Overclock.net banner
10621 - 10640 of 12871 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
113 Posts
Hello guys again,
any advice what to set differently?

2518202
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
626 Posts
Hello guys again,
any advice what to set differently?

View attachment 2518202

Rtt values maybe.

@XPEHOPE3 First time I've ever seen it but I got a PC reboot running y-cruncher, so you've helped me find out what you already knew. We're not stable! 😂

Reboots during y-cruncher, is that more likely to be on the CPU end? I'm going to null my curve at the moment anyway and run y-cruncher again.

Not had a PC reboot in ages, even during all my time running TM5 it was just those crashes in the app (and even they were rare). So I guess something is right on the edge of unstable, making me think its a curve value that might need to drop a few notches that CoreCycler just didn't catch.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
113 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
25 Posts
My mismatched 48GB RAM kit (4 sticks) with my Ryzen 1600 and Asrock B450m Pro4 (1.40V DRAM limitation by the board)

The motherboard uses a daisy chain topography for the memory slots. I put the 3600 MHz kit in the "slower" slots.

Currently the 2933 MHz at 16-18-18-36-54 timing with T1 command rate + Gear Down Mode + Power Down Mode + Bank Group Swap on auto + BGS alt on auto is stable after running memtesthelper for about 36 hours.

At 3000 MHz, it was stable for about 12 hours, and then when I restarted to computer and ran the memtesthelper again, it threw a memory error in a few minutes. 3133 MHz throws errors almost as soon as I start the stability test.

I tried using T2 and disabled the power down mode with 3200 and 3133 MHz with the same timings, but both of them threw errors almost as soon as I started the memtesthelper.

I understand the CPU, motherboard and the different RAM kits are a major handicap to the RAM overclocking. I'm curious if there's still a way to go beyond the current 2933 MHz setting.

The reason why I added 32GB to my original 16GB kit is because Cities Skylines uses a little over 30GB RAM by itself, and that's after pruning the Steam Workshop subscriptions. I'm missing about 1000 props/textures for the custom buildings I'm using in order to cut down on memory usage back when I just had the 16 GB kit. Maybe I could have searched hard for a 32GB kit that matched closer to my 16GB kit.

I am currently testing 3066 MHz with Power Down Mode disabled + Bank Group Swap disabled + BGS alt enabled.

EDIT: The 3066 MHz attempt also threw memory errors.
I'm going to disable Bank Group Swap and Gear down mode just to see what would happen with the 2933 MHz.

I'm looking for a guide on how to try to tighten down the timings. I saw the one from the author of the DRAM Calculator, but I was wondering if there something more exact with stepping down the primary, secondary and then the tertiary timing values?

Alternatively, should I use the 32 GB kit's 18-22-22-42-64 timing and then try to increase the MHz?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,754 Posts
its not "always" that way with every board, to get FULL turning OFF of DF-Cstates
on my MSI board, one has to set power supply idle control to "typical current idel" and set DF-States to OFF.
if one does not set typical current idle then DF-Cstates remain "half" active leaving package state active while C6 state is off.
this way im talking above manages this, (do note that i didnt set anything in zenstates i just opened it to show DF-Cstates are indeed off)
unless i missed something somewhere and its not 100% off?
On Gigabyte X570 Aorus Xtreme:
Typical Current Idle : Package C6-States are OFF
Low Current Idle
: Package C6-States are ON

There isn't another setting around to adjust this "Package C6-States"

Core C6-States can be adjusted in AMD CBS settings with the DF-Cstates.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
626 Posts
Hmm, I auto'd out my memory voltage settings and was going to try that first with y-cruncher before my CPU curve but at the last second in the BIOS I also tried dropping the auto oc boost frequency from +100 to +75.

Yeah, I know, should try one thing or one set of values at a time, but anyway, now my y-cruncher is over an hour in on its way to 10.

So it's looking like my reboot might have been too large a CPU boost value for my curve or some memory voltage settings. The fun of stability on the line, finding out that tiny bit of instability that is only cropping up rarely.

Gonna guess its the +100mhz on CPU in combination with a curve value that might need increased by like 1 or 2 notches. Dropping to +75 looks like it might have made it happy for now. Surprised 24 hours of CoreCycler hadn't picked up on this but here is a good reminder to use multiple stability testing apps.

