High Voltage on Auto Clock |
Post Reply | Page <1234 6> |
Author | ||||
VUMeter
Newbie Joined: 14 Sep 2017 Location: UK Status: Offline Points: 148 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||
If I ran Prime95 with all cores and threads, my Auto voltage went to vCore of 1.20v. However, it's when running on single or two cores (or threads) only with Prime95 is when the vCore really shot up. We cant continue discussion on a thread I created a while ago f you like, rather than continue on this, although it does seem relevant. http://forum.asrock.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=6185 The main point for me is that temps were not bad under auto or under fixed voltage mode. This is interesting: https://forums.anandtech.com/threads/ryzen-strictly-technical.2500572/ "Understanding the voltages specified for the standard PStates can be confusing as well. That's because in the normal operating mode (i.e. "non-OC") the SMU controls the voltages automatically through the voltage controllers. For example, the P0 PState might specify 1.37500V voltage, while the actual effective voltage during the residency in this state is 1.26250V or slightly higher. This is not a glitch, but the normal operation of the CPU. Basically, the voltage specified in the MSR is just the upper limit and the SMU will automatically add a dynamic negative offset to this value, reducing the actual effective voltage. The amount of the negative offset varies depending on load and the temperature. For the tested sample the offsets were -120mV & -144mV for the two highest base PStates (3.6 & 3.2GHz). Looks like the on chip power controller does some interesting this with voltage offsets that make it hard to measure. If you are havinga hard time with temperatures though, that's a cause for concern. I am basing my assumption on low temps = a good time.
|
||||
zlobster
Groupie Joined: 02 Sep 2017 Status: Offline Points: 403 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||
Same here. Only that I was getting huge spikes on idle as well. Talking about ~1.58V (!)
It's nearly 2018! Who copies and pastes URLs these days?!?!
You bet!
When I was using all-autos my idle was ~52C! Not talking +20 offset here. That is w/ a h115i with 2 rad-optimized 140mm Noctuas... N.B. after P3.10; with P3.00 things was less crazy but still pretty crazy. EDIT: Now I remembered The Stilt's writings. Dude's simply a category of his own. I wonder if ASRock engineers/FW developers knew the same stuff he knew, before designing the board? Edited by zlobster - 14 Dec 2017 at 5:33am |
||||
1700X ZP-B1 (stock); X370 Taichi (UEFI 3.10); 16GB F4-3200C14-8GFX XMP; 256GB 960 EVO; RX 580 NITRO+ 8GB
|
||||
VUMeter
Newbie Joined: 14 Sep 2017 Location: UK Status: Offline Points: 148 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||
Why can't this place let you link another thread in the same damn forum???
OK, here goes: http :// forum.asrock.com /forum_posts.asp?TID=6185 OK, it just replaces ? with %3F, neat, helpful. Idle 52°C !?! Yeah, that would make me (1) turn off immediately (2) take off CPU cooler (3) clean of thermal compound (4) cry (5) think of who I could call to do it for me. However, I'll assume you did actually apply the CPU correctly. First time builder here, I put on an NH-U14s, and that was nerve wracking! Thermal compound application didn't fill me with confidence (though tests showing even a 'smiley face' pattern works OK enough). Damn screws wouldn't get purchase on the threaded mounting brackets until I put some force onto them, but it's kinda scary. The UEFI/BIOS temp is Tctrl on P3.00 and T-socket (?) on versions below. Either way the Temp reported in BIOS isn't accurately reflecting what is going on, which makes setting fan speeds a pain! That's seems like there is something very messed up to be getting idle temps that high though. It's Winter here in, perpetually dreary, England and we don't have our heating on all day, only when it's really cold. I had a small window open too, so it was about 10-12 °C in the room and the idle temp Tdie was 19.8 °C. The Zotac Mini 1070 with fans at 30% was 24 °C!
