ROG Crosshair VII overclocking thread - Page 22 - Overclock.net - An Overclocking Community

Forum Jump: 

ROG Crosshair VII overclocking thread

Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #211 of 10428 (permalink) Old 04-24-2018, 08:30 AM
New to Overclock.net
 
The Stilt's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 2,572
Rep: 861 (Unique: 329)
Quote: Originally Posted by SwiperNoSwiping View Post
@elmor @The Stilt

Can you guys provide a little bit more in-depth information about how exactly the new Performance Enhancer feature works? Some questions I have after reading the PDF:

- What's the difference between level 3 and level 4? (level 1 and 2 as well, for that matter)

- Balanced power plan, as in DEFAULT win 10 balanced, correct? I assume "Ryzen Balanced" is not a thing anymore?

- I assume voltage is handled automatically in this mode, and gives cores as much voltage as CPU requests?

- To continue previous question - looking at PDF the sample CPU boosted all the way to 4.5 GHz on a single core, I guess that required quite a lot of voltage? Definitely more than 1.4v which are considered "safe" among the community? Will it have any impact on the longevity of CPU, or not really, since for load of this kind current will not really be high enough, while voltage is pretty high?

If there are any specific tips you guys can give to start getting into this new kind of "overclocking" I'd really appreciate them. Thanks for another great board!
- The difference between LVL3 & 4 is the "Precision Boost Override Scalar", which for LVL3 is 1x and 10x for LVL4. Increasing the scalar value will relax the voltage limiting rules of FIT monitoring.
- Yes, Windows Balanced. The key here is to provide sufficiently low "minimum processor state" value to allow the boost to activate (25% of the cores have to reside in C6 for the ST boost to kick in fully). The Ryzen Balanced profile for 1000-series Ryzens won't work as its minimum is 90%.
- The CPU is always in control of the voltage, unless "OC-Mode" is activated (ratio set manually to higher than base ratio) or the voltage is set to "manual mode" (i.e. override from the controller side).
- The voltage curve on Zen CPUs is extremely steep at high frequencies and Pinnacle Ridge is not an exception. Based on "FIT" testing I made, up to ~1.42V (single core workloads) provides 100% silicon reliability, while up to ~1.48V provides slightly reduced reliability (similar to FIT rules set to 10x). These are actual voltages mind you ("CPU Core Voltage SVI2 TFN" in HWInfo).
The Stilt is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #212 of 10428 (permalink) Old 04-24-2018, 08:36 AM
New to Overclock.net
 
Gettz8488's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 528
Rep: 3 (Unique: 1)
Quote: Originally Posted by The Stilt View Post
- The difference between LVL3 & 4 is the "Precision Boost Override Scalar", which for LVL3 is 1x and 10x for LVL4. Increasing the scalar value will relax the voltage limiting rules of FIT monitoring.

- Yes, Windows Balanced. The key here is to provide sufficiently low "minimum processor state" value to allow the boost to activate (25% of the cores have to reside in C6 for the ST boost to kick in fully). The Ryzen Balanced profile for 1000-series Ryzens won't work as its minimum is 90%.

- The CPU is always in control of the voltage, unless "OC-Mode" is activated (ratio set manually to higher than base ratio) or the voltage is set to "manual mode" (i.e. override from the controller side).

- The voltage curve on Zen CPUs is extremely steep at high frequencies and Pinnacle Ridge is not an exception. Based on "FIT" testing I made, up to ~1.42V (single core workloads) provides 100% silicon reliability, while up to ~1.48V provides slightly reduced reliability (similar to FIT rules set to 10x). These are actual voltages mind you ("CPU Core Voltage SVI2 TFN" in HWInfo).


