I'd like to optimize my PC...

[RevGAM]

Please look at my profile for my setup. I would like to undervolt my CPU and learn what else I can do to optimize its performance.

https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/100148532?

[PcBeExpensive]

25 minutes ago, RevGAM said:

Please look at my profile for my setup. I would like to undervolt my CPU and learn what else I can do to optimize its performance.

https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/100148532?

Undervolting the GPU is also pretty good with AMD cards.

[RevGAM]

3 minutes ago, PcBeExpensive said:

Undervolting the GPU is also pretty good with AMD cards.

I'm going to need instructions for undervolting both. Can you link me to them?

[PcBeExpensive]

3 hours ago, RevGAM said:

I'm going to need instructions for undervolting both. Can you link me to them?

sure, do you have Adrenaline?

Don't know if these are very good videos, I think the first one is decent but not sure about the second one. If they are both terrible search up 'How to undervolt AMD GPU' or 'How to undervolt Intel CPU'.

[Sawa Takahashi]

2 hours ago, PcBeExpensive said:

Don't know if these are very good videos, I think the first one is decent but not sure about the second one. If they are both terrible search up 'How to undervolt AMD GPU' or 'How to undervolt Intel CPU'.

You should take a look at JayZ2Cents channel. There's at least a video for AMD GPUs and probably a few videos for Intel CPUs too.

 

But my question is why do you need to overclock ? Stock settings should be acceptable for the hardware you have.

[PcBeExpensive]

27 minutes ago, Sawa Takahashi said:

You should take a look at JayZ2Cents channel. There's at least a video for AMD GPUs and probably a few videos for Intel CPUs too.

 

But my question is why do you need to overclock ? Stock settings should be acceptable for the hardware you have.

Free extra performance? Why would you not. Also were talking about undervolting.

[RevGAM]

6 hours ago, PcBeExpensive said:

sure, do you have Adrenaline?

Don't know if these are very good videos, I think the first one is decent but not sure about the second one. If they are both terrible search up 'How to undervolt AMD GPU' or 'How to undervolt Intel CPU'.

I did like the first video suggested, 2400 MHz and 1100 mV and the Superposition score was pretty low:

Compare to default settings: 9890, and the watts only decreased 10W.
After changing it to 2441 and 1090, I didn't have any power savings but my score went to 10102

 

Based on the Aussie's results, it seems like my XFX Speedster Merc 319 6800 XT is a lot better than what he's got...?

 

I'm not sure what I can do to get that score up more and decrease power consumption - I didn't see any problems other than that switching screens during the modified settings run caused the benchmark run to crash. So, I dropped it to 1050 mV and upped the frequency to 2520 MHz.

But power consumption was almost as high as the default settings. I have to go to work, but I will try playing with the settings again after work.

4 hours ago, Sawa Takahashi said:

You should take a look at JayZ2Cents channel. There's at least a video for AMD GPUs and probably a few videos for Intel CPUs too.

 

But my question is why do you need to overclock ? Stock settings should be acceptable for the hardware you have.

As I said, I want to improve the performance. I also want to reduce power consumption.

3 hours ago, PcBeExpensive said:

Free extra performance? Why would you not. Also were talking about undervolting.

What's the difference between overclocking and upping the frequency?

[GarlicDeliverySystem]

9 minutes ago, RevGAM said:

and the Superposition score was pretty low:

I haven't watched the video, but from the screenshots I wonder why you think this is low? what is the comparison, because the section from the leaderboard shows 6900XT and Ryzen 7 entries, while you are using a 6800XT on an intel platform. So not necessarily comparable.

 

11 minutes ago, RevGAM said:

Compare to default settings: 9890, and the watts only decreased 10W.
After changing it to 2441 and 1090, I didn't have any power savings but my score went to 10102

Did you do multiple runs on those? Because I don't know what the variance of the results is, so not sure how significant 9899 vs 9890 really is. 9890 vs 10102 I can see, but would still be nice to see what the run to run variance is.

 

13 minutes ago, RevGAM said:

As I said, I want to improve the performance. I also want to reduce power consumption.

4 hours ago, PcBeExpensive said:

There rarely is such a thing as free lunch. While you can get lucky with the silicon lottery, I would either focus on maintaining the performance level while reducing power consumption, or go for more performance. Only if you are cooling limited and your voltages are way higher than necessary will you get more performance and less power consumption, at least as far as I understand how modern GPUs work with thermal and power budgets etc.

[RevGAM]

35 minutes ago, GarlicDeliverySystem said:

haven't watched the video, but from the screenshots I wonder why you think this is low? what is the comparison, because the section from the leaderboard shows 6900XT and Ryzen 7 entries, while you are using a 6800XT on an intel platform. So not necessarily comparable.

Superposition only taxes the GPU, so the CPU isn't relevant. Also, the top 2 scores listed are 6800 and the top score is a 10th gen Intel. 

35 minutes ago, GarlicDeliverySystem said:

Did you do multiple runs on those? Because I don't know what the variance of the results is, so not sure how significant 9899 vs 9890 really is. 9890 vs 10102 I can see, but would still be nice to see what the run to run variance is.

