Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Islam Ghunym

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Islam Ghunym

  1. Ok, not sure from where you got these numbers to prove that average will be higher as there is no explanation why these numbers would appear, but That will be different on every motherboard depending on how manufacturer has designed how to compensate for spikes as more LLC level will also stress VRM components and lower the efficiency in general. I found that: LLC is found to make overclockers able to reach higher voltages on load because they can't put higher idle voltage (Ex: 1.43V on intel while idling and maybe 1.35V on load so they can't increase load voltages by going out of safe voltage range on idle) so with higher levels of LLC the Vdroop will decrease and we will get higher load voltage as we will get a spike for a short duration while going back to idle "a matter of ms" which should not be a problem usually if it is not very high like 2 volts. There is no point of using LLC that will decrease VRM efficiency while you can put a higher idle voltage like while undervolting. When undervolting LLC should be at lowest level as we don't care about core VID here. I mean Fuck it! Let it drop since I am already droping voltages myself! It does not make any sense! why I should prevent that droop. I feel like a big idiot. So I should go for lowest LLC level possible and undervolt as required. Another thing is that because voltage decides how much current is going into the CPU, I simply should not care about that too. That matters only when overclocking as those will limit the CPU current at high voltages preventing hugher clocks. Also limiting total power won't change anything as it will limit the current and why I should limit current while I can limit voltage. I should simply let the CPU take what it needs and only tweak voltages. There is no magical thing to be done. I just made things more complicated while they are simple.
  2. Nope I already know that. when we talk about power consumption then average voltage only matters here and I think you know that. Power draw is not related to your instantaneous voltages which I am trying to tweak to achieve higher clocks. So if you are not aware don't attack my understanding. Look at yours. For a moment I thought I would learn something. Thank you, you already said much. Your statements stayed out of logic even after asking several times.
  3. Well I know, but I still didn't get what you meant. I mean why extreme LLC won't help if it hides the vdroops. Why it would take more power if current is already limited and why it would be dangerous if -offset is already set and why it will make use off more power if voltages spikes does not happen in realtime? I am just lost here. It looks like things won't be explained with just words. Can you forward me pls somewhere that can clarify for me?
  4. Hold on a second. what I already know is: At a certain voltage when CPU goes to load, it will cause a Vdroop then it will stabilize again because amps changed. What will LLC do is removing this drops when set at higher than medium ending up increasing voltages more than what are already set by bios settings. So if I set for example a certain voltage Ex: 1.2. When CPU goes under load, Extreme LLC will increase the outpot voltage to 1.3 or even more and those can be serious if the reference voltage is high
  5. So I will crash in the end if I did -offset, but would that be helpfull if combined with power limit which would limit amps. What I want exterme LLC to do is to prevent vdroops while keep limiting power
  6. That why I said I wanted to combine that with -offset voltage so..?
  7. Exterme LLC will be harmfull only if I set high voltages, however the voltage spike won't inctease power consumption for small fraction of second, right?
  8. I am trying to make most out of an AMD Zen2 3700X chip at low power demands (Ex: 30 watts) + OCed memory to limits (frequency + all timings and sub-timings) so I have some questions that I want to discuss: There are different settings that may achieve that if combined and used properly. I just can't determine what should I do: 1- CPU core Voltage: the lower it is, the less power it will demand + less clocks will be achived 2- PPT or Soc Power in watts: the lower it is, the less power of course 3- EDC: the higher it is the more power it will consume 4- DRAM Voltage: should be 1.45 with OCed memory. 5- LLC: it controlls the way voltages scale with Amps 6-VRM frequency: There maybe even more that I am not aware of. My thoughts are: if I limited Amps and placed high voltages +offsets while LLC on medium I will probably achieve higher clocks at the limit 30 watts for example, but that will increase the idle power consumption. If I increased LLC to extreme and placed an -offset voltage on cores then placed a limit on Soc power "PPT" I will probably idle at lower power, but not sure if i i will reach less stable clocks on load Not sure if VRM frequency would help Not sure if anything I wrote even right!
  9. Just 1 more thing. Will motherbiard vrm play a rule on how good my cpu clocks can go at certain power consumption?
  10. Cool, maybe I can set 2 profiles, one with 4 cores higher clocks and other with all 8 cores. I will see if 6 cores are better. Thanks very much
  11. Yup 2 chiplets, each one can have 4 cores. So then I should go for 3800X then disable everyboost and undervolt as required then try to certain clocks untill I reach good power consumption and good clocks... I can see later what is suitable, right?