|
||||
datonyb
Senior Member Joined: 11 Apr 2017 Location: London U.K. Status: Offline Points: 3139 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||
you should care about the current that is what will make the heat understand current and voltage are very different you can have high volts and produce low heat as long as the amps (current) is low as an example turn you car over on the starter motor and feel the heat in the thick battery cable that is 12v but 300+ amps now hold onto the ht leads to the spark plugs they have many many thousands of volts but absolutely miniscule amps they will be stone cold so please dont be so dismissive if you dont understand the basics of ohms law and amps vs volts ,you wont get any closer to solving your issues and understanding why things do what heat comes from current not from volts |
||||
[url=https://valid.x86.fr/jpg250][/url]
3800X, powercolor reddevil vega64, gskill tridentz3866, taichix370, evga750watt gold |
||||
yodivanbaped
Newbie Joined: 06 Oct 2017 Location: Indonesia Status: Offline Points: 16 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||
Just fyi I previously use R3 1300X on the same board and barely went to 3.8Ghz (sometimes my board failed to post and I need to press the restart button) thats why I'll just put my R5 1600X on auto. I'll try to manually put my clockspeed and voltage later when I'm home. One question, does this high voltage has something to do with XFR? Another fyi, I have Cool n Quiet disabled, haven't try to enable it (maybe I should) because I disabled it right after I install then R5 1600X... |
||||
zlobster
Groupie Joined: 02 Sep 2017 Status: Offline Points: 403 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||
Hmm, I believe my wording ('current voltage') mislead you. Before you continue, let me tell you I have a MSc in electrical engineering. I'd love to chat about electricity and physics, although not here. Otherwise you're right. One of the main things that leads to heat in conductors is the current. Other one being resistance. Joule's first law. Naturally, increasing the voltage also increases the current -> hence increase in heat generation as well. Let's skip the nitty-gritty details about semiconductors and transients. EDIT: syntax Edited by zlobster - 14 Dec 2017 at 7:28pm |
||||
1700X ZP-B1 (stock); X370 Taichi (UEFI 3.10); 16GB F4-3200C14-8GFX XMP; 256GB 960 EVO; RX 580 NITRO+ 8GB
|
||||
zlobster
Groupie Joined: 02 Sep 2017 Status: Offline Points: 403 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||
Reddit and The Stilt have some interesting info regarding all this. It was posted in some other threads here.
I'll try to engage The Stilt and see if he can shed some real insights on what's really going on, and how to optimally set the voltages. P.S. when transitioning from OC MODE to MANUAL one should always go for NEGATIVE voltage offsets first! |
||||
1700X ZP-B1 (stock); X370 Taichi (UEFI 3.10); 16GB F4-3200C14-8GFX XMP; 256GB 960 EVO; RX 580 NITRO+ 8GB
|
||||
VUMeter
Newbie Joined: 14 Sep 2017 Location: UK Status: Offline Points: 148 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||
From what I am reading, yes exactly. The system management unit (SMU) handles distribution of voltages on the chip to all of the different areas. It controls thermal throttling and other fancy things. It also controls how and when and even if XFR is going to work at all. If you change the frequency of the chip (not sure if both increase 'overclock' and decrease 'underclock' or just increase) it disables the XFR function. For this reason it makes sense for those who overclock to at least get the same all-core overclock as their XFR single core speed, else they are at a single threaded speed penalty. It would also seem that the SMU is a secretive box of tricks. It doesn't seem to feed much info out to the system (or monitoring applications) about it's inner workings. Sure there are some voltage and amperage data sensors, but they don't tell the whole truth. From what I read from reputable sources, voltage data reported from the CPU is actually 100-150mV (0.1-0.15v) higher than is actually being distributed internally. Now, if one sets the Motherboard voltage to a fixed amount, then the CPU may well request more (VID) but it ain't getting it. On my chip at least 1.30v, or maybe lower, will happily support all of the CPU stock functionality including multi- and single- core XFR boosting. Of course, there could be the odd 'dud' chip that really won't boost to single-core XFR frequencies unless it gets ~1.4v (or >1.5v supplied to the SMU), which is why all of the chips jump up to this seemingly rather drastically high voltage. I have sent AMD Technical an email, whether I'll get a suitable reply is another question, but hopefully I'll get a definitive answer. Why there isn't the option to control the max vCore ceiling for XFR whilst allowing for vCore reduction when idle, I don't know. What I am going to do shortly is to play a bit more with P-states and offsets and see if I cannot coax the behaviour that I desire: All cores idle < 1v / ~0.80v All cores maxed ~1.20v Single core maxed 1.30v I have no want to keep putting 1.4-1.5v into the chip when it completely doesn't need it.
|
||||
zlobster
Groupie Joined: 02 Sep 2017 Status: Offline Points: 403 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||
Or maybe, I don't know, ASRock fix this?
