CCX sees the most benefit of this power plan.

Aha! just seen this in Tom's forum from a search -
It's not called Cool n' Quiet any more (except on some Gigabyte MBs), C-states replaced it. Frequency is going to constantly jump up and down in response to demands from OS and programs, no escape from that. That's what it's for, to keep frequency down until needed. Cool n' Quiet would just slow it down even if it existed. Only way would be to set frequency manually to a preset value.

@Zach_01
Just noticed something in HWINFO _

[Operating Points]
CPU Minimum: 550.0 MHz = 5.50 x 100.0 MHz
CPU Base: 3800.0 MHz = 38.00 x 100.0 MHz
CPU Boost Max (Fmax): 4650.0 MHz = 46.50 x 100.0 MHz
CPU Overclocking Max: 4650.0 MHz = 46.50 x 100.0 MHz
(EDIT - Adding that 200MHz offset brings the overclock up to a potential 4850.o MHz)
CPU High Temperature Clock Limit: 4400 MHz >= 80 °C
CPU Automatic Overclocking Offset: 0 MHz
CPU Current: 4225.1 MHz = 42.25 x 100.0 MHz @ 1.3687 V

That suggests to me that throttling actually begins at 80c ? If so than that plus the losing 75Hz per every 10c above 50c might equal my CPUs' limits ?

 

[Zach_01]

Ah Great to know! I'll set it and see what happens then. Thank you for your explanations, that above all else is great for me, as it's the knowledge that I'm more interested in



Aha! just seen this in Tom's forum from a search -
It's not called Cool n' Quiet any more (except on some Gigabyte MBs), C-states replaced it. Frequency is going to constantly jump up and down in response to demands from OS and programs, no escape from that. That's what it's for, to keep frequency down until needed. Cool n' Quiet would just slow it down even if it existed. Only way would be to set frequency manually to a preset value.

This is my BIOS page of "CPU Advanced Settings" on "Tweaker" tab
Cool n' Quiet exists at least at some boards and like said it was just added with latest UEFI
Maybe Gigabyte didnt add it in 400series chipset, yet.

@Zach_01
Just noticed something in HWINFO _

[Operating Points]
CPU Minimum: 550.0 MHz = 5.50 x 100.0 MHz
CPU Base: 3800.0 MHz = 38.00 x 100.0 MHz
CPU Boost Max (Fmax): 4650.0 MHz = 46.50 x 100.0 MHz
CPU Overclocking Max: 4650.0 MHz = 46.50 x 100.0 MHz
(EDIT - Adding that 200MHz offset brings the overclock up to a potential 4850.o MHz)
CPU High Temperature Clock Limit: 4400 MHz >= 80 °C
CPU Automatic Overclocking Offset: 0 MHz
CPU Current: 4225.1 MHz = 42.25 x 100.0 MHz @ 1.3687 V

That suggests to me that throttling actually begins at 80c ? If so than that plus the losing 75Hz per every 10c above 50c might equal my CPUs' limits ?

I'm not sure I understand the info you provided here... Just post a screenshot of HWiNFO sensors only mode like the one I posted earlier... Maximize window, use the blue arrows to expand to more major columns (3~4 or more depending your monitor) and adjust the individual columns to fit all names/readings to be visible (sensor, current, min, max, avg). After maximizing window and adjusting columns hit Ctrl+PrtScr and Ctrl+V here in typing window.

Like this... idle/browsing/videos


And this... CB R20


The +200MHz advanced PBO setting is not an adding offset. It doesnt mean that the CPU will raise clocks +200MHz over your current max clock. Doesnt work that way. ZEN2's boost behavior and the algorithm behind it, is much more complicated and advanced than just adding numbers...
On very very few CPUs and rare occasions some users (having enabled PBO with or without +200MHz) may see like +25 up to +100MHz above rated max boost but this is not a general fact/rule. Most users see equal to rated or under rated single boost by 25~50MHz.
While boost behavior of ZEN2 is very temp related that is not the only factor affecting clocks.
It depends primarily on individual silicon quality (its just lottery)... and that level of quality affects the amount of voltage needed by certain clocks = produced heat, and thus the thermal behavior and further the ability to raise clocks beyond, or not, or drop under rated speed... And this applies to both single and all core boost clocks.