  12. What about silicon bining. Will I get better better efficiency with 8 cores 3700X or it should do as 3600X do when downclocked in term of power consumption. It will be ok if the 8 core ryzen 7 takes the same power of ryzen 5 3600. What do you expect?
  13. Nope, I am totally right. If you can prove that I was very wrong, go head. I may learn something from you.
  14. Droping clocks by itself is a problem, this sucks. Idk what I should take. I need a CPU that can boost well like intel. Intel 9900T probably does that peaking high wattage each time required, but since it does that for short duration ot won't suck much power. AMD chips could be better, but I need the benfit of boosting mechanism
  15. I know, but my english is not good enough to explain what I actually meant. the thing is that each game uses the CPU in a different way. Intel CPU adapts to all these needs so if the applications needs less cores but higher clocks, the CPU will decide how to behave unlike AMD which do boost on all cores whenever it can and usually it fails to boost some cores. some old tiles I play make use of 1 core very much ex: from 60% to 100% causing stutters in some cases on AMD but not on intel because intel boosts well (short duration can be enough to deliver the intended demands). what I wanted to say is bellow 4.2 is not enough for me. however most new games uses all cores properly so that high clock speeds of all cores from AMD compared to intel does not matter so that multi core performance does not matter as a value that is higher on AMD CPUs, but the number of cores/threads does.
  16. I mainly play games, but I am very limited in power matter as I am working and playing on batteries, but I won't go for laptops as I don't like fixed non-tweakable stuff and are far more expensive. I really need a very power efficient CPU that will deliver stable frame timings in any game from 2000 to 2020 so I need the power of intel's single core as multicore performance does not matter for me, but numbers of cores and threads does.
  17. so people buy the 9900T becasue it does that boosting mechanism automatically to favour power and looks like making a 9900K works as a 9900T will require changing multipliers individually depending on the workload. does not seem to be achievable, but relatively close. I would go for ryzen 7 3700X 7nm, but that CPU does not make use of power well. it takes 95W to reach 4.15GHz and takes even more to reach the 4.4 GHz while it is advertised at 65W. the biggest issue is that if I disabled PBO and precesion boost. it will stay at 3.6Ghz and it gives a decent efficiency (40W maybe) more than intel 14nm T variants which goes between 50 and 60w, but intel has it's own great boosting mechanism that reaches 4.4GHz for one core on the I9 at bellow 60w and ryzne 7 will stuck at 3.6 could that issue be fixed someway with ryzen?
  18. as far as i know: any changes to multipliers in bios will negate CPU boosting and that will result in very poor performance if it stays at 2.0 Ghz all the time especially in games,is that true?
  19. cool, I can undervolt the 9900K and match it's base clock to 9900T one, but will the CPU perform exactly like a 9900T with max boost clock 4.4? or I have to tweak other things. what I meant is: 9900T has maybe power limits that stop it from having higher clocks or boosting for longer durations so if I turned those off, will the 9900T takes as much power as possible to sustain higher boosting clocks so it reaches the 9900 non-k level of performance? the 8700T has been already tested and it seems to perform like 8700 when limits are disabled, but that is a different CPU.
  20. What are the actual technical differences between I9 CPUs?!?! I mean, I got it, one 35W TDP, other 65 and last 95W. the 9900T base at 2.0 GHz then boost up to 4.4GHz (using 60-60W) depending on demands. not all cores can boost to 4.4 as these clocks goes down when more cores are needed by appliccations, but the 9900K can boost to 5.0 GHz (using freakin 165W to 180W!!). using Intel XTU I can't set the turbo multiplier, right? not even on any bios, right? the actuall question is: can you make a 9900T level of efficiency out of a 9900K while getting the same max clock speed (4.4 of 9900T at 1 core)? will limiting the TDP of a 9900K to 35W makes the 9900K behave like a 9900T if base clock has been lowered or some voltage offsets applied or changing other stuff like long and short duration, maximum current and so on? can you make the 9900T clocks behave like a 9900 with power tweaks? I need some detailed info about required tweaks if that is possible.
