Overclock.net banner
1 - 20 of 23 Posts

RAGEdemon

· Registered
Joined
·
44 Posts
Discussion starter · #1 · (Edited)
It is common knowledge that the AVX offset helps us achieve better overclocks with programs that don't have AVX workloads. Basically, the CPU downclocks by a few multipliers when it detects AVX instructions, e.g. when encoding video.

What is /not/ common knowledge is that most games nowadays, especially AAA games, use AVX to a limited degree, e.g. The Witcher 3. The important note here is that the limited AVX used in games will /not/ cause any instability...

The problem is that [most] games will downclock the CPU by this overkill AVX offset, e.g. a 5GHz 8700k will downclock to 4700MHz when a game is running because AVX use is detected, thereby severely hamstringing game performance when AVX offsets are enabled - when playing the AVX game with 0 AVX offset will work just fine.

Most of us are gamers here, and I believe you will agree with me that this is a problem worth solving.

Most people I know leave the AVX offset at 0 because of this, and prefer to suffer the occasional crash when some program needs to heavily use AVX, e.g. a download being decrypted.


What is required is a feature where AVX offset only takes effect when power usage above a certain threshold is detected. This would mean that light AVX workloads, i.e. most games, will not trip the offset, however heavy AVX workloads, such as video encoding/encryption etc, will, thereby allowing us to game with maximum CPU speed.

Towards that end, I have tried a couple of things with limited success with my ASUS Hero board:

-- There is a temperature vs CPU speed setting - you can limit the CPU multiplier when the CPU goes above a certain temperature. There is also an AVX offset setting in this submenu but it does not work as intended - this AVX setting will always kick in just as if you had adjusted the main AVX offset setting, so is ultimately just as useless.

-- There is a power limit setting where you can limit power to the CPU to a certain wattage thereby keeping AVX temperatures and therefore stability under control.

Unfortunately neither of these settings work reliably, probably because it takes the system a little while to detect over temperature/over power, by which time the CPU has already destabilised and crashed to a BSOD.

Discussion and possible solution to this problem would be quite insightful.

Thanks for reading...
 
I would go even further and day that AVX offset is totally useless. Practically everything uses AVX now, including Windows. I think that if they are not already doing so, compilers will make optimizations using AVX so there is no avoiding it. .

The most reliable mechanism I have found for throttling is temperature based. On many newer motherboards you can set the TJMax temperature, setting it lower than the chip's default TJMAX will kick in the chip's TJMAX throttling of the frequency when it approaches your set temperature. It works quite well. I have mine set to 85c.All of the other mechanisms of throttling based on power or current don't behave as well or react as quickly. I can run small FFT AVX that would be unstable because of temperature and it will throttle down to a stable voltage/frequency, where other mechanisms would fail.

BTW, everything behaves properly when changing the TJMAX (reported TJMAX, core temperatures etc), e.g.:

2480995
 
AVX offsets are garbage. Only useful if you're playing Prime95 all the time and you can't handle the 100C temps...
 
AVX offsets are garbage. Only useful if you're playing Prime95 all the time and you can't handle the 100C temps...
Or having a terrible chip like my 9700k that locks up when the operating system boots. 4.9Ghz requires 1.45v while 5Ghz isn't stable even at 1.5v. I'll stick to 1.3v at 5Ghz with a 2 AVX offset and enjoy my fans running at 950 RPM.
 
Or having a terrible chip like my 9700k that locks up when the operating system boots. 4.9Ghz requires 1.45v while 5Ghz isn't stable even at 1.5v. I'll stick to 1.3v at 5Ghz with a 2 AVX offset and enjoy my fans running at 950 RPM.
holy damn it sir, that is prob the worst clocking cpu ive ever heard of, CONGRADULATIONS :sneaky:
 
ThrottleStop lets you create up to 4 profiles. In the FIVR window, you can set a different AVX offset value for each profile. You can switch profiles based on CPU or GPU temperature. You can change the thermal throttling temperature or adjust the turbo power limits. It also supports keyboard shortcuts for profile switching.