By reliability do you mean voltages that won’t degrade the silicon? Find it unusual seeing as everything on default voltages can spike to 1.5


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Asus Crosshair VII X470 with AMD Ryzen 2700X @ Stock, Bios 0601
EVGA SSC 1070
16 GB Corsair Vengeance 3200 cl 16
Samsung 960 evo x1, Samsung 850 evox1, 1TB HDD
EVGA 850 Gold fully modular PSU
Corsair H115I
Gettz8488 is offline  
post #213 of 10428 (permalink) Old 04-24-2018, 08:37 AM
New to Overclock.net
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 13
Rep: 0
I can't seem to get past 101.6 bclk. The highest I've been able to attain and stabilize is 101.6 blck with a + .0375v offset. I have my ram running at ~3252 14-14-14-34

With pe=3 set, single and dual core performance will boost to 4422mhz, while all cores can simultaneously boost to 4.2ghz.

I've tried 102 bclk with up to a + .05v offset, but that locks up almost right after boot.

Performance and thermals where I'm at now are pretty good though. Peak temps have been around 66C. Single threaded tests in SuperPi and Cinebench had vcore all the way up to 1.537 during single core benchmarks, but temps averaged in the 50s. Will play with the memory timings a bit to see if I can get the clock a bit higher.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	OC-101.6.png
Views:	344
Size:	1.83 MB
ID:	161305  


Ryzen 2700x w/ Kraken x62
Asus Crosshair VII Hero - WiFi Bios 0601
G.Skill F4-3200C14D-16GTZR
Seasonic SSR-750TR
Gigabyte 980 TI OC - GV-N98TG1 GAMING-6GD
Samsung 960 Evo in m2_2
stevets is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #214 of 10428 (permalink) Old 04-24-2018, 08:41 AM
New to Overclock.net
 
asdkj1740's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 1,030
Rep: 13 (Unique: 7)
Quote: Originally Posted by The Stilt View Post
- The difference between LVL3 & 4 is the "Precision Boost Override Scalar", which for LVL3 is 1x and 10x for LVL4. Increasing the scalar value will relax the voltage limiting rules of FIT monitoring.
- Yes, Windows Balanced. The key here is to provide sufficiently low "minimum processor state" value to allow the boost to activate (25% of the cores have to reside in C6 for the ST boost to kick in fully). The Ryzen Balanced profile for 1000-series Ryzens won't work as its minimum is 90%.
- The CPU is always in control of the voltage, unless "OC-Mode" is activated (ratio set manually to higher than base ratio) or the voltage is set to "manual mode" (i.e. override from the controller side).
- The voltage curve on Zen CPUs is extremely steep at high frequencies and Pinnacle Ridge is not an exception. Based on "FIT" testing I made, up to ~1.42V (single core workloads) provides 100% silicon reliability, while up to ~1.48V provides slightly reduced reliability (similar to FIT rules set to 10x). These are actual voltages mind you ("CPU Core Voltage SVI2 TFN" in HWInfo).
hi stilt, would you recommand pe4 over pe3 for 24/7 ?
asdkj1740 is offline  
post #215 of 10428 (permalink) Old 04-24-2018, 08:41 AM
New to Overclock.net
 
The Stilt's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 2,572
Rep: 861 (Unique: 329)
Quote: Originally Posted by Gettz8488 View Post
By reliability do you mean voltages that won’t degrade the silicon? Find it unusual seeing as everything on default voltages can spike to 1.5


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Yes.

The requests can be extremely high, however the CPU will monitor the actual effective voltage.
Try adjusting the load-line and you should see the request to decrease.
The Stilt is offline  
post #216 of 10428 (permalink) Old 04-24-2018, 08:45 AM
New to Overclock.net
 
The Stilt's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 2,572
Rep: 861 (Unique: 329)
Quote: Originally Posted by asdkj1740 View Post
hi stilt, would you recommand pe4 over pe3 for 24/7 ?
Even with PE4 the voltage will remain in the constrains AMD is willing to allow these parts to run at (through overclocking).

Both PE3 & PE4 involve overclocking, so use whatever works best for you.

There is plenty of silicon variance with Pinnacle Ridge, so you need to test out and see which works the best.
The Stilt is offline  
post #217 of 10428 (permalink) Old 04-24-2018, 08:49 AM
New to Overclock.net
 
Gettz8488's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 528
Rep: 3 (Unique: 1)
Quote: Originally Posted by The Stilt View Post
Even with PE4 the voltage will remain in the constrains AMD is willing to allow these parts to run at (through overclocking).