No, I didn't have time.

35 minutes ago, GarlicDeliverySystem said:

There rarely is such a thing as free lunch. While you can get lucky with the silicon lottery, I would either focus on maintaining the performance level while reducing power consumption, or go for more performance. Only if you are cooling limited and your voltages are way higher than necessary will you get more performance and less power consumption, at least as far as I understand how modern GPUs work with thermal and power budgets etc.

As indicated, I have no experience with undervolting. Also, I have never OCed. Watching the changes, it seemed to me that the increase of frequency was causing the increase in watts, so thanks

[GarlicDeliverySystem]

32 minutes ago, RevGAM said:

Also, the top 2 scores listed are 6800 and the top score is a 10th gen Intel. 

No, they aren't. They list "RX 6800/ 6800XT/ 6900XT", which probably doesn't mean they used all three at the same time, but that whatever software was used to capture the hardware couldn't distinguish between the three.

So likely those entries were 6900XT as well, which would make sense given the scores are within the range for the other 6900XTs.

[PcBeExpensive]

1 hour ago, GarlicDeliverySystem said:

There rarely is such a thing as free lunch. While you can get lucky with the silicon lottery, I would either focus on maintaining the performance level while reducing power consumption, or go for more performance. Only if you are cooling limited and your voltages are way higher than necessary will you get more performance and less power consumption, at least as far as I understand how modern GPUs work with thermal and power budgets etc.

Overclocking and Undervolting are free performance?? If done right you can get extra FPS/performance out of the card.

[GarlicDeliverySystem]

29 minutes ago, PcBeExpensive said:

Overclocking and Undervolting are free performance?? If done right you can get extra FPS/performance out of the card.

yes, if done right.

What I was trying to say was that getting more performance and less power consumption at the same time is more of a stretch goal, considering that overclocking usually entails higher and not lower power consumption.

So with higher clocks etc. for more performance you get more power consumption, especially as you usually increase the voltages to get to higher clocks, instead of decreasing them.

 

At least that is my understanding?

 

Edit: I might have used the wrong idiom, better would have likely been "have your cake and eat it too"

 

[RevGAM]

2 hours ago, GarlicDeliverySystem said:

No, they aren't. They list "RX 6800/ 6800XT/ 6900XT", which probably doesn't mean they used all three at the same time, but that whatever software was used to capture the hardware couldn't distinguish between the three.

So likely those entries were 6900XT as well, which would make sense given the scores are within the range for the other 6900XTs.

I doubt it, especially the 10th gen.

[GarlicDeliverySystem]

20 minutes ago, RevGAM said:

I doubt it, especially the 10th gen.

Why, what am I missing?

[RevGAM]

It doesn't matter. We can speculate all we want. 

[Sawa Takahashi]

6 hours ago, RevGAM said:

As I said, I want to improve the performance. I also want to reduce power consumption.

There's nothing wrong with what you want but in my experience the gains are minimal for recent hardware. Undervolting may be an exception but be gentle so your computer still run in the stability zone.

As for the free performance of overclocking, I say it is not worth the risks. A few FPS is not worth crashes and reduced longevity of hardware.

Just my opinion, feel free to thing and act otherwise

[RevGAM]

2 hours ago, Sawa Takahashi said:

There's nothing wrong with what you want but in my experience the gains are minimal for recent hardware. Undervolting may be an exception but be gentle so your computer still run in the stability zone.

As for the free performance of overclocking, I say it is not worth the risks. A few FPS is not worth crashes and reduced longevity of hardware.

Just my opinion, feel free to thing and act otherwise

Thanks. I only plan on undervolting the CPU since the margins are too small.  My GC seems to be stronger than I expected. 

[RevGAM]

I dropped the frequency back to 2400, and decreased the voltage to 1040mV.

Wattage was between 212-222W.

 

I went crazy and dropped the voltage to 950, which resulted in slow drawing of the loading screen, and then Adrenalin and Superposition crashed. I tried again at 1,000 mV. Wattage was in the 190s most of the time.

[RevGAM]

So, to undervolt my CPU, which do I use: Actual VRM Core Voltage (manual or offset?), or Global Core SVID Voltage?

And by how much?

[PcBeExpensive]

14 hours ago, GarlicDeliverySystem said:

yes, if done right.

What I was trying to say was that getting more performance and less power consumption at the same time is more of a stretch goal, considering that overclocking usually entails higher and not lower power consumption.

So with higher clocks etc. for more performance you get more power consumption, especially as you usually increase the voltages to get to higher clocks, instead of decreasing them.

 

At least that is my understanding?

 

Edit: I might have used the wrong idiom, better would have likely been "have your cake and eat it too"

 

Sure it's a stretch but it's not too difficult if you spend some time on it.

[RevGAM]

So how do I underclock my CPU?

[RevGAM]

I seem to have my computer at the best I can do with it.
CPU Core Voltage Offset -1.2mV

GPU voltage: 1060

GPU frequency: 2420 MHz

 

Now that I've done that, destroyed Asus Armoury Crate, updated all my drivers and BIOS, I can restart my fan testing...From 0. Unless, that is, someone has suggestions on how to further optimize my PC!