ryzen Ryzen will not overclock.

[Salacious B Crum]

1 hour ago, Fleanuts said:

I'm running windows 10 64 bit 

https://gyazo.com/fcfa7fc4bb3a233d3a2850023a9e3604

The minimum is a % and its set to 100, the max is a number. but i was on power saver mode. so that could help, I know that much. so thanks for that, got it out fo the way instead of in the future.

This probably isn't an answer to your problem but that power setting screen shot does not look like the Ryzen power settings option that was made available go to their website and download the driver for it, it may at least help show more accurate information regarding your system.

[Fleanuts]

29 minutes ago, Zyndo said:

do you maybe have the BCLK set below 100? you could be trying to do something like a 41x multiplier on a 60.00 bclk

bclk is on auto which is 100, should i manually set to 100? or do what you said and do 60x and make it equal 4,1 

[Zyndo]

2 minutes ago, Fleanuts said:

bclk is on auto which is 100, should i manually set to 100? or do what you said and do 60x and make it equal 4,1 

nono i'm not saying you SHOULD run your BCLK that  low, I was theorizing that could be a potential explaination for your symptoms despite your multiplier being set to 41

[Fleanuts]

16 minutes ago, Zyndo said:

nono i'm not saying you SHOULD run your BCLK that  low, I was theorizing that could be a potential explaination for your symptoms despite your multiplier being set to 41

I will try it real quick!

[Zyndo]

4 minutes ago, Fleanuts said:

I will try it real quick!

you do not appear to be listening... turning down your bclk will not help you. I was merely saying if it HAD somehow been turned down you could be experiencing these problems.

[Fleanuts]

1 minute ago, Zyndo said:

you do not appear to be listening... turning down your bclk will not help you. I was merely saying if it HAD somehow been turned down you could be experiencing these problems.

sorry I misread that twice. haha. I wasnt even able to achieve a clock higher than 3850 with the blck lowered. it told me right in the bios. it was limiting me. sorry about that

[tom_w141]

12 hours ago, Zyndo said:

lots of silly and pointless advice going on here. 4,1GHz isn't a "top %" oc for ANY Ryzen.... 4.1 is even within the XFR of the 1800x. 4.1 is barely above the boost clock/XFR of many other Ryzen chips as well 4.1 is barely above the XFR of a R5 1600x, so its not unreasonable to start at 4.1GHz... its literally the first OC number he should try since it boosts 4.0GHz stable on its own stock settings (or he could try 4.0GHz with tighter voltage if that is more his thing). doesn't make any real sense to "overclock" to below your boost clock.

 

Next, you should try to understand why the CPU throttled. If his thermals are reporting correctly (which is definitely a problem with newer platforms) then his temps are well within reason, therefore urging him to reset his overclocks and start from scratch makes no sense. all that is going to do is help get runaway thermals under control. your starting point of 3.6GHz makes no sense, as explained above, and your overclocking guide makes no sense in itself. bumping up MHz slowly and incrementally is a decent idea (but as explained earlier, 4.1GHz really should be his starting point considering the stock performance of his CPU, and starting at 3.6GHz is nonsense) but telling him to tighten his voltages as much as he can before increasing his frequency again literally makes no sense at all. the only time you want to tighten your voltages is when you're at your final overclock number, and you believe that pushing its frequency further is outside of your comfort zone, or if thermals are just getting too high. Tightening your voltages any time before that makes no sense at all.

 

The proper overclock method is find a happy starting point (usually just above your stock settings) and then bump the frequency up until it becomes unstable, then bump up the voltage until its stable, then frequency, then voltage, then frequency, and so on until you reach something you're comfortable with, or you reach your thermal limits (or recommended voltage limits as determined by the manufacturers for 24/7 OC, but I would define this as part of your "comfort zone"). Once you reach the upper limit of your frequency due to comfort or thermal limits, its at this point you tighten your voltage and get it as low as possible without making yourself unstable. I could understand why you think overclocking takes "A LOT OF TIME".... it would definitely take a long ass time doing it the way you're saying it needs to be done lol. Overclocking itself takes not a ton of time, but running your long term stability tests do. You should only need to run those a few times. the way you sound to be doing it.... I mean it must take you weeks lol.