Just see a comparison of 3900X vs 3950X on auto settings boosts/voltages. 3950X is a higher binned (higher quality silicon) CPU and in most middle range clock speeds (like 3.8~4.2GHz) requires ~20% less voltage vs the 3900X for the same clock speed.

My 3600 which is the lowest quality ZEN2 silicon requires around 1.32~1.35V for 3.95~4.0GHz all core boost. Yours I bet its somewhere between 1.25~1.30V. The 3950X requires no more than 1.15V or maybe less.
3950X tastes a little like Threadripper... and Threadripper tastes a little like EPYC CPUs and those are the tip-top quality silicon, thus more expensive chiplets.
The higher you go with core count the higher the quality must be = the lower possible voltage at a given speed, in order to control thermal and electrical behaviour of a CPU and have a sustainable and acceptable safe boost clock. Single or all core.

Dont afraid the auto boost settings includung the advanced PBO. The CPU cant and wont hurt it self. The static all core OC/voltage is a different story, and I personally dont care about that.

Not all ZEN2 chiplets are created equal (determined by silicon quality) leading to different thermal/electrical behavior and different max clocks. Differences in quality existing between 3600/X and 3700Xs and 3800X and 3900X and of course 3950X...
This is called product segmentation and by this every major CPU manufacturer exploits as much printed wafer area as possible = making more overall profit...

And it is observed that small differences existing also between same segment CPUs. Like between 3600s, or between 3900Xs etc etc... This is the lottery I was talking about.

 

[lorry]

This is my BIOS page of "CPU Advanced Settings" on "Tweaker" tab
Cool n' Quiet exists at least at some boards and like said it was just added with latest UEFI
Maybe Gigabyte didn't add it in 400series chipset, yet.

View attachment 138540


I'm not sure I understand the info you provided here... Just post a screenshot of HWiNFO sensors only mode like the one I posted earlier... Maximize window, use the blue arrows to expand to more major columns (3~4 or more depending on your monitor) and adjust the individual columns to fit all names/readings to be visible (sensor, current, min, max, avg). After maximizing window and adjusting columns hit Ctrl+PrtScr and Ctrl+V here in typing window.

Like this... idle/browsing/videos
View attachment 138544

And this... CB R20
View attachment 138545

The +200MHz advanced PBO setting is not an adding offset. It doesn't mean that the CPU will raise clocks +200MHz over your current max clock. Doesn't work that way. ZEN2's boost behaviour and the algorithm behind it, is much more complicated and advanced than just adding numbers...
On very few CPUs and rare occasions some users (having enabled PBO with or without +200MHz) may see like +25 up to +100MHz above rated max boost but this is not a general fact/rule. Most users see equal to rated or underrated single boost by 25~50MHz.
While boost behaviour of ZEN2 is very temp related that is not the only factor affecting clocks.
It depends primarily on individual silicon quality (its just lottery)... and that level of quality affects the amount of voltage needed by certain clocks = produced heat, and thus the thermal behaviour and further the ability to raise clocks beyond, or not, or drop underrated speed... And this applies to both single and all core boost clocks.

Just see a comparison of 3900X vs 3950X on auto settings boosts/voltages. 3950X is a higher binned (higher quality silicon) CPU and in most middle range clock speeds (like 3.8~4.2GHz) requires ~20% less voltage vs the 3900X for the same clock speed.

My 3600 which is the lowest quality ZEN2 silicon requires around 1.32~1.35V for 3.95~4.0GHz all core boost. Yours I bet its somewhere between 1.25~1.30V. The 3950X requires no more than 1.15V or maybe less.
3950X tastes a little like Threadripper... and Threadripper tastes a little like EPYC CPUs and those are the tip-top quality silicon, thus more expensive chiplets.
The higher you go with core count the higher the quality must be = the lower possible voltage at a given speed, in order to control thermal and electrical behaviour of a CPU and have a sustainable and acceptable safe boost clock. Single or all core.

