Overclock.net banner
561 - 580 of 1094 Posts

· Registered
Joined
·
3,442 Posts
You can set a temp limit for the cores.
But its normal to have some temp spikes.
I think its not because the voltage, but because the load...
Anyway a temp limit will downclock the CPU to keep the temps below the limit you set.
Am I wrong or watt power limit and temp limit creates some instability when they kick in?

Am I the only one who noticed it?
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,665 Posts
Discussion Starter · #562 ·
Am I wrong or watt power limit and temp limit creates some instability when they kick in?

Am I the only one who noticed it?
You are rigth!
You need a guardband...
The package temp limit is "less unstable" once it act downclocking all cores, not only that ones at high temp.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
490 Posts
I always focused ocking core and ecore, now im playing with ring
but i didn't understand well what is the vcore dedicated to it, on hwinfo what line i gave to loock at to identify the ring volt?
i can go up to 50x without issue, all stable games benchmarks etc etc but asa i set it to 51x, instantly bsod at system loading
 

· Registered
Joined
·
21 Posts
I was able to turn on OCTVB+2 without increasing any of the V/F points. is the next step to try and lower the v/f curve or increase the light load clocks (currently at 5.8). Seems like increasing the light load clocks would be in line with where I want to go from an outcome standpoint, but didn't know if by doing that directly would cause some other issue...
 

· Facepalm
Joined
·
11,646 Posts
I always focused ocking core and ecore, now im playing with ring
but i didn't understand well what is the vcore dedicated to it, on hwinfo what line i gave to loock at to identify the ring volt?
i can go up to 50x without issue, all stable games benchmarks etc etc but asa i set it to 51x, instantly bsod at system loading
Ring, P-cores and E-cores use the exact same vcore rail.
They are not FIVR'd.
Normally, to use a high ring, you must just suck it up and increase cpu vcore.
What you can try to do first is see what your max stable ring clock is with E-cores disabled.
Once you determine this (and make sure you run a PROPER battery of tests---Y-cruncher N32/N64/SFT, Stockfish chess AVX2 (all threads),
then enable the e-cores and see how much the max ring ratio stability decreases and by how much.
Y-cruncher's SFT test heavily hammers the instruction cores, but Stockfish (AVX2/BMI2) may bring out issues that may even pass Y-cruncher.

In some cases, you can raise CPU (Atom) L2 voltage (This is NOT ring voltage, as I said already, Ring is directly linked to vcore) to partially compensate, if enabling the E-cores decreased the max ring ratio.
In some cases, you can also raise CPU Core PLL Voltage and/or Ring PLL voltage which may help or may make things worse. In the past, raising PLL Termination Voltage (which is not the same thing as PLL voltage trim)--and at the same time, raising CPU Standby voltage (VCC STG, aka Standby Gated Voltage) may "sometimes" help or it may just destroy your OS.
Mess with this at your own risk and please don't ask me for guidance on this. Usually these settings are used for LN2 and coldbug issues.
 
  • Helpful
Reactions: mattxx88

· Registered
Joined
·
1,665 Posts
Discussion Starter · #567 · (Edited)
What's the best guardband in terms of stability?

Temp guardband?
Power limit guardband?

Is there a way to not loose stability when the guardband kicks in?
The guard band I'm talking is voltage.
You need to run with voltage a bit high to be stable when the transient comes...
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,665 Posts
Discussion Starter · #568 ·
I was able to turn on OCTVB+2 without increasing any of the V/F points. is the next step to try and lower the v/f curve or increase the light load clocks (currently at 5.8). Seems like increasing the light load clocks would be in line with where I want to go from an outcome standpoint, but didn't know if by doing that directly would cause some other issue...
One simple way to rise ring is rising vf #8, #9 and #10 about 90mv.

Try:
adaptive 1460mv
Rise the vf curves (8,9 and 10) 90mv
Tune again the AC_LL. (You will need to lower AC_LL).
Rise by Pcore frequencies to let's say

58x2-57x4-56x6-55x8 and apply +2 boost profile.