2481079


To be honest, I am not a big fan of AVX offset adjustments. You will probably get better results by using power limit throttling. If your heatsink can only dissipate 250W, set both turbo power limits to 250W and your CPU will throttle immediately so it never exceeds 250W.

Power limit throttling happens immediately if it is setup correctly. ThrottleStop gives you access to the turbo power limits Clamp option so there is zero lag when a power limit is reached.
 
I fully support 0 avx. Why the hell would I overclock just for it to underclock when I actually use it. Or if there's light avx work and it kicks it down for no reason. If I can't handle the heat/voltage to make it stable I either lower frequency if it's a voltage problem (over 1.4v loaded), or I put pl1 restrictions if it's purely a heat problem.
 
  • Rep+
Reactions: tdbone1
I fully support 0 avx. Why the hell would I overclock just for it to underclock when I actually use it. Or if there's light avx work and it kicks it down for no reason. If I can't handle the heat/voltage to make it stable I either lower frequency if it's a voltage problem (over 1.4v loaded), or I put pl1 restrictions if it's purely a heat problem.
This. If my stuff isnt avx 0 stable it isnt stable for me at all.
 
  • Rep+
Reactions: tdbone1
Forgot to add, I do the pl1 thing because under light/medium loads I can still have whatever overclock I want and when I run into a major workload I'm OK with it varying voltage/frequency to maintain that 80c mark. With some workloads being short lived I will even tweak pl2 to keep from castrating those workloads when it's only for a second. This is mainly on computers I build for work where the machinist oily air really clogs things up so I'm sticking to air coolers with them.
 
Or having a terrible chip like my 9700k that locks up when the operating system boots. 4.9Ghz requires 1.45v while 5Ghz isn't stable even at 1.5v. I'll stick to 1.3v at 5Ghz with a 2 AVX offset and enjoy my fans running at 950 RPM.
I think that you are missing the point, you could set 4.8 GHz with 0AVX offset and run at a voltage <1.3 V instead, perhaps 1.28 V, with even quieter fans. You'll hardly ever get your "5 GHz" under many modern loads on all cores with such an AVX offset, even when you do hit 5 GHz, it'll be in loads where it doesn't make any noticable difference.
 
My offset avx is 0.

10900k 5.1ghz all core @1.32v.

Didnt have any crash yet. I guess I'm lucky with the games i played.
 
I think that you are missing the point, you could set 4.8 GHz with 0AVX offset and run at a voltage <1.3 V instead, perhaps 1.28 V, with even quieter fans. You'll hardly ever get your "5 GHz" under many modern loads on all cores with such an AVX offset, even when you do hit 5 GHz, it'll be in loads where it doesn't make any noticable difference.
Seems like you missed the point, 4.8Ghz w/ AVX is only stable with 1.3v. I start off with running Prime95 small FFTs for 8 hours with AVX. After that I run Prime95 small FFTs for another 8 hours with AVX off.

I don't see a reason not to boost non-AVX workloads when using the same voltage.

According to Silicon Lottery it's an average chip. Maybe slightly better since it uses less voltage.


Coffee Lake RefreshAll Core SSE FrequencyAll Core AVX2 FrequencyBIOS Vcore% Capable
9700K4.90GHz4.70GHz1.337V100%
9700K5.00GHz4.80GHz1.350VTop 90%
9700K5.10GHz4.90GHz1.362VTop 38%
9700K5.20GHz5.00GHz1.375VTop 9%
9700K5.30GHz5.10GHz1.387VTop 1%
 
Seems like you missed the point, 4.8Ghz w/ AVX is only stable with 1.3v. I start off with running Prime95 small FFTs for 8 hours with AVX. After that I run Prime95 small FFTs for another 8 hours with AVX off.

I don't see a reason not to boost non-AVX workloads when using the same voltage.

According to Silicon Lottery it's an average chip. Maybe slightly better since it uses less voltage.