  21. Well, this is actually tough question that I found no concluded answer for it. Answer is needed for better knowledge. 7nm AMD should be more efficient than older 12nm or 14nm ones of course, but AMD has pulled the triger of auto overclocking with PBO which boosts the CPU depending on thermals so it takes much more power to give a little more so performance has always been the main focus for Desktop market. Intel today is increasing the power delivery in order to make faster processors as they can't make 14nm more efficient. The good side about that is Intel now has a great experiments with making use of power efficiently (probably by the massive difference between base and boost clock) unlike AMD which can't be as good even with her 7nm CPUs. For that we see Intel having more efficient CPUs in laptop market on 14nm as they couldn't make the 10nm ones as efficient or as fast. Intel has spent alot of time on her 14nm++... for a scientific purposes as they don't compete with AMD at all. regardless marketing and AMDs lower prices, Intel is the future. with that being said it looks hard to determine which architecture is more power efficient for "gaming specifically" (the 7nm AMD or the 14nm Intel). Unfortinately nobody cares about power consumption so it is very hard to gather statistics unless I have all Intel and AMD CPUs and use some gaming benchmarks that count the average cnsumed power using frequency demanding game title as reference. So I wanna hear your expectations and I want to discuss this with ya.
  22. I will include details about the line: the line is connected to local box which is near my house and my shop (shop is down and house up) it also rotated around many other line cables.... the lines like a ball of ropes.... but the terminals seems fine. after that ball of ropes of lines it comes out near a condition fan or under it I should say (old model ones that has fan outside) then it goes beside some metals that forms the shop outside upper shape then it goes inside the shop to the main opening of the building (a whole from the roof to the ground floor and it opens on the basement) usually this whole is wet during winter but that should not do anything to the line then it goes near 2 other RJ45 and 1 12V DC cable near the wall all the way to my modem. I don't know what do you mean by a high powered device. I have been told that DC lines does not effect DSL cable but AC ones do and there is a column of electricity outside near the house but it is 2 or 3 meters away of local box. add to that this problem is still there while electricity cut so no 220 AC anywhere around me. do you think I should change the cable? or remove it then add it again? because I can't do that myself and I have to request service to do so and that will take days if not a month... the line should not effect the latency, right? Why do you think I have way much of latency to my gateway? latency goes down after that it does not seem logical to me tho.... XD (I mentioned that ping plotter is showing PL to around 50% from my device to modem. if that was real it should not be a good thing at all it is not about the 1 ms. About latency spikes I am of course performing this while I am sure not even 1 kb is getting used other than just pinging so it is for sure not because of low bandwidth and I can confirm that even 8 mb connection won't make less latency to me. however the latency should be always 67 ms (to google DNS of course not everywhere) if connection is healthy.
  23. In case you don't know G.dmt modulation is always better than ADSL2+ if you have low bandwidth. Mark this down in your memory you may need this info in the future.
  24. so I am fed up from my internet lags and all kinds of issues that appears. I contacted my ISP and it confirmed that DSL link down issue is not their problem and I should contact local service to check my line. well, I did so someone came and checked the line and it seems to be connected properly to local box and he tried to use the phone, but I am not sure if what he did is enough. however I am still having very bad experience in online games with Packet Loss all over the place. I also demanded to check the gateway and they confirmed that there was no issue in my gateway. in case you don't know to subscribe to ISP in my country you have to wait until gateways dedicated to that ISP become available, however I don't have knowledge about networks. all I can provide here is a details from my modem/router ASUS DSL-N14U and info about trace route. maybe some of you can guess where the hell is my problem. it is not a speed service 512/2048 KB Up/Down, but speed does not matter here and don't suggest changing ISP because I can't....... Notes: 1- (image 1) recent general log at the time connection lost in case it is needed 2- general log continue 3- a routing table. 4- here is DSL log: for SNR margin it gets to 35 ( the pic shows 18 db) and goes down to 0 then DSL link down Line attenuation still always healthy and great I am using G.dmt modulation as it is better than ADSL2+ when it comes to lines that affects delays and as long as my max speed is far less than attainable rate I should be fine I have no idea what power stands for in this log now for the CRC the image shows 0 CRC but sometimes I get CRC detected and connection goes worse and usually when CRC prompted by DSL log I lose DSL connection multiple times in a row before it stabilize at low CRC count then goes 0 again but even if it is 0 now I have much of PL in any online game 5- traceroute to google DNS showing high and varies delays 6-pinging 30 times to google DNS 7- ping plotter reports now here as you can see in the first there is a PL! between me and my router however that is not possible as I used differnt devices with both wired RJ45 and wireless connection and it still showing that, howver I tried different modedm from D-link and this report still the same for first hop x.x.x.33 this is my gateway IP and it shows much delays to 800 ms sometimes (570 in image) after that a bunch of PL reports distributed all the way. however I don't believe that ping plotter is reporting what is actually going on now I need your genius minds