Overclock.net banner
5,601 - 5,620 of 10,270 Posts
From most of program what i use only the ycruncher hit max freq
 
@parameshvara "considering RMA’ing it because it never went into its nominal max boost frequency (4.550 GHz)" did you write this and andersood what you write? Or i can not read whit understood.
 

I'm trying to set this up. But I'm getting an error: "The operator or adimistrator has refused the request (0x800710e0)"
I think that the only thing I set differently than the guide was to put the program outside c:\users folder.
I even started from scratch once again and I'm pretty sure I followed the tutorial thoroughly, does anyone know what might be the issue here?
yeah, that was a hard drive permissions thing. Got it running when I copied over to my c drive. If anyone wonders or face the same issue in the future.
(couldn't quite get the warning to work though. But the program is running on startup and aplying the correct settings as expected)
 
Trying offset -0.05 now, since my cpu took CO -30 like a champ I decided to push it a little more. 10 minutes into occt apparently without issues.
Font Line Screenshot Software Technology


(edit) and that's one hour OCCT
Font Screenshot Software Technology Electronic device
Font Screenshot Software Technology Parallel


Still no whea errors, it ran mostly pegged to 4.539 ghz the whole time and if anyone checks the screenshot they'll also notice that the elusive 45.5 multiplier did show itself on cores 2 and 6 -- although I did not observe it myself. Temps were hovering around 72ÂşC, ranging from 70Âş to 76Âş, I think I'm content with that.
 
Literally in the pic you posted yourself o0
I don't get how on overclockers forum people are trying to convince me that my cpu running below spec is still fine...
If 11mhz made you consider RMA, then you will struggle even more. Even 100mhz wouldn't make any difference in performance.
 
Trying offset -0.05 now, since my cpu took CO -30 like a champ I decided to push it a little more. 10 minutes into occt apparently without issues.
View attachment 2604527

(edit) and that's one hour OCCT
View attachment 2604532 View attachment 2604533

Still no whea errors, it ran mostly pegged to 4.539 ghz the whole time and if anyone checks the screenshot they'll also notice that the elusive 45.5 multiplier did show itself on cores 2 and 6 -- altough I did not observe it myself. Temps were hovering around 72ÂşC, rangin from 70Âş to 76Âş, I think I'm content with that.
Yeah I would be happy with that too. I personally haven't seen my cpu go over 4450 mhz. So 4550 would be a nice bonus. I assume that my Peerless Assassin SE just isn't good enough for this chip.

On another note, could you please put your system specs in the signature area so I and others know what you are working with? Thank you
 
  • Rep+
Reactions: duckyduck
I think that a very good material that maybe some of you will help understand why the processors get so hot.
How is the measuring solved, and why 90 degrees makes you think the CPU will explodeand that did not happend
 
  • Rep+
Reactions: elbubi
Next is stability testing. Download CoreCycler GitHub - sp00n/corecycler: Stability test script for PBO & Curve Optimizer stability testing on AMD Ryzen processors, and place it in two folders because we'll run two configs at the same time.
First config in the .ini is
stressTestProgram = PRIME95
runtimePerCore = 10m
coreTestOrder = 4, 5, 6, 7, 0, 1, 2, 3
skipCoreOnError = 0
numberOfThreads = 1
disableCpuUtilizationCheck = 1
mode = SSE

Second config, in the other folder
stressTestProgram = YCRUNCHER
runtimePerCore = 10m
coreTestOrder = 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7
skipCoreOnError = 0
numberOfThreads = 2
disableCpuUtilizationCheck = 1
mode = 19-ZN2 ~ Kagari
tests = BKT, BBP, SFT, FFT, N32, N64, HNT, VST, C17


Run the both tests at the same time and leave them at least overnight. This will test both SSE and AVX+ loads, with the max CPU boost.
This is a pretty good test. Sequentially loads core pairs directly opposite from each other* to max out transient power while still allowing enough cores to go into C6 to test that 45.5x boost.

Only thing I change is to make the FFT size in Prime95 720k (FFTSize = 720-720) as the default huge FFT sizes are a very light load that isn't need to get the full boost out of a 5800X3D. 720k throws errors (or crashes the system) faster on Vermeer.

Anyway, with the LCLK bug (that lets the y-cruncher core crack 80C+ while holding near 4550MHz in all tests) my system spontaneously restarts at -30C once the tests hits core 2+6 by the third iteration. Was simpler, and made for a faster CPU in practice, for me to disable C-states than to further increase temps by reducing the CO offset of the problem core, or stop using the LCLK bug (which significantly reduces peak load clocks on the cooling I currently have).