Coffee Lake RefreshAll Core SSE FrequencyAll Core AVX2 FrequencyBIOS Vcore% Capable
9700K4.90GHz4.70GHz1.337V100%
9700K5.00GHz4.80GHz1.350VTop 90%
9700K5.10GHz4.90GHz1.362VTop 38%
9700K5.20GHz5.00GHz1.375VTop 9%
9700K5.30GHz5.10GHz1.387VTop 1%
OK, unusual case I think. Sure that's a bonus if you can do that! My chip has no such non-AVX bonus, and if I lower the multiplier by x1 I can shave off another 0.02 V off Vcore.
 
Keep in mind that Silicon Lottery voltages are bios set with auto LLC, which should be 1.6mOhm for the 9700k. So at 100A you're looking at 160mV of Vdroop, 150A would be 240mV.

They also don't specify if they use the small FFT AVX P95 test, but I assume that's what they're using. Imo, that test is unnecessary in typical use. If you're running F@H or something, then sure. Otherwise OCCT large AVX2 is a good baseline. Doesn't use insane amounts of power but it's really good at finding instability. OCCT small SSE for thermal / Vdroop testing. It's basically the same as P95 small non-AVX.
 
Keep in mind that Silicon Lottery voltages are bios set with auto LLC, which should be 1.6mOhm for the 9700k. So at 100A you're looking at 160mV of Vdroop, 150A would be 240mV.

They also don't specify if they use the small FFT AVX P95 test, but I assume that's what they're using. Imo, that test is unnecessary in typical use. If you're running F@H or something, then sure. Otherwise OCCT large AVX2 is a good baseline. Doesn't use insane amounts of power but it's really good at finding instability. OCCT small SSE for thermal / Vdroop testing. It's basically the same as P95 small non-AVX.
And if it hasn't already been mentioned, Slicon Lottery almost always certifies with an AVX offset, so set your expectations to such (though it has been my experience you can usually also count on AVX=0, albiet maybe at a higher voltage - YMMV).
 
I just found this thread after i made a post about the same thing the OP posted here.
how can people call there chip stable if it can not pass all the instruction sets while testing (including Prime95 avx and avx2 enabled).
about 5 or 6 years ago you might be able to get away with saying your chip was stable without using avx but today in this age....really?
to many apps/games are using this avx/avx2 instruction set to have it as a mandatory requirement to be in a "Valid" passing set frequency thing.
i agree with almost everyone in this thread and the OP.
toss that AVX Offset out of the bios and start making it a requirement in all Valid Results.
thanks and i wish i would have seen this thread before i made one.

i have 7700k (not delided) with a kraken x63
i run P95 with avx2 enabled.
multi 46x
llc = 1
1.365v cpu core
fans and pump maxed out

i want to go higher then 4.6ghz is there any other settings i can adjust to get there and still stay p95 avx2 stable?
 
I just found this thread after i made a post about the same thing the OP posted here.
how can people call there chip stable if it can not pass all the instruction sets while testing (including Prime95 avx and avx2 enabled).
about 5 or 6 years ago you might be able to get away with saying your chip was stable without using avx but today in this age....really?
to many apps/games are using this avx/avx2 instruction set to have it as a mandatory requirement to be in a "Valid" passing set frequency thing.
i agree with almost everyone in this thread and the OP.
toss that AVX Offset out of the bios and start making it a requirement in all Valid Results.
thanks and i wish i would have seen this thread before i made one.

i have 7700k (not delided) with a kraken x63
i run P95 with avx2 enabled.
multi 46x
llc = 1
1.365v cpu core
fans and pump maxed out

i want to go higher then 4.6ghz is there any other settings i can adjust to get there and still stay p95 avx2 stable?
Any more voltage and your pushing it for daily use imo.
 
AVX offsets are garbage. Only useful if you're playing Prime95 all the time and you can't handle the 100C temps...
Yeah it is better to set Long Duration Power Limit in BIOS to something the CPU cooler can handle.
 
Yeah it is better to set Long Duration Power Limit in BIOS to something the CPU cooler can handle.
Aka max the board supports 😂😂😂
 
1 - 20 of 23 Posts