And start test rising only the max ring frequency (let minimum in auto)

The CPU will manage the ring frequency...

With these setting I can run max ring frequency of 55x.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
3,442 Posts
One simple way to rise ring is rising vf #8, #9 and #10 about 90mv.

Try:
adaptive 1460mv
Rise the vf curves (8,9 and 10) 90mv
Tune again the AC_LL. (You will need to lower AC_LL).
Rise by Pcore frequencies to let's say

58x2-57x4-56x6-55x8 and apply +2 boost profile.

And start test rising only the max ring frequency (let minimum in auto)

The CPU will manage the ring frequency...

With these setting I can run max ring frequency of 55x.
I have seen that 58x2 frequency kicks in very rarely.
Even when windows is in idle with nothing running there are more than two active cores.

What kind of load benefit from the x2 multiplier?
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,665 Posts
Discussion Starter · #570 ·
I have seen that 58x2 frequency kicks in very rarely.
Even when windows is in idle with nothing running there are more than two active cores.

What kind of load benefit from the x2 multiplier?
I didn't understand...
Are you talking about this?
58x2-57x4-56x6-55x8

This nomenclature means by core
58,58,57,57,56,56,55,55
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,665 Posts
Discussion Starter · #572 ·
Suppose that I have adaptive voltage set to 1.440V.
Should I set the vf/11 to 0.140V right?

I remember that this was a recommended setting for z690. Am I wrong?
The vf curve behavior of 13900K is very different from 12900k...
You can try using VF#11, but in my tests it was better to leave it on AUTO and just use adaptive voltage.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
3,442 Posts
I didn't understand...
Are you talking about this?
58x2-57x4-56x6-55x8

This nomenclature means by core
58,58,57,57,56,56,55,55
Yes, what the purpose of setting a 58x2?
No real world app will benefit from that 58x2 multiplier since there are always more than 2 active cores.

With that config you can see 5800MHz on two cores when the CPU is basically idling but as soon as your start an app that requires a little bit of CPU computation that frequency goes down.

I could be wrong but this is what I see on my system
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,665 Posts
Discussion Starter · #574 · (Edited)
Yes, what the purpose of setting a 58x2?
No real world app will benefit from that 58x2 multiplier since there are always more than 2 active cores.

With that config you can see 5800MHz on two cores when the CPU is basically idling but as soon as your start an app that requires a little bit of CPU computation that frequency goes down.

I could be wrong but this is what I see on my system
This may seem useless, but if we think about the processing load, what we do is make tasks with less demand run with higher frequencies and consequently faster.
Take a look at the frequencies when this game is loading...


 

· Registered
Joined
·
3,442 Posts
Another questions if possible.
I noticed that if I set multi core enhancement to "enforce all limits" my all core frequency is reduced by 100MHz in cinebench on both pcores and ecores even if I'm not reaching the thermal limit or power limit.

Why?
 

· Registered
Joined
·
5 Posts
Another questions if possible.
I noticed that if I set multi core enhancement to "enforce all limits" my all core frequency is reduced by 100MHz in cinebench on both pcores and ecores even if I'm not reaching the thermal limit or power limit.

Why?
Yeah a lot of people are having this issue, me too. Can somebody contact the guys at Asus to look into this problem?
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,665 Posts
Discussion Starter · #578 ·
Another questions if possible.
I noticed that if I set multi core enhancement to "enforce all limits" my all core frequency is reduced by 100MHz in cinebench on both pcores and ecores even if I'm not reaching the thermal limit or power limit.