 

Hes not going to break his hardware doing what he did, or doing what I recommended (which is what most people recommend, not sure where you got those extra ideas from).

Firstly no the other advice was correct (albeit 3.6 is a bit low, 3.8 would be a better start point).

 

Next we will cover what XFR is and why its pointless and only exists for marketing:

 

1) All Ryzen CPUs have some XFR, the X models simply denote a higher stock clock and more XFR.

2) XFR only boosts one core for short periods when thermals allow.

3) When preforming an overclock XFR is disabled entirely.

 

Lastly why not start at 4.1? Well as you stated its easy - very wrong. According to silicon lottery who buy CPUs in bulk and resell them based on overclock ability also produce statistics as to what a CPU can do on average. The Ryzen "flagship" 1800X has a 23% chance of achieving a 4.1GHz all core overclock (when you mess with cpu ratio in the ryzen bios you are performing an all core overclock, i.e all cores at the same time at the desired frequency 24/7). So with a 77% chance of failure 4.1 is a terrible starting point to advise. All ryzen cpus are fairly similar and there is a hard wall around 4GHz, for example my 1700 can do 4GHz and my friend's 1800X can do 4.025GHz (£160 price difference with a 25MHz performance difference).

 

 

@Fleanuts

Other advice in this thread has been ok though:

 

- High performance or Ryzen balanced power plan (this is installed on windows by default with latest drivers).

 

- Clean OS install (should not need to be said but often people don't do it...).

 

- Flash the latest BIOS (do this in the BIOS with a USB stick and not in windows).

 

- Start around 3.8GHz, if you manage a cinebench run move up in frequency or if you crash move up in voltage.

 

- Repeat until you can't complete cinebench, however do not exceed 1.45V for a daily use overclock.

 

- In the external digi power menu within the BIOS set load line calibration to level 2 or above (you may need level 4-5 at 4GHz and above) to combat voltage droop.

 

- Run long term stability test (AIDA 64) for a minimum of 15 minutes, 1 hour for near certainty or 24 hours for absolute certainty.

 

- Monitor using HWinfo64 (sensor only mode) its been far more consistent and offers more information than HW monitor or cpu Z.

[Zyndo]

1 minute ago, tom_w141 said:

1) All Ryzen CPUs have some XFR, the X models simply denote a higher stock close and more XFR.

2) XFR only boosts one core for short periods when thermals allow.

3) When preforming an overclock XFR is disabled entirely.

 

1. No one said otherwise so far as I'm aware.

2. not really accurate... but whatever. this thread isn't about XFR anyway so lets move on.

3. of course

 

No one has disputed any of these claims or provided any incentive for you to bring them up. this thread is about his CPU failing to run his instructed settings, not his instructed settings being incapable of stability.

 

6 minutes ago, tom_w141 said:

Lastly why not start at 4.1? Well as you stated its easy - very wrong. According to silicon lottery who buy CPUs in bulk and resell them based on overclock ability also produce statistics as to what a CPU can do on average. The Ryzen "flagship" 1800X has a 23% chance of achieving a 4.1GHz all core overclock (when you mess with cpu ratio in the ryzen bios you are performing an all core overclock, i.e all cores at the same time at the desired frequency 24/7). So with a 77% chance of failure 4.1 is a terrible starting point to advise. All ryzen cpus are fairly similar and there is a hard wall around 4GHz, for example my 1700 can do 4GHz and my friend's 1800X can do 4.025GHz (£160 price difference with a 25MHz performance difference)

I see no mention here of what voltages they were unable to get 4.1GHz at. Kind of a huge factor to ignore. I'm sure that 77% failure rate would be a crapton lower if they pushed the voltages a bit harder or had a bit more cooling on hand.