*Physical layout of the cores on a single CCD Vermeer looks like this:
0, 1, 2, 3
----L3----
4, 5, 6, 7

Yeah I would be happy with that too. I personally haven't seen my cpu go over 4450 mhz. So 4550 would be a nice bonus. I assume that my Peerless Assassin SE just isn't good enough for this chip.
The Peerless Assassin SE is more than sufficient, especially since most loads capable of triggering the C-state boost are very light loads anyway.

If you never see that 45.5x, something is configured improperly, or you have so much running in the background that there are never five cores that can be put in C6.
 
I'm pretty sure mine has never went above 4450 either. Maybe it's because my board is an old model who knows.
 
I've been tuning my FCLK back to 1933Mhz and the only thing that causes WHEA's is TestMem5 ABSOLUT config test 6 specifically, anyone know what this test hammers so i have an idea of which voltages to try and adjust?
 
Keep testing OCCT over several days. Mine would pass then a day or two later I'd revisit the stress test and it'd fail..
 
Keep testing OCCT over several days. Mine would pass then a day or two later I'd revisit the stress test and it'd fail..
I've had similar experiences, FCLK is a moody ***** lol
 
  • Haha
Reactions: OCmember
I set fclk1866 101.87bclk run games working ycruncher complete end of testing play games apex legends 190-210FPS
 
Well well, I guess you guys were right. Without a proper XMP profile to export from my TeamGroup kit I finally decided to just use the A0 PCB revision (also a guess) and when I did DRAM Calc gave me different settings to try, so I tried them and sure nuff it now boots into windows at 3733. 3600 also worked at the same exact timings, albeit a little different tRFC and voltage. My BIOS has three tRFC settings tRFC, tRFC2 and tRFC3. I left the two latter at Auto because it is giving me a MUCH lower number by default than what DRAM Calc is telling me. Like 192 vs 545. And I don't understand what I am looking at, but since none of the other timings changed I decided to leave those at Auto since I like the looks of 192 over 545. Maybe the higher number is better?

Anyway, here is my new ZenTiming screen. I passed one hour of OCCT and Cinebench ran without any issues. Also my highest temp was 78c while running Cinebench, but this could be because of a lower ambient then previous stress tests. What if anything should I try next?

Rectangle Font Screenshot Parallel Technology
 
  • Rep+
Reactions: BHS1975
Well well, I guess you guys were right. Without a proper XMP profile to export from my TeamGroup kit I finally decided to just use the A0 PCB revision (also a guess) and when I did DRAM Calc gave me different settings to try, so I tried them and sure nuff it now boots into windows at 3733. 3600 also worked at the same exact timings, albeit a little different tRFC and voltage. My BIOS has three tRFC settings tRFC, tRFC2 and tRFC3. I left the two latter at Auto because it is giving me a MUCH lower number by default than what DRAM Calc is telling me. Like 192 vs 545. And I don't understand what I am looking at, but since none of the other timings changed I decided to leave those at Auto since I like the looks of 192 over 545. Maybe the higher number is better?

Anyway, here is my new ZenTiming screen. I passed one hour of OCCT and Cinebench ran without any issues. Also my highest temp was 78c while running Cinebench, but this could be because of a lower ambient then previous stress tests. What if anything should I try next?

View attachment 2604908
tRFC 2/4 are only used at high temps (85c+) so only worry about the first one.

Are you able to lower your tRRDS&L to 4? And tFAW to 16? If not try 6/6/24
 
  • Rep+
Reactions: }SkOrPn--'
If you never see that 45.5x, something is configured improperly, or you have so much running in the background that there are never five cores that can be put in C6.
Well guess what, I closed everything in the background and ran Cinebench again. When I ran the single core bench I saw the 45.5 ratio several times, but not often. So yeah it does hit 4550 when it needs to. With half an hour of y-cruncher something on the chip hit 89.5c. CCD1

But overall I am becoming happier and happier with this system. Now I am wondering if I should try 3800/1900... lol, but didn't I read somewhere that there isn't much to gain over these current figures? Cinebench R23 MC score 14678 and SC is 1486. Small improvements, but improvements none the less.

Colorfulness Font Screenshot Technology Parallel
 
5,601 - 5,620 of 10,270 Posts