No, because, as you can see from my reply to ajlueke just above your post, if left to itself, a ridiculous amount of voltage is fed to the Ryzen 3000 series of CPUs
All the power plan does is to rearrange the deck-chairs on the Titanic a bit, it does absolutely NOTHING against the iceberg which has ripped it apart.
If you bother to go to AMD's website and get the "chipset" drivers from AMD they include their own "balanced Ryzen" or thread ripper or whatever plan for your PC for windows 10, but I read somewhere theres a special high performance power plan you can unlock and enable somehow don't recall how. But changing the powerplan in windows 10 for CPU performance seems to have same 100% min state and 100% max state for CPU power usage for every plan I'd looked at really so changing powerplans shouldn't be an issue to CPU scores in anyway, where it does make a difference is the Suspend HDD power after 20mins setting that to zero or the USB power or wifi/network power standby/disable or your display sleep time. changing These settings in your power plans can obviously make a difference if you are having any issues. when in doubt just go for the AMD manufacturers power plan obviously! Unless you meant the "determinism slider state" or whatever it is in the bios which can be set to performance vs low power and so on. I'd consider finding that one and toggling it on, I'm not sure how much of a difference it makes but I set it that on performance on my PC at least. Though I don't actually overclock things I leave the bios to do everything for me and use PBO on my 2700x the real performance gains are from memory timing tweaks and lower latency. You've never seen a high latency super computer, they don't exist at all. What puts the super in super computers is they're built for zero latency. the lower latency you get and the higher floating points your computer is the closer to a super computer you'll have in your own home. Whether or not anybody can figure out how to program and develop games for it though is another thing. Sadly people think AMD 64 development is just renaming intel itanium64 code to say AMD64 on the label pretty much the way it looks to me. As the memory timings nano seconds are in billionths of a second if it takes your memory 16 or 18nano seconds instead of 9 or 10 nano seconds you might think its a small difference but over the period of a minute 9billionths of a second would issue instructions far far far more times. Disabling gear down mode doubles the number of millions of instructions per second and setting command rate to 1T means every command isn't sent twice for stability instead its just sent the one time which means its literally twice as fast. You can make your computer roughly realworld 6 times faster just by tweaking your secondary memory timings and configuring everything for as low latency as possible. But benchmarks and FPS numbers will remain the same but booting into windows will take seconds when before it took half a minute or more. completion of tasks will be done in rocket fast times and your gaming will be super smooth and responsive, simply upping the MHz by a few clock cycles does nothing if theres a massive delay waiting on the memory to issue or execute commands.1866mhz is latency of around 1-4 while 3200mhz is automatically around 8latency you might think that double the speed of 1866 is only just slightly faster than 3200mhz.. but oh man would you be sooo very very wrong.
In Ryzen Master my VDDCR CPU Power is going red and maxing out at 133 Watts when I run Cinebench R20 or another stress test. Is this safe?
Wattage by itself is only a measure of the work being done. As long as your temps are in spec as well as the voltage you will be fine. CPU socket power can go up to 142W on a 105W TDP processor under normal operating conditions.
This guide was a nice starting point as I just got my CPU so thank you. Lowered my voltage to 1.3, set all cores to 4.3 and am stable. Temps are idling (well, IDLE at windows desktop NOT bios - bios is lower) lower at around 35C to 38C which were at 38C - 44C before. Temps under load hit a max of 76C - I am running an AIO with exhaust (not intake)
Running an x570 MSI MEG ACE, 32GB of Trident Z NEO 3600 RAM (the 189.99 priced ones, mid timings), and of course, a 3900X
Anything higher on this voltage, system becomes unstable eventually..
This is fine for me - it works well!
However...I am debating going a little higher with my ram (as many have done with this same ram - 3800ish) and raising the voltage of my CPU just a hair to hit 4.4 on all cores. I also want to try to lower the voltage, maybe to 1.25, see if I can sustain the speeds...
I am incredibly new to overclocking, so if you see something wacky, speak up - I have no idea what I'm doing.