Don't afraid the auto boost settings including the advanced PBO. The CPU can't and won't hurt itself. The static all core OC/voltage is a different story, and I personally don't care about that.

Not all ZEN2 chiplets are created equal (determined by silicon quality) leading to different thermal/electrical behaviour and different max clocks. Differences in quality existing between 3600/X and 3700Xs and 3800X and 3900X and of course 3950X...
This is called product segmentation and by this every major CPU manufacturer exploits as much printed wafer area as possible = making more overall profit...

And it is observed that small differences existing also between same segment CPUs. Like between 3600s, or between 3900Xs etc... This is the lottery I was talking about.

The info was just the info provided by Info about the CPU. This part 'CPU High Temperature Clock Limit: 4400 MHz >= 80 °C 'To me that suggests that thermal throttling might begin at 80c perhaps? Added to was that part where any temp above 50c loses 75 MHz for ever 10c above 50.

I've learnt what the advanced option in PBO is on my mb, that then opens up the 'max cpu boost overdrive' (the option simply isn't available until you enable advanced).

here are some screenshots, I have cropped them so hope that they still give you the info that you asked for
This first one is with boost clock set to max of 200 but with the new windows power setting
Second is with boost of 100 and windows new power setting

For some reason that new power setting just did not work well for me, giving me significantly worse scores in cinebench, so I have cleared cmos and then reload optimized settings and reverted back to the ryzen power plan

Last is just after redoing R20 , I'll add another of just browsing etc when I have.

Oh and sods law, the Noctua fan arrived a day early but I can't fit it until the splitter cable arrives, should have been today but nothing in the post

Ooh couple of silly questions -

How did you add your pics within your comment rather than as attachments?

Thanks

Here's a full screen info after sitting at desktop, watching youtube etc

 

[Zach_01]

How did you add your pics within your comment rather than as attachments?

View attachment 138552View attachment 138553View attachment 138554

View attachment 138568
Here's a full screen info after sitting at desktop, watching youtube etc

Well what works best for you I cant tell. You will have to decide what settings/plan gives you the best performance. All and all the differences would be marginal.
And your temps are quiet nice for air cooling within a case. Adding the second fan may help a little more. During R20 all core how was you max temps?

The screenshots is just a copy and paste action...

 

[lorry]

Well what works best for you I cant tell. You will have to decide what settings/plan gives you the best performance. All and all the differences would be marginal.
And your temps are quiet nice for air cooling within a case. Adding the second fan may help a little more. During R20 all core how was you max temps?

The screenshots is just a copy and paste action...

About 72c with the one fan, but drops back to 40 Immediately the test has ended.. The splitter cable has just arrived, so I'm going to try to add the second fan to the cooler now.
Hopefully back Soon! It's going to be a fiddly job though!

 

[INSTG8R]

About 72c with the one fan, but drops back to 40 Immediately the test has ended.. The splitter cable has just arrived, so I'm going to try to add the second fan to the cooler now.
Hopefully back Soon! It's going to be a fiddly job though!

Those temps seem fine and adding another fan should improve them even further.

 

[lorry]

Those temps seem fine and adding another fan should improve them even further.

Fingers crossed they will.

Any thoughts on the best performing AIO 360? I'll swap to that soon as I can.

 

[INSTG8R]

Fingers crossed they will.

Any thoughts on the best performing AIO 360? I'll swap to that soon as I can.

They all are of similar designs and performance. The quality of the fans and a few use all copper rads would be the defining edge in the pack.

 

[lorry]

Those temps seem fine and adding another fan should improve them even further.

Nice speed! my best is 396 down, 32 up

 

[oxrufiioxo]

Fingers crossed they will.

Any thoughts on the best performing AIO 360? I'll swap to that soon as I can.

I have the h115i platinum on my 3900X it outperforms the h150i pretty sure that mostly just comes down to having higher rpm fans though. There's a new Arctic 360 aio coming out that looks promising the 280mm version performs well.