 

I'm going to go get around all the bullshit that is ensuing in this thread and just get straight to the point of what I was trying to say. everyone keeps cautioning that hes gotta start low and go high...... but why? Get over the stigma you've heard a thousand times and really think about it. WHY does he absolutely need to start low and go high? that is what people recommend rookie overclockers do so that they don't accidentally start too high and break something. 4.1GHz and 1.4V isn't going to break anything. hes fine. IF he is unable to achieve his desired speed of 4.1GHz with any comfortable amount of voltage/thermals.... whats the big deal? the universe doesn't divide by 0 and implode. If hes unable to get his desired results, all he need do is dial back his CPU 100MHz and go again. Its reeeaaaallllly not the end of the world.

 

4.1GHz is a fine starting point. It also has nothing to do with the problems the OP is having in this thread. please try to stay on topic.

34 minutes ago, tom_w141 said:

Start around 3.8GHz, if you manage a cinebench run move up in frequency or if you crash move up in voltage.

 

Repeat until you can't complete cinebench, however do not exceed 1.45V for a daily use overclock

As mentioned above and in other posts. this is not a thread about overclocking guidelines. it doesn't matter what you tell him to set because his hardware isn't running it. gotta figure out his problem before we have this conversation, if he even wants to hear it.

[tom_w141]

10 minutes ago, Zyndo said:

 

1. No one said otherwise so far as I'm aware.

2. not really accurate... but whatever. this thread isn't about XFR anyway so lets move on.

3. of course

 

No one has disputed any of these claims or provided any incentive for you to bring them up. this thread is about his CPU failing to run his instructed settings, not his instructed settings being incapable of stability.

 

I see no mention here of what voltages they were unable to get 4.1GHz at. Kind of a huge factor to ignore. I'm sure that 77% failure rate would be a crapton lower if they pushed the voltages a bit harder or had a bit more cooling on hand.

 

I'm going to go get around all the bullshit that is ensuing in this thread and just get straight to the point of what I was trying to say. everyone keeps cautioning that hes gotta start low and go high...... but why? Get over the stigma you've heard a thousand times and really think about it. WHY does he absolutely need to start low and go high? that is what people recommend rookie overclockers do so that they don't accidentally start too high and break something. 4.1GHz and 1.4V isn't going to break anything. hes fine. IF he is unable to achieve his desired speed of 4.1GHz with any comfortable amount of voltage/thermals.... whats the big deal? the universe doesn't divide by 0 and implode. If hes unable to get his desired results, all he need do is dial back his CPU 100MHz and go again. Its reeeaaaallllly not the end of the world.

 

4.1GHz is a fine starting point. It also has nothing to do with the problems the OP is having in this thread. please try to stay on topic.

As mentioned above and in other posts. this is not a thread about overclocking guidelines. it doesn't matter what you tell him to set because his hardware isn't running it. gotta figure out his problem before we have this conversation, if he even wants to hear it.

Btw 1-3 of the above are all true, I am on the platform since march and have tested extensively. Why don't you run some tests on your ryzen system and post your results? Oh no wait..

 

I'm sure they tried the maximum safe voltage of 1.45V as they are trying to get the most out of these chips because after all they are selling them on as top overclockers. Also you conveniently ignored the personal experience with my 1700 and my friends 1800X having such similar maximums at max safe voltage.

 

I have never ever heard overclocking advice saying start with a low chance and work backwards... Also doing it this way means you don't see how much you are improving your performance run to run.