The auto voltage values on my memory are very close to the manual settings I had dialed in. So I don't think it's the memory voltages.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
224 Posts
On Gigabyte X570 Aorus Xtreme:
Typical Current Idle : Package C6-States are OFF
Low Current Idle
: Package C6-States are ON

There isn't another setting around to adjust this "Package C6-States"

Core C6-States can be adjusted in AMD CBS settings with the DF-Cstates.
I couldn't have those changes stick after reboot or actually influence Package C6-States on B550 Gigabyte Aorus Pro V2 with 1.2.0.3A AGESA BIOSes. What AGESA does your BIOS use?

Surprised 24 hours of CoreCycler hadn't picked up on this
It tests single core, while you fail multicore. So no wonder. Total powerbudget and total heat are not tested. Please use HWiNFO to know what kind of power/volts/temps you get per-core, it's available in latest version.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,754 Posts
Hmm, I auto'd out my memory voltage settings and was going to try that first with y-cruncher before my CPU curve but at the last second in the BIOS I also tried dropping the auto oc boost frequency from +100 to +75.

Yeah, I know, should try one thing or one set of values at a time, but anyway, now my y-cruncher is over an hour in on its way to 10.

So it's looking like my reboot might have been too large a CPU boost value for my curve or some memory voltage settings. The fun of stability on the line, finding out that tiny bit of instability that is only cropping up rarely.

Gonna guess its the +100mhz on CPU in combination with a curve value that might need increased by like 1 or 2 notches. Dropping to +75 looks like it might have made it happy for now. Surprised 24 hours of CoreCycler hadn't picked up on this but here is a good reminder to use multiple stability testing apps.

The auto voltage values on my memory are very close to the manual settings I had dialed in. So I don't think it's the memory voltages.
Not all cores are stable at higher frequencies.

The AUTO OC Boost settings just sets the maximum clocks allowed higher. So if you don't want overboost, you set it to a lower value or disable it overall.

I use this with my 3800X to limit clocks @ 4600Mhz for stability issues where the cores aren't stable at higher frequencies if I fully tweak it to maximum performance.

I couldn't have those changes stick after reboot or actually influence Package C6-States on B550 Gigabyte Aorus Pro V2 with 1.2.0.3A AGESA BIOSes. What AGESA does your BIOS use?
AGESA 1.2.0.3b, F34
The latest & greatest.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
626 Posts
Not all cores are stable at higher frequencies.

The AUTO OC Boost settings just sets the maximum clocks allowed higher. So if you don't want overboost, you set it to a lower value or disable it overall.

I use this with my 3800X to limit clocks @ 4600Mhz for stability issues where the cores aren't stable at higher frequencies if I fully tweak it to maximum performance.



AGESA 1.2.0.3b, F34
The latest & greatest.
Yup I'm figuring out that is what it is. I spent about a week with CoreCyler and guides trying to reign in my curve and stability test it but obviously staying with one app has shown its limitations. Tbf I didn't know about y-cruncher until I joined in with this topic.

I mean it (CoreCyler) did root out instabilities, my final curve ended up -5 on one of my best cores, -15 on the other two and -20 on one. The rest seemed to be okay with -30. But clearly in there one or a few cores crap out with a +100mhz boost on top. Maybe even +75, but it's holding up so far with y-crunch running.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
224 Posts
Only CoreCycler ?

CoreCycler for me is just a primer for finding something that looks to be OK, after I found something its then onto Y-Cruncher to see if its stable, if Y-Cruncher crashes on specific tests (N32/N64 are particularly sensitive to CO) I tweak CO on core that crashed then hone in Y-Cruncher just to run on the crashing test.

Once its stopped crashing on the particular core I return to Y-Cruncher full test suite.