Both PE3 & PE4 involve overclocking, so use whatever works best for you.



There is plenty of silicon variance with Pinnacle Ridge, so you need to test out and see which works the best.


So even under PE3-4 it stays within amd voltage limits? What’s the best way to reduce voltage spikes LLC and offset? PE 3 takes me up too 1.55+


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Asus Crosshair VII X470 with AMD Ryzen 2700X @ Stock, Bios 0601
EVGA SSC 1070
16 GB Corsair Vengeance 3200 cl 16
Samsung 960 evo x1, Samsung 850 evox1, 1TB HDD
EVGA 850 Gold fully modular PSU
Corsair H115I
Gettz8488 is offline  
post #218 of 10428 (permalink) Old 04-24-2018, 08:50 AM
New to Overclock.net
 
asdkj1740's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 1,030
Rep: 13 (Unique: 7)
Quote: Originally Posted by The Stilt View Post
Even with PE4 the voltage will remain in the constrains AMD is willing to allow these parts to run at (through overclocking).

Both PE3 & PE4 involve overclocking, so use whatever works best for you.

There is plenty of silicon variance with Pinnacle Ridge, so you need to test out and see which works the best.
some users report the pe4 would boost the voltage to >1.55v which is siad to be unsafe for the long run.
i just want to maximize the single core performance for gaming purpose, but i found that when single core is boosted to 4.4g~4.5g, the rest were just <3ghz....any suggestion to raise those rest cores frequecenies while having highest single core frequencies at the same time??

thanks i will try pe4 tmr
asdkj1740 is offline  
post #219 of 10428 (permalink) Old 04-24-2018, 10:06 AM
New to Overclock.net
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Posts: 7
Rep: 0
I’m having some issues with getting my RAM to run at any respectable speed on this motherboard. The kit I’m using is F4-3600C15D-16GTZ (3600mhz C15 Samsung B-die) but nothing above 2133mhz is stable. I’ve tried the D.O.C.P (spelling? In class currently) settings but the machine wont post with them. On BIOS 0601 I can’t even post with 3000mhz C16. On 05XX (cant remember #) I can post at C16 3000mhz but Windows10 immediately blue screens. I’ve tried various settings but none seem to be stable except 2133 with something like C15 timings. I’ve tried the built in profiles (The Stilts and the rest) but cant seem to make any progress. What am I doing wrong? Is there a guide I can be pointed to?

Edit: forgot to mention I have a 2700x.

Last edited by haydn-j; 04-24-2018 at 10:33 AM.
haydn-j is offline  
post #220 of 10428 (permalink) Old 04-24-2018, 10:15 AM
New to Overclock.net
 
The Stilt's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 2,572
Rep: 861 (Unique: 329)
Quote: Originally Posted by asdkj1740 View Post
some users report the pe4 would boost the voltage to >1.55v which is siad to be unsafe for the long run.
i just want to maximize the single core performance for gaming purpose, but i found that when single core is boosted to 4.4g~4.5g, the rest were just <3ghz....any suggestion to raise those rest cores frequecenies while having highest single core frequencies at the same time??

thanks i will try pe4 tmr
This is what I wrote few days ago:

Quote:
The maximum safe voltages for CPUs are an eternal riddle, as neither of the two manufacturers release this information for public consumption. Public or even the NDA documents generally specify a vague limit, which most of the time relates to a point where the catastrophic failures become more common instead of specifying the voltage that is safe to sustain without causing any damage to the silicon. Such limit is admittingly rather hard to specify, as the limit will vary between the different CPU specimens (silicon variance, SIDD) and operating scenarios (peak current in different utilization scenarios, temperature, etc.).

In order to get the most accurate answer for this question I ended up “asking” the CPU itself. As stated previously, the CPU features various different limiters / safe guards (Package Power Tracking: PPT, Thermal Design Current: TDC, Electrical Design Current: EDC, thermal protection and FIT).