Why?
this issue was discussed extensively a few pages ago, and it looks like this is not a MB or bios problem, but CPU ecores related.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
3 Posts
Hello everyone

Long story short I just had my 13900K/Rog Strix Z790 E-gaming Wifi and before yesterday I knew nothing about overcloking and stuff. Thing is, when playing BF2042, my CPU temps started spiking at 80° with my fans ramping at 100%. I ran a C23 test with package temp at 95° after 10 minute so I figured my AIO was working good enough. I looked some YT vids and ended up switching fixed voltage from Auto -> 1.2V in bios which helped tremendously (BF2 spikes now at 72° and C23 at 89°). But I think now that I lost my 2 cores @5,8GhZ :sadface:

I digged deeper into internet and I found you guys. Huge huge HUGE kudos to @RobertoSampaio and all of you. I've read you for hours now, and it amazes me how much talent and knowledge can be found on some places. Thanks thanks thanks.

But I'm still a big noob paralyzed with fear of frying my CPU and with frankly no motivation to min-max anything. I just need some good profile, which runs quietly and cool enough, aiming exclusively at gaming (no streaming, no content creation).

I'd like to achieve something like this :

P : 59x2 57x4 55x8 (since most games use 2 to 4 cores anyway)
E : 43x16 or even 37x16 if it helps stabilizing temps/noise for P-core I dont know, I dont thing these E-cores are a big deal for my utilisation anyway.
Lowest voltage possible to control temperature
If possible without having to install multiples software and such, only bios tweaking


But now I'm kinda hooked by all this stuff and I still have some silly questions if I may (I swear i read multiples times but still cant figured some things out).

1. Concerning Adaptive voltage, it adapts according to a baseline or within a range of some sort ? How to know that ? At some point @RobertoSampaio had Adaptive on with Additionnal Turbo set to 1.4460 but I guess it's not an offset. Does that value determine the max your bios can go up to ? Can i put it at let's say 1.33V for my most clocked core and see if this work ?

2. At some point @RobertoSampaio had full load at stock ([email protected] GhZ) and voltage fixed at 1.14V. But then he started finetuning core by core and his V/F curve had a V/F point 7 at 5400MhZ at 1.274V. How is the voltage worst than when all cores are synced ?

3. If I dont want to get a headache messing with V/F curves I dont understand and cut corners by going to BIOS for something like (voltages numbers are a wild guess and I'll test it of course) :
Performance Core Ratio : Auto
P0 : Ratio 59 / Adaptive Voltage ON / Additionnal Turbo 1.35V
P1 : Ratio 55 / Adaptive Voltage ON / Additionnal Turbo 1.18V
P2 : Ratio 57 / Adaptive Voltage ON / Additionnal Turbo 1.27V
P3 : Ratio 55 / Adaptive Voltage ON / Additionnal Turbo 1.18V
P4 : Ratio 59 / Adaptive Voltage ON / Additionnal Turbo 1.35V
P5 : Ratio 55 / Adaptive Voltage ON / Additionnal Turbo 1.18V
P6 : Ratio 57 / Adaptive Voltage ON / Additionnal Turbo 1.27V
P7 : Ratio 55 / Adaptive Voltage ON / Additionnal Turbo 1.18V
Efficient Core Ratio : Auto
E-cores : Ratio 37 / Adaptive Voltage ON / Additionnal Turbo 1.18V

Is that OK ? Is it bad to have the same cores being high frequency for the life span of a CPU ? Will games recognized my high frequency cores and use them first ? Is the number of each core determined by their position on the die so I should put low frequency cores next to high ones to spread heat ? Are those values fixed or will they lower when CPU is idle as I want to ?

Many thanks to people taking the time to read this mess ^^
 

· Registered
Joined
·
5 Posts
this issue was discussed extensively a few pages ago, and it looks like this is not a MB or bios problem, but CPU ecores related.
this issue was discussed extensively a few pages ago, and it looks like this is not a MB or bios problem, but CPU ecores related.
[/QUOTE]
Hi. The weird thing is. I looked into cases with 103sp score can do, as mine is 102sp score, same z690 Hero. My ecore is 85. But mine cannot do while others can. And some people in my country claim that they try the z690 aorus pro ddr5, or gaming x, or elite from gigabyte and never have this issue… try on more than 10 chips.
 
561 - 580 of 1094 Posts
Top