After Y-Cruncher is stable I do another CoreCycler, then use the system normally for an extended period of time to possibly catch idle crashes before moving to other types of stress tests
@Audioboxer see also this.
+ I remember on one of the y-cruncher tests there always is a huge temperature and current spike in the end, for less than 2 seconds, but usually it's captured by HWiNFO. I get up to 89C on tDie sensor
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
626 Posts
@Audioboxer see also this.
+ I remember on one of the y-cruncher tests there always is a huge temperature and current spike in the end, for less than 2 seconds, but usually it's captured by HWiNFO. I get up to 89C on tDie sensor
Thanks. I'm glad I'm learning all this now rather than plodding on thinking my CPU settings were locked in due to CoreCyler. It's making me wonder if some of my past errors in TM5 runs were contributed to by an unstable CPU curve 😤

That's completely on me though for either not having a 100% stable CPU or for not doing mem testing on CPU auto/safe settings.

You're right about the temps, my highest spike on tDie is reading 91 degrees! I'm liking this y-cruncher, it's pushing my PC even harder than prime95!

Water temps are still only 34-35 degrees after 2 hours of y-cruncher. So it's not the loop/fan curve, it's just that brutal pushing the CPU it can hit 91 degrees under testing 🔥
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
626 Posts


Ooft, make that 92 degrees it managed to peak at.

A bit happier I seem to have rooted out my CPU instability, however, this is just with a core clock boost drop from 100 to 75. Want to retest my curve again as much as I can.

Once this hits 10 going to now take my memory voltages off auto, put them back to where they were and run y-cruncher again.

Notice it maxed out my EDC, but I assume that is quite normal for this. My settings are 270 PPT, 150 TDC and 190 EDC.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5 Posts
I was more concerned with the loss of bandwidth as it should be increasing with mclk, but it actually goes down. Wondering what would cause this behavior? With the 2-3 ns latency difference that is due to me not shutting down my Aquacomputer service.

2518212


I do feel between 18-22-22 and 19-19-19 everything looks fine
Even the added latency by the SETUP times (63)
Also very glad to see the SETUP timings "pattern" functions well ~ very very happy

Aside from the 8-9ns added ontop, it was kind of expected
You have 12ns ontop , soo there seems to be more than one issue ~ maybe 1.8v rail being too weak higher MCLK (which can easily make 1-2ns difference ~ if it's lacking)
But else,it looks normal
The increase tho is quite high ~ i think to match the same ns latency for 1900, you needed a 5000+ result , or near 4800+
@Nighthog is the person to ask S
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
224 Posts
the loss of bandwidth as it should be increasing with mclk, but it actually goes down.
Only if you run memclk=fclk=uclk. If you don't run it like that there has to be a delay to synchronize memclk and fclk clocks, and that delay varies nontrivially, because it probably involves some algebra and modulus arithmetic on clock numerators (for 1900 it's 57/3, numerator is 57, for 1933 it's 58/3, numerator is 58, etc). For example, here is me going from 3600-1800 to 3600-1900 and 3600-2000 and getting lower latency on 3600-2000. Actually on fclk 1933, 1967 and 2000 latency was similar and much less than on fclk 1900.
tldr: you can try different fclk to lower latency instead of or in addition to varying memclk
 

·
Registered
Down on luck
Joined
·
113 Posts
Notice it maxed out my EDC, but I assume that is quite normal for this. My settings are 270 PPT, 150 TDC and 190 EDC.
I find the gains are really small for the amount of power you draw when you push the PPT boundary. There's really not much left to squeeze out of the 5900X/5950X if your ambient temps aren't like 10+ deg Celsius and/or you don't have a beefy custom loop with lots of thermal capacity to absorb the amount of heat these chip throw out.

I settled with 145W PPT, 105A TDC and 170A EDC for my daily PBO power limits.
My ambient temps are usually at least 30 deg Celsius on most days, just to give a frame of reference. Max Tdie temp on my 5900X are around 86 deg Celsius, cooled using a 360mm EK-aio.
 
  • Rep+
Reactions: Audioboxer

·
Registered
Joined
·
626 Posts
I find the gains are really small for the amount of power you draw when you push the PPT boundary. There's really not much left to squeeze out of the 5900X/5950X if your ambient temps aren't like 10+ deg Celsius and/or you don't have a beefy custom loop with lots of thermal capacity to absorb the amount of heat these chip throw out.

