ASRock.com Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > Technical Support > AMD Motherboards
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - ASROCK 970M Pro3 CPU Throttling?
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search Search  Events   Register Register  Login Login

ASROCK 970M Pro3 CPU Throttling?
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123>
Author
Message
  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
TechLord View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: 05 Dec 2015
Status: Offline
Points: 60 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote TechLord Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: ASROCK 970M Pro3 CPU Throttling?
    Posted: 05 Dec 2015 at 5:13pm
Hi guys!
I have an FX6300 on this MB. My issue is that is seems to me to be throttling the CPU regarding Turbo speeds.
I use:
- prime95 to stress test the CPU.
- CPUID HW monitor to look at core speeds

Case 1 - Bios defaults, all bells and whistles enabled ( CnQ, Thermal protections, the works).
         I start prime95 and the core speeds go back and forth between 1.4 and 3.5 Ghz. Sometimes, the cores jump to 3.8 for a very very short while. The monitor has some monitoring of overall power consumption which rarely hits 50W.

Case 2 - I disable every protection in BIOS, turn everything full on.
        I start prime95 and all cores freeze at 3.5Ghz.

I sometimes start the prime95 on only 2 cores but the results are the same.

My question - should I see some hits of the 4.1 Ghz Turbo Speed? I either don't test well or I missed something in the BIOS. I know it's only a 4+1 phase power but the 970 chipset should really make the CPU run as advertised by AMD.
Back to Top
Xaltar View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar

Joined: 16 May 2015
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 25028 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Xaltar Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Dec 2015 at 5:38pm
What kind of temps are you getting? High temps on the socket, CPU and VRMs will all cause throttling. If your monitoring app isn't giving you readings for all 3 then you can check the temp of the VRM heatsink by touch but be careful it can get very hot and could burn you. I generally advise a case fan blowing down onto the VRM heatsink with FX systems. The 4+1 phase power should be enough to handle the FX 6300 so I would lean more towards temp throttling. 

What CPU cooling to you have, how many intake fans are you using and where are they situated? FX systems are well known for running hot.
Back to Top
TechLord View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: 05 Dec 2015
Status: Offline
Points: 60 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote TechLord Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Dec 2015 at 6:25pm
Thanks for you response. The CPU cooler (a DEEPCOOL) is pretty good, once it goes to full speed it keeps the CPU at 47 C no matter what. It is top-bottom so the VRMs are cooled only by their stock radiators.
Below is a picture after 5 minutes of Prime95.

My questions are these:
- Shouldn't the MB be able to handle stock uses of a CPU out-of-the-box? I agree that OCing should imply better cooling of the VRMs but stock speeds should be OK with stock cooling...
- The throttle should kick in after the VRMs reach high temps but it kicks in immediately after windows start... 
Back to Top
Xaltar View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar

Joined: 16 May 2015
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 25028 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Xaltar Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Dec 2015 at 7:33pm
Those temps all look to be well within tolerance. What BIOS version are you running and have you tried updating to the latest? 
Back to Top
wardog View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group


Joined: 15 Jul 2015
Status: Offline
Points: 6447 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote wardog Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Dec 2015 at 7:34pm
If I may. Which DeepCool is it you have?
Back to Top
TechLord View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: 05 Dec 2015
Status: Offline
Points: 60 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote TechLord Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Dec 2015 at 8:27pm
Bios is 1.30 which seems to be the last.
Cooler is an "older" Deepcool Beta 400 Plus. It seems to get the job done quite well.
Back to Top
wardog View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group


Joined: 15 Jul 2015
Status: Offline
Points: 6447 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote wardog Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Dec 2015 at 8:45pm
Originally posted by TechLord TechLord wrote:

It seems to get the job done quite well.


All things considered I could argue that with you here in your "Throttling' thread :)

Nope. Even Deepcool themselves fess up to this cooler not properly cooling FX CPUs/boards.

http://www.deepcool.com/product/cpucooler/2014-01/7_695.shtml
(then click on Specs tab)


As Xaltar advised, _safely_ position and secure a decently large fan blowing across the VRM section of the motherboard and check for throttling.

Side note: The VRM's can override all else and lower speeds if they become overheated. Commonly referred to as Over Current Protection, or OCP for short.

I admire the person who wrote the below article. He's the same as me. Your 970 board was never designed to operate an FX processor. Like him, I too get tired of repeating myself on this matter

http://www.overclock.net/a/about-vrms-mosfets-motherboard-safety-with-high-tdp-processors


Edited by wardog - 05 Dec 2015 at 8:50pm
Back to Top
TechLord View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: 05 Dec 2015
Status: Offline
Points: 60 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote TechLord Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Dec 2015 at 9:37pm
Thank you for your response wardog. However, this being a forum, lets argue ideas.