 

Lastly with regard to his issue yes that's the primary fault which is why he is mentioned from halfway down as that part is intended for him and if he does all those points i'm convinced it will work. From his posts he has sort of implied this isn't a clean install of windows which is what i'm betting the fault is. People really underestimate the problems not doing a clean install when changing the heart of the PC can cause. AMD and Intel use completely different drivers and as such an old OS won't always integrate well with hardware that is vastly different in how it works, for example I know someone whose 1600 would only show 4 cores in windows no matter what he did in the OS or the BIOS, until he did a clean install and now 6 show and work correctly.

[Zyndo]

8 hours ago, tom_w141 said:

Snip

I have more important things to do than trying to teach people who aren't willing to learn. have a good day.

[tom_w141]

13 minutes ago, Zyndo said:

I have more important things to do than trying to teach people who aren't willing to learn. have a good day.

Or that you can't respond lmao but whatever as long as OP resolves their issue  

[Fleanuts]

10 hours ago, tom_w141 said:

Firstly no the other advice was correct (albeit 3.6 is a bit low, 3.8 would be a better start point).

 

Next we will cover what XFR is and why its pointless and only exists for marketing:

 

1) All Ryzen CPUs have some XFR, the X models simply denote a higher stock clock and more XFR.

2) XFR only boosts one core for short periods when thermals allow.

3) When preforming an overclock XFR is disabled entirely.

 

Lastly why not start at 4.1? Well as you stated its easy - very wrong. According to silicon lottery who buy CPUs in bulk and resell them based on overclock ability also produce statistics as to what a CPU can do on average. The Ryzen "flagship" 1800X has a 23% chance of achieving a 4.1GHz all core overclock (when you mess with cpu ratio in the ryzen bios you are performing an all core overclock, i.e all cores at the same time at the desired frequency 24/7). So with a 77% chance of failure 4.1 is a terrible starting point to advise. All ryzen cpus are fairly similar and there is a hard wall around 4GHz, for example my 1700 can do 4GHz and my friend's 1800X can do 4.025GHz (£160 price difference with a 25MHz performance difference).

 

 

@Fleanuts

Other advice in this thread has been ok though:

 

- High performance or Ryzen balanced power plan (this is installed on windows by default with latest drivers).

 

- Clean OS install (should not need to be said but often people don't do it...).

 

- Flash the latest BIOS (do this in the BIOS with a USB stick and not in windows).

 

- Start around 3.8GHz, if you manage a cinebench run move up in frequency or if you crash move up in voltage.

 

- Repeat until you can't complete cinebench, however do not exceed 1.45V for a daily use overclock.

 

- In the external digi power menu within the BIOS set load line calibration to level 2 or above (you may need level 4-5 at 4GHz and above) to combat voltage droop.

 

- Run long term stability test (AIDA 64) for a minimum of 15 minutes, 1 hour for near certainty or 24 hours for absolute certainty.

 

- Monitor using HWinfo64 (sensor only mode) its been far more consistent and offers more information than HW monitor or cpu Z.

I did a bios update through windows so ill do it again through a usb. The problem is i can manage a cinebench run at any frequency right now. i could probably clock the car to 8 billion . it WILL NOT pass 2200mhz because its not using power. it has ridiculously low power consumption while overclocked in bios. Once I solve the issue im fairly confident from all the advice everyone in the thread has thrown around i can overclock it on my own, but as of right now i cant even get to the overclock part of overclocking. @Zyndo

[Fleanuts]

@Zyndo https://gyazo.com/ec03568af2ec6032d0f41dacafc8f4c5

 

 

Another view of my 4.0 at 1.4 

[Zyndo]

21 minutes ago, Fleanuts said:

@Zyndo https://gyazo.com/ec03568af2ec6032d0f41dacafc8f4c5

 

 

Another view of my 4.0 at 1.4 

stress test it. monitoring idle frequencies means very little.

