5900x undervolting overclocking

[DG House]

hey lads

has someone a 5900x undervolted overclocked

i like to have a good starting point to find the most efficient Watt/MHz for my silicon

 

 

[Shimejii]

The main question is what exactly are you trying to achieve by doing this?

[Skiiwee29]

7 minutes ago, DG House said:

hey lads

has someone a 5900x undervolted overclocked

i like to have a good starting point to find the most efficient Watt/MHz for my silicon

 

 

You should actually just enable PBO2 and undervolt that. With my 5900x I get an all core of about 4.625 and single or 2 cores over 5ghz as needed with this method. 

 

Follow this guide/tutorial.

 

 

[DG House]

5 minutes ago, Shimejii said:

The main question is what exactly are you trying to achieve by doing this?

to get the most perfomance for the Watts it draws

for example, my old 3600 did 4GHz all Core for 1,069 V (nice) without being unstable at all

its the most power efficient by performance on my silicon though out my testing

[DG House]

7 minutes ago, Skiiwee29 said:

You should actually just enable PBO2 and undervolt that. With my 5900x I get an all core of about 4.625 and single or 2 cores over 5ghz as needed with this method. 

 

Follow this guide/tutorial.

 

 

thanks for that but i already saw it, and it kinda misses my intentions

im gonna test it with PBO2 and AMD RM to see what more fitting

[Skiiwee29]

17 minutes ago, DG House said:

thanks for that but i already saw it, and it kinda misses my intentions

im gonna test it with PBO2 and AMD RM to see what more fitting

Then what is it you're trying to accomplish? Anything else and you're limiting the potential of your CPU and what it can do. 

[LIGISTX]

1 hour ago, DG House said:

hey lads

has someone a 5900x undervolted overclocked

i like to have a good starting point to find the most efficient Watt/MHz for my silicon

 

 

I mean.... thats sort of how overclocking works. You have to figure out where your specific chip lands on the scale of total turd to golden sample.... no one else can do that for you.

 

Overclocking takes time to get it dialed in just right; the 10700k in my sig took a solid 1.5 weeks to get dialed in perfectly, and the 9900k before it took about as long, 8700k before that, 6700k, 4700, 3770k, 2700k, i7 920, e6750, and Pentium D I forget the model number before that.

 

It takes time to dial it in. I don't know as much about AMD and how they respond to voltage and frequency, but if they typically are able to run faster with an undervolt, start with stock volts and see how far you can push it, then start dialing the voltage down. If things get unstable, either up the voltage or drop the clocks. You will pretty quickly get a sense of where the chip falls and will be able to adjust your target accordingly.

 

I understand what you're after, a good starting point. Totally get it, and that is where I start as well when I start learning a new platform. But I pretty much guarantee a few quick googles will provide plenty of guides for what others were able to get on their chips. You just have to try and figure out from all of the different sources of data what seems to be the middle ground and start there, and hope your chip is better than average. That is why it takes a few weeks to get a OC dialed, there is usually 4-5 days and many hours of reaching and watching videos, followed by 4-5 days of trial and error quickly learning the chips capabilities, testing for stability, dialing it in better, etc. 

[DG House]

1 hour ago, LIGISTX said:

I mean.... thats sort of how overclocking works. You have to figure out where your specific chip lands on the scale of total turd to golden sample.... no one else can do that for you.

exacly, thats why im asking for a educated starting point

 

1 hour ago, LIGISTX said:

Overclocking takes time to get it dialed in just right; the 10700k in my sig took a solid 1.5 weeks to get dialed in perfectly, and the 9900k before it took about as long, 8700k before that, 6700k, 4700, 3770k, 2700k, i7 920, e6750, and Pentium D I forget the model number before that.

 

It takes time to dial it in. I don't know as much about AMD and how they respond to voltage and frequency, but if they typically are able to run faster with an undervolt, start with stock volts and see how far you can push it, then start dialing the voltage down. If things get unstable, either up the voltage or drop the clocks. You will pretty quickly get a sense of where the chip falls and will be able to adjust your target accordingly.

 

im gonna use multiple tools to find the sweet spot

 

1 hour ago, LIGISTX said:

I understand what you're after, a good starting point. Totally get it, and that is where I start as well when I start learning a new platform. But I pretty much guarantee a few quick googles will provide plenty of guides for what others were able to get on their chips. You just have to try and figure out from all of the different sources of data what seems to be the middle ground and start there, and hope your chip is better than average. That is why it takes a few weeks to get a OC dialed, there is usually 4-5 days and many hours of reaching and watching videos, followed by 4-5 days of trial and error quickly learning the chips capabilities, testing for stability, dialing it in better, etc. 

as i got my old 3600 i found plenty of charts and diagramms of OC guides, but not with my new 5900

 

i also have to integrate my Moba, CPU, Cooler and my Latency tighted RAM into the settings

that gonna be a lot of work, but it will be worth for gaming and specaily productive workloads over the years of use

[jwwagner25]

as others have said. You already have your starting point. it's turning on pbo2 and undervolting. that will get best overall result. unless you want to sacrifice single thread perf and do a simple all core OC locking the frequency at say, 4.7 or 8. Which again would be pretty dumb unless you happen to be constantly using CPU for heavy 24/7 task. And hope you have great cooling. It's not more complicated than that. 

[DG House]

ok, im just gonna try it next year and see what i can do

thanks to all contributers

btw. it will bee cooled by a Noctura U12A chromax.black

[Bitter]

If you're going for the highest watt/flop efficiency it will not be found at the highest clock speed attainable as there's a big drop off as clocks increase and power use increases. Getting peak performance basically also ensures peak power draw. Peak efficiency will probably be with boost turned off and a heavy undervolt.

I know my Zen+ experience isn't directly translatable to Zen3 but with PBO tuning and undervolting I was able to get my 2700X to run 4.0-4.1 all core and run 4.3-4.4 single core but the all core power consumption was 180W with an average idle power draw of 45W. I turned boost off and actually reduced my undervolt somewhat and it runs at 90W all core 3.7Ghz for about a 20% drop in Cinebench score. 20% less peak performance for 50% less peak power use, idle is now around 18-20W as well which is also a 50% reduction. Nothing I do actually needs that peak performance and it's simple enough to turn it all back on again.  If you want max efficiency you're not going to get peak performance.

[YoungBlade]

3 hours ago, Bitter said:

If you're going for the highest watt/flop efficiency it will not be found at the highest clock speed attainable as there's a big drop off as clocks increase and power use increases. Getting peak performance basically also ensures peak power draw. Peak efficiency will probably be with boost turned off and a heavy undervolt.

I know my Zen+ experience isn't directly translatable to Zen3 but with PBO tuning and undervolting I was able to get my 2700X to run 4.0-4.1 all core and run 4.3-4.4 single core but the all core power consumption was 180W with an average idle power draw of 45W. I turned boost off and actually reduced my undervolt somewhat and it runs at 90W all core 3.7Ghz for about a 20% drop in Cinebench score. 20% less peak performance for 50% less peak power use, idle is now around 18-20W as well which is also a 50% reduction. Nothing I do actually needs that peak performance and it's simple enough to turn it all back on again.  If you want max efficiency you're not going to get peak performance.

Yep, I've found for my 5900X that the max efficiency window is around the level of the OEM-only 5900. Setting power limits to PPT 88W, TDC 60A, and EDC 90A (the defaults for the non-X part) gives about 85% of the all-core performance at just 61% of the power draw when combined with a Curve Optimizer per-core undervolt.

[Bitter]

9 hours ago, YoungBlade said:

Yep, I've found for my 5900X that the max efficiency window is around the level of the OEM-only 5900. Setting power limits to PPT 88W, TDC 60A, and EDC 90A (the defaults for the non-X part) gives about 85% of the all-core performance at just 61% of the power draw when combined with a Curve Optimizer per-core undervolt.

Zen CAN be very watt efficient.