You're a genius. I was having issues with the stock settings of this CPU on the ASUS Strix X570-E Gaming motherboard. The clocks would jump around anywhere from 3.5GHz all the way to 4.6GHz while sitting at the desktop, doing nothing. Temps were horrendous. I changed my power plan settings to Ryzen Performance, used Ryzen Master to OC just as you explained, and hit 4.275 @ 1.3v with idle temps at 37c on a $75 Cooler Master 240mm AIO!! It ran stable at 4.325, but I wanted to leave a bit of headroom, and the gains in Cinebench weren't enough to warrant the increase (around 20pt difference), and my 4.275GHz clock at 1.3v actually beat out my previous 4.3GHz Cinebench score (AI Suite's 5-Way Optimization, which sucks and uses too much vcore) by quite a good margin. You can see in the Cinebench screenshot how my 4.275GHz (shows as 3.8GHz for some reason) beat out the 4.28GHz score.
Just worth mentioning again that locking the CPU into a fixed clock speed and voltage will improve your multi-core scores by a small margin, but will do so at the expense of your lightly threaded performance. Most desktop gaming workloads fall in the lightly threaded category, so unless you are doing heavily multi threaded work, a manual overclock won't do much for you.
"and raising the voltage of my CPU just a hair to hit 4.4 on all cores."
This is where the danger comes in. All processors have a built in FIT (silicon fitness monitoring feature) that prevents the processor from boosting to a voltage that would reduce the silicon life faster than what AMD has specified. Manually overclocking disables that feature. To determine what the FIT voltage for your CPU is, run the CPU at stock settings. Turn on precision boost overdrive to set PPT, TDC, and EDC to motherboard limits so they do not limit boosting. Turn on auto-OC to 200Mz to raise Fmax. Then run your favorite multicore benchmark and observe the voltage. The processor will stop boosting at a fixed voltage, even if PPT, TDC, EDC, Temp and Fmax haven't been reached. This is the max voltage FIT allows. You should not exceed that voltage when manually overclocking, doing so will reduce the life of your chip. By how much? That is anyone's guess.
You can also run the test with a single threaded benchmark and observe that the FIT voltage is different for light current vs high current workloads.
I had to register to thank you for this post. It helps a lot.
I'm not too crazy for having the fastest computer on the planet, but I want to get closer to what AMD says on the box for my 3900x. Not much of an overclocker and this is actually my first experience. I've never had to tinker so much with a CPU to try to get what was promised.
I'm running a 3900x on an Aorus Ultra X570 with G Skill RAM @ 3600 Mhz.
My problem is that the motherboard sets voltage to over 1.4v which seemed high to me. It was running hot and my AIO was working overtime to keep it cool.
I followed your instructions on this post and these are my results:
Leaving BIOS on auto voltage, applying your settings, and running Cinebench I can stay at 1.3v and get 4250 Mhz out of it.
Leaving BIOS on auto voltage, applying your settings but pushing to 4300 Mhz, my computer restarts itself as soon as Cinebench starts the test.
Changing BIOS voltage to 1.3v, applying your settings, and running Cinebench my computer restarts itself as soon as Cinebench starts the test.
Ryzen Master is an app that has to be manually started each time and the profile has to be applied each time. I was thinking about testing on Ryzen Master and then taking those settings to the BIOS, but it seems like that's not working.
What is the recommended approach?
1.3 VCore and 4.275GHz is about all you're going to be able to get out of this CPU and remain stable. Some people can get a tiny bit more, but that's about it. And it's because it's applying those clocks to all cores at once. This CPU isn't capable of reaching advertised boosts on all cores. It can only reach that 4.6/4.7GHz on a single core at a time for very specific workloads. You can see this happening within Ryzen Master.
If you want stock boosts, you can also try simply undervolting your vcore. Your Gigabyte BIOS should have that option. So, in your BIOS, you can set your Core Ratio back to Auto, then scroll down to "VDDCR CPU Voltage" or whatever VCore is called in your BIOS, and set it to Offset Mode, then select the "minus " symbol, and bring it down to a safe starting spot, like mine is at 0.07500, and then run Cinebench R20 and see how it goes. You may be able to go a little lower without undervolting your CPU too much when it's trying to boost during heavy workloads.
This will allow you to keep your boosts and normal clocks, but lower your core voltage consistently across the board. Mine boosts properly now, and no longer runs too hot. I'm also running the latest BIOS version for the Strix X570-E Gaming.
Good luck with your system. It's a good CPU. It just wasn't launched properly and the motherboards still, to this day, aren't running it properly.