1. Asrock recommends using a top-bottom cooler for this board. As long as the CPU does not go beyond 48C, why do you call this cooler obsolete? It is much better than the stock cooler which was reaching 60+ degrees during Prime stress testing. Another point is that the CPU does not have time to overheat because the throttling is present always. I start prime at 25 degrees for the CPU. It should a least go at 4.1Ghz for the first 10 seconds. But I say again, no matter how long Prime runs, the CPU stays at 47C.

2. I very much understand the need for good VRMs and cooling them while OVERCLOCKING. I do not understand why the stock cooling solution for the VRMs does not make the board behave as designed during STOCK clocks. It's like buying a new car that has 150 km/h top speed in the manual but to reach that speed you need to change engine parts.

"Your 970 board was never designed to operate an FX processor"
So your basic point is that I got hassled by Asrock by selling me a board which cannot handle a stock FX-6300 (I'm not even mentioning the 8xx series). This makes me a little sad because the alternatives for me from other vendors (mATX) were all with 760G/880G chipsets which really are bad for the FX.

I still hope I missed something in BIOS...:)
Back to Top
PetrolHead View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie


Joined: 07 Oct 2015
Status: Offline
Points: 403 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote PetrolHead Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Dec 2015 at 10:12pm
A few quick remarks:

-ASRock doesn't require a top-down cooler for your CPU. It does for the FX-6350, but not for the FX-6300. It's a good idea to have one, but the VRM should - according to ASRock - be fine without one.
-The FX-6300 is a 95W TDP processor, so it's not what I would consider "high TDP".
-Funnily enough, in the article wardog provided, it is written that:
  • Look for a minimum quality 4+1 phase on the board for use with high TDP processor. Higher is better though

The 970M Pro3 has that. Also, here "high TDP" refers to 125 W. Of course the quality of the VRM components also matters alot. I'm not sure what sort of components ASRock uses. However, the board also has VRM cooling, which the linked article considers a must when overclocking a high-TDP processor on a board with a 4+1 phase. So for a stock 95W TDP 4+1 should be more than enough.

-The 970M Pro3 uses the 970 chipset, which is designed for FX-series processors. AMD itself suggests this chipset for CPUs up to FX-8320, FX-8370E and FX-8320E. The SB on this board is 950, which is good as well. In addition, ASRock promises that the board supports CPUs up to an FX-8370 so clearly the board itself is also supposed to be designed for FX-series CPUs.

-I have this board and my 125W TDP Phenom II X6 has experienced zero throttling even without a top-down cooler. Edit: And I've done some pretty heavy stress testing on this system.

The bottom line is that this motherboard should be able to run an FX-6300 at stock speeds without issues. Of course, your board may be faulty. There's always that. If your board is not faulty and it still can't run an FX-6300 at stock speeds without throttling, then that's just plain ridiculous considering the promises ASRock makes and what this chipset is supposed to be able to handle. If that is truly the case, then whoever is responsible for quality control and/or design of this board deserves to be fired because, make no mistake, it's ASRock's fault, not AMD's.

Edit2: Could you list your full system specs? I'd be interested to see what sort of PSU and GPU you have.



Edited by PetrolHead - 05 Dec 2015 at 10:16pm
Ryzen 5 1500X, ASRock AB350M Pro4, 2x8 GB G.Skill Trident Z 3466CL16, Sapphire Pulse RX Vega56 8G HBM2, Corsair RM550x, Samsung 960 EVO SSD (NVMe) 250GB, Samsung 850 EVO SSD 500 GB, Windows 10 64-bit
Back to Top
wardog View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group


Joined: 15 Jul 2015
Status: Offline
Points: 6447 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote wardog Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Dec 2015 at 10:16pm
TechLord,

I'm up for debating.

1. I'm not calling it obsolete. I am however calling it inadequate for what you have CPU/MB wise. As does Deepcool also.

2. Again, if the "cooler' can not dissipate heat per CPU TDP then it goes that what heat is being dissipated is higher temped and now being passed over the VRMs as even higher than normal. Hence your rapid temp rise in HWMonitor and the fan running at full force. Hence additional VRM cooling via a separate fan all the while using your present Deepcool.

3. Being observant of where I'm posting I'll again state "Your 970 board was never designed to operate an FX processor". I don't care who says what. It plain and simple was not. The FX 125w processors were a pipe dream when the 970 chipset was introduced.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.04
Copyright ©2001-2021 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.110 seconds.