I know the X370 Taichi is made for OC but can't users just enjoy normal behavior out of the box? |
||||
1700X ZP-B1 (stock); X370 Taichi (UEFI 3.10); 16GB F4-3200C14-8GFX XMP; 256GB 960 EVO; RX 580 NITRO+ 8GB
|
||||
VUMeter
Newbie Joined: 14 Sep 2017 Location: UK Status: Offline Points: 148 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||
"Normal behaviour out of the box" - well that is exactly what I am experiencing, if what I read is correct. Ryzen 7 chips (and maybe others) boost their drawn vCore when XFR is engaged because the SMU pulls more. That's the way it is, it is nothing to do with the motherboard, but all to do with the actual chip SMU architecture.
My idle temps are low, my chips boosts to 3.9GHz single and 3.5GHz all core/all thread. This is correct behaviour. When it boosts XFR single core it pulls almost 1.5v. That's by design, not changeable as it's written into the SMU of the chip. @Zlobster directly: You have something wrong somewhere that is not normal and that is creating higher than normal idle temps. What that is I don't know and can't even begin to work out without 'playing' with it directly. Windows is being lied to about things too. The monitoring software is being told the frequency drops to 2000MHz on a 1700X and that's not true, the base frequency is 2200MHz (22x multiplier). AMD hasn't said a lot but they have said Windows isn't fast enough to respond to things that the chip is doing, that or they just ain't bothering to report to the OS because the SMU is doing it. OK, what I have just finished playing with and my results: 0 Default 1700X, all volts on auto. Idle ~0.869v @ 2200MHz All core ~1.2v @ 3500MHz Single core ~1.45v @ 3900MHz 1 Disable CPB (Core Performance Boost / XFR), P-State 0 1.30v (28) @ 3400MHz, everything else stock or auto. Idle ~0.869v @ 2200MHz All core ~1.150v @ 3400MHz (100MHz sslow, no XFR boost) Single core ~1.140 @ 3400MHz (500MHz slow, no XFR) 2 Enable CPB, P-state 0 1.30v @ 3400MHz, all else stock or auto (1-above with CPB enabled). Idle ~0.869v @ 2200MHz All core ~1.2v @ 3500MHz Single core ~1.45v @ 3900MHz So, I'll try to explain my findings: Disabling CPB (XFR) means that the chip operates at it's basic multiplier speeds without turbos. Whilst it's not a massive hit for all-core performance (drops 100MHz on a 1700X), the single-core performance takes a huge 500MHz hit. But because 3400MHz is easily achievable on all cores, it's gonna be even easier on just one core, hence the lower vCore. However, unless the user is gonna overclock all cores to 3900MHz or has a specific multi-core reason, disabling CPB (XFR) seems like a bad move on an -X chip. Single core performance suffers too much. Unfortunately we do not have control over the SMU on the chip. So we cannot control the vCore ceiling when XFR boost is happening. We can forcibly lock the motherboard to provide a static amount of volts, but this doesn't seem to drop down when reducing load, it stays static always. I'd like access to the ghost P-states of XFR, but these are dealt with by the SMU on chip and not for the user to mes with. P0 is not XFR, it is the maximum all core state. If the P0 frequency is changed then XFR is disabled. If P0 stays at stock frequency then the SMU is free to allow XFR boosts on all or some cores as it sees fit, and to provide whatever voltage internally that it decides too. Now, it could be true that when manually specifying volts, the reported value in monitoring software is fairly accurate. The SMU may have to just deal with what is available. But when the motherboard voltage is auto, the SMU can pull more but maybe internally distribute less. I am not a fan of this hidden working stuff, I like to see what is the real deal. It's like these temperature offsets that aren't already programmed into the chips, just like on my old Core 2 Duo. Sorry if this is moving off topic a bit from the original posters question. I do hope some of it is relevant to the question though.
|
||||
Post Reply | Page <1234 6> |
Tweet
|
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |