Ryzen 9 5900x oc find pbo curve optimizer

[Hypothermia]

I want oc my cpu need advices from begining how to find proper curve optimizer setings etc i am.new in amd overclocking got asus tuff x570 wifi plus full watercooling loop

[filpo]

1 minute ago, Hypothermia said:

I want oc my cpu need advices from begining how to find proper curve optimizer setings etc i am.new in amd overclocking got asus tuff x570 wifi plus full watercooling loop

Even undervolting gives some good gains

 

[PDifolco]

1 minute ago, Hypothermia said:

I want oc my cpu need advices from begining how to find proper curve optimizer setings etc i am.new in amd overclocking got asus tuff x570 wifi plus full watercooling loop

Simpler way to do  :

Look with HWInfo64 which are your "best" cores (they're ranked)

In BIOS do OC by core, put -15 for the 4 best ones and -30 for the others

That should be stable in 99% of cases

 

[adm0n]

15 minutes ago, PDifolco said:

Simpler way to do  :

Look with HWInfo64 which are your "best" cores (they're ranked)

In BIOS do OC by core, put -15 for the 4 best ones and -30 for the others

That should be stable in 99% of cases

 

From what I learned this is not stable in most cases.

[WereCat]

23 minutes ago, adm0n said:

From what I learned this is not stable in most cases.

Agree. 

 

 

IMO, start at - 25.

 

If it crashes drop by -5 if it crashes again, again drop by -5. If its stable, up by 1 until you get instability again then drop by -2 to have a little headroom. 

 

Now you found all core stable CO setting. If you want, you can start doing it again per core but start at -30 and repeat the process. 

 

 

I've settled at -23 offset for daily use. -30 is stable enough for benching but not for daily, I also did not bother with per core. 

[adm0n]

13 minutes ago, WereCat said:

Agree. 

 

 

IMO, start at - 25.

 

If it crashes drop by -5 if it crashes again, again drop by -5. If its stable, up by 1 until you get instability again then drop by -2 to have a little headroom. 

 

Now you found all core stable CO setting. If you want, you can start doing it again per core but start at -30 and repeat the process. 

 

 

I've settled at -23 offset for daily use. -30 is stable enough for benching but not for daily, I also did not bother with per core. 

I would go a bit further and just check with corecycler for a long time, if it is actually stable. Otherwise you might run into very weird problems.

[PDifolco]

28 minutes ago, WereCat said:

Agree. 

 

 

IMO, start at - 25.

 

If it crashes drop by -5 if it crashes again, again drop by -5. If its stable, up by 1 until you get instability again then drop by -2 to have a little headroom. 

 

Now you found all core stable CO setting. If you want, you can start doing it again per core but start at -30 and repeat the process. 

 

 

I've settled at -23 offset for daily use. -30 is stable enough for benching but not for daily, I also did not bother with per core. 

That's for all core CO ?

Because in my experience on a per core basis most cores are stable at -30, only the fastest drop/crash at -25 or less 

[WereCat]

1 hour ago, PDifolco said:

That's for all core CO ?

Because in my experience on a per core basis most cores are stable at -30, only the fastest drop/crash at -25 or less 

All core. 

[freeagent]

-30 pushes the clocks harder, its not undervolting, you are just changing the voltage curve. 

 

On my 5900X I run 240/160/190 all core -25 is what I daily with. I run +175MHz.

[PDifolco]

34 minutes ago, freeagent said:

-30 pushes the clocks harder, its not undervolting, you are just changing the voltage curve. 

 

On my 5900X I run 240/160/190 all core -25 is what I daily with. I run +175MHz.

But that's the whole point of CO

 

[freeagent]

6 minutes ago, PDifolco said:

But that's the whole point of CO

 

I thought the whole point of co was to push clocks in PB.

[PDifolco]

10 minutes ago, freeagent said:

I thought the whole point of co was to push clocks in PB.

That's what I meant, push clocks through lower voltage

[freeagent]

1 hour ago, PDifolco said:

That's what I meant, push clocks through lower voltage

The problem with that is you may not have the current to support those clocks. So while the cpu might look like it’s doing well with somethings, you could be losing performance in others. My 5900X loves power and current. So does my 5600X.. and X3D is just a pussy

[Hypothermia]

And how i can know what of cores are best? And how to check stability with core cycler?

[freeagent]

My 5900X fails core cycler not too far past stock settings, so I just give it the beans with an aggressive curve to back it up. 100% stable for everything, except core cycler.. fuck that program lol

 

But to be fair my 5600X is core cycler stable at PBO +150, so 4800MHz. But I run it at +200 anyways.. no problem.

[Hypothermia]

On 6/4/2023 at 3:51 AM, freeagent said:

My 5900X fails core cycler not too far past stock settings, so I just give it the beans with an aggressive curve to back it up. 100% stable for everything, except core cycler.. fuck that program lol

 

But to be fair my 5600X is core cycler stable at PBO +150, so 4800MHz. But I run it at +200 anyways.. no problem.

Can u guide my with core cycler etc?

 

[freeagent]

1 hour ago, Hypothermia said:

Can u guide my with core cycler etc?

 

Check out this thread:

 

https://www.overclock.net/threads/corecycler-tool-for-testing-curve-optimizer-settings.1777398/

[Acaiv1980]

Very interesting , 

 

mi rig   5900x/tuf b550 pro, hyperx 32 gb 3666 16-16-16-32, Artic luquid freezer II 240 modd with p12MAX fans with puts him on pair with 360model, case is Fractal design meshify II lite with 4 arctic p14 pwm pst fans, PSU Fractal design 860w platinum

 

OC with  185/125/170 +200Mhz  stable setting is with curve optimizer one core is -14, two are -20, rest are -28

 

On cinebench R23 i`m getting 23100 score on multicore, 1620 on single core. Is this decent score, or you think that maybe is more headroom for improvement?