“FIT” as the name suggest is a feature to monitor / track the fitness of the silicon and adjust the operating parameters to maintain the specified and expected reliability. Many semiconductor manufacturers utilize such feature to eke out every last bit of performance, in an ERA where most of the semiconductors are process bound in terms of performance. In short: FIT feature allows the manufacturers to push their designs to the very limit out of the box, without jeopardizing the reliability of the silicon. A practical example would be the knock sensors on an engine. The control unit of the engine always tries to advance the ignition timing as much as possible, to produce the best possible power / torque figures. The purpose of the knock sensors is to listen if knocking occurs and tell the ECU to reduce the timing advance when it does, in order to protect the engine.

To see what the actual maximum voltage FIT allows the CPU to run at in various different scenarios is, I disabled all of the other limiters and safe guards. With every other limiter / safe guard disabled, the reliability (FIT) becomes the only restrain. The voltage command which the CPU sends to the VRM regulator via the SVI2 interface and the actual effective voltage were then recorded in various scenarios. In stock configuration the sustained maximum effective voltage during all-core stress allowed by FIT was =< 1.330V. Meanwhile, in single core workloads the sustained maximum was =< 1.425V. When the “FIT” parameters were adjusted by increasing the scalar value from the default 1x to the maximum allowed value of 10x, the maximum all-core voltage became 1.380V, while the maximum single core voltage increased to 1.480V. The recorded figures appear to fall very well in line with the seen and known behavior, frequency, power and thermal scaling wise.

The seen behavior suggests that the full silicon reliability can be maintained up to around 1.330V in all-core workloads (i.e. high current) and up to 1.425V in single core workloads (i.e. low current). Use of higher voltages is definitely possible (as FIT will allow up to 1.380V / 1.480V when scalar is increased by 10x), but it more than likely results in reduced silicon lifetime / reliability. By how much? Only the good folks at AMD who have access to the simulation data will know for sure.

These figures will almost certainly vary between the different CPU specimens (due to SIDD and other silicon specific factors), however the recorded values were almost identical on all of the tested samples (within 20mV, lowest-highest leaking specimen).

Also note that the figures stated here relate to the actual effective voltage, and not to the voltage requested by the CPU. The CPU is aware of the actual effective voltage, so things like load-line adjustments and voltage offsets will modify the CPUs voltage request from the VRM controller accordingly. The most accurate method to measure the effective voltage on AM4 platform is to monitor the “VDDCR_CPU SVI2 TFN” voltage, which is available in HWInfo. This reading is sourced directly from the VRM controller (through SVI2 interface) and generally it is the most accurate reading available to end-users by far. As a side note, while the TFN (“telemetry function”) voltage readings are always generic (and accurate), never blindly trust the reported current and power readings (as every motherboard model needs separate calibration).
The voltage requests you are seeing are irrelevant, only the actual voltage matters.
Look at the TFN voltage figure and nothing else.

The voltage will vary depending on several things. In single threaded workloads it varies heavily based on the core the workload is being scheduled on.

Here's some figures with PE3:

ST workload scheduled on the best core of the CPU (Core 2):

Spoiler!


Peak voltage 1.451V, while the average being 1.372V.

ST workload scheduled on the worst core of the CPU (Core 7):

Spoiler!


Peak voltage 1.503V, while the average being 1.472V.

All-core workload:

Spoiler!


Peak voltage 1.297V, while the average being 1.259V.

VDDCR_CPU is the same reading as "CPU Core Voltage SVI2 TFN" under HWInfo, while the "command" value is what the CPU is requesting.

Since the CPU remains in control of the voltage at all times, the actual voltage will depend on the core the workload gets utilized and on the CPU specimen itself.
If you are seeing constantly over 1.5V SVI2 TFN voltages with PE4 enabled, in single threaded workloads then I suggest that you don't use PE4 on your CPU.
The Stilt is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Overclock.net - An Overclocking Community forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 5 (1 members and 4 guests)
Praetorr
Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off