I settled with 145W PPT, 105A TDC and 170A EDC for my daily PBO power limits.
My ambient temps are usually at least 30 deg Celsius on most days, just to give a frame of reference. Max Tdie temp on my 5900X are around 86 deg Celsius, cooled using a 360mm EK-aio.
Yup, you're likely right.

When I bought my 5950x I also bought another radiator to add to my loop so I entered the world of playing with the curve and CPU settings feeling thermals are no issue. And they aren't really, during demanding games I tend to have 70-75 degrees tops and most other games 65-70. Idle/desktop I don't pay too much attention to due to boost spikes, but usually around 38-50 degrees depending on what is going on.

Mafia Definitive edition is the one game that's managed to get my CPU to 80 degrees during gaming, but I've read about how poorly optimised this game is from the 2K launcher to unlocking the 60FPS cap (which I did) also causing more heat generation.

So I've been getting pretty good performance on my settings and with a reasonably generous curve. But as I have uncovered weeks and weeks later I've had a small instability tucked away that needed to be rooted out and I'm likely generating more excess heat than needed just for a tiny bit of performance.

Will likely rethink my whole approach to the 5950x but for now I'm just going to do some more testing on this curve with OCCT next and see if there is more issues than just the +100mhz setting being too high.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5 Posts
Thing is I tested this on my other system - 5950x and Samsung B-Die Dual Rank and indeed the bandwidth did increase as expected with mclk. So I don't know if its the 5800x, Single Rank Dimms, or a settings issue.

Only if you run memclk=fclk=uclk. If you don't run it like that there has to be a delay to synchronize memclk and fclk clocks, and that delay varies nontrivially, because it probably involves some algebra and modulus arithmetic on clock numerators (for 1900 it's 57/3, numerator is 57, for 1933 it's 58/3, numerator is 58, etc). For example, here is me going from 3600-1800 to 3600-1900 and 3600-2000 and getting lower latency on 3600-2000. Actually on fclk 1933, 1967 and 2000 latency was similar and much less than on fclk 1900.
tldr: you can try different fclk to lower latency instead of or in addition to varying memclk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
330 Posts
That would be extremely fast!

The first cycle takes less time than the last cycles.

I do believe CPU frequency does play a role, but in @craxton case he is using a 5800x, where as I am using a 5600x so logically the 5800x sustained mhz should be higher than what I can achieve.

Can you double check your values for completed 25 cycles TM5 runs as im confident that there are not too many peeps who have posted faster times than what I have posted while using a 5600x with 32GB I could understand a time within 2:40 mins while using flat 14s but 2:30 is a big stretch
Here you go
32gigs @ 25 cycle = 2 hours and 35 min
Do note the dram calc bench numbers also... :)
Light Product Font Line Screenshot

But it should also be said that this is a faster then average dual CCD setup :p (running 4 memory sticks ontop that)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25 Posts
My mismatched 48GB RAM kit (4 sticks) with my Ryzen 1600 and Asrock B450m Pro4 (1.40V DRAM limitation by the board)

The motherboard uses a daisy chain topography for the memory slots. I put the 3600 MHz kit in the "slower" slots.

Currently the 2933 MHz at 16-18-18-36-54 timing with T1 command rate + Gear Down Mode + Power Down Mode + Bank Group Swap on auto + BGS alt on auto is stable after running memtesthelper for about 36 hours. It is also stable with GDM and BGS disabled, and BGS alt enabled.

Any attempts at going for 3000 MHz with the same timings, even if I use T2 command rate, ends in a failure.

I understand the CPU, motherboard and the different RAM kits are a major handicap to the RAM overclocking. I'm curious if there's still a way to go beyond the current 2933 MHz setting.

Alternatively, should I use the DRAM calculator's 14-17-18-17-36-56 timing values to try to tighten down 2933 MHz? This is assuming that my 3200 MHz kit is weaker than my 3600 MHz kit, although I'm not sure if the slot locations for the kits also have an impact.
2518220
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
113 Posts
@domdtxdissar thanks for the screenshot as I still have 1-2 errors during 25 cycles and wanted to see some rtt settings with someone that also have 4x8GB (although I have only Micron kits).
Or 1933Mhz may be too much for my 4x8GB config :-/
 
10621 - 10640 of 12871 Posts
Top