[Fleanuts]

16 minutes ago, Zyndo said:

stress test it. monitoring idle frequencies means very little.

https://gyazo.com/e83c722d71cc43787efd4baad939eb0a 

[Zyndo]

53 minutes ago, Fleanuts said:

https://gyazo.com/e83c722d71cc43787efd4baad939eb0a 

better.... well the only mention I've seen on anything hinting to a fixed 2200MHz on Ryzen revolves around the windows power management settings (if the cause was something else, we should expect to see some kind of variance in your results).... if its not too much of a hassle I would suggest a reinstall of windows. you could also just run stock settings since those seem to be working for you. I have no experience solving this sort of issue or troubleshooting it so I can't really be of much help at this point.

 

Which CPU cooler do you have by the way?

[Fleanuts]

4 minutes ago, Zyndo said:

better.... well the only mention I've seen on anything hinting to a fixed 2200MHz on Ryzen revolves around the windows power management settings (if the cause was something else, we should expect to see some kind of variance in your results).... if its not too much of a hassle I would suggest a reinstall of windows. you could also just run stock settings since those seem to be working for you. I have no experience solving this sort of issue or troubleshooting it so I can't really be of much help at this point.

 

Which CPU cooler do you have by the way?

I have an H55 from corsair, bought the am4 bracket and just swapped it from my old build. I will do a fresh install sometime this week and post the results. For now i can live with stock settings; thank you for all the assistance.

[Salacious B Crum]

Install the latest chipset drivers from AMD's support page its going to help improve performance by preventing core parking.

[Jamuro]

Just now, Fleanuts said:

I have an H55 from corsair, bought the am4 bracket and just swapped it from my old build. I will do a fresh install sometime this week and post the results. For now i can live with stock settings; thank you for all the assistance.

 

I am quessing right now (haven't heard of anything as stubborn as your issue so far) ...

But could you do us a favour and reset your cpu to stock settings and then change only the base clock (should be at 100mhz per default) or the multiplier. (not the voltage since that also depends on the load)

 

Just by a tiny amount btw.

I want to see if your system even takes ANY changes into account or immediatly boots in what i can only assume is a "save mode".

 

My theory right now is that your system actually is failing to boot the oc and has a profile clocked at the 2,2 ghz which it uses to achieve even post.

 

(How many times do you hear your fans "restarting" after your oc changes? (if it's a crapton like 5 times then it would more or less confirm a failed post imo)

 

[Fleanuts]

11 minutes ago, Jamuro said:

 

I am quessing right now (haven't heard of anything as stubborn as your issue so far) ...

But could you do us a favour and reset your cpu to stock settings and then change only the base clock (should be at 100mhz per default) or the multiplier. (not the voltage since that also depends on the load)

 

Just by a tiny amount btw.

I want to see if your system even takes ANY changes into account or immediatly boots in what i can only assume is a "save mode".

 

My theory right now is that your system actually is failing to boot the oc and has a profile clocked at the 2,2 ghz which it uses to achieve even post.

 

(How many times do you hear your fans "restarting" after your oc changes? (if it's a crapton like 5 times then it would more or less confirm a failed post imo)

 

Oc'ing to 3.7 worked. Oc'ing to 3.8 immediately brought me down to 2200. So thats interesting. @Zyndo

 

 

*EDIT* 

My fans do not rev off and on during the reboots. it starts up in one go. there is no issue with it starting and failing.

Edited May 15, 2017 by Fleanuts

[Jamuro]

Just now, Fleanuts said:

Oc'ing to 3.7 worked. Oc'ing to 3.8 immediately brought me down to 2200. So thats interesting. @Zyndo

 

 

*EDIT* 

My fans do not rev off and on during the reboots. it starts up in one go. there is no issue with it starting and failing.

 

Okay good ... well bad actually, but it seems we have at least a possible culprit here.

The 3,7 oc was there a voltage change?

 

From what you have showed us, your thermals are fine but your power draw is shoddy at best.

Is by any chance your power supply unit almost capped?

 

Or is it a quite old one?

 

Otherwise it's most likley the mobo that fails to draw the power needed.

This could mean one of 2 things.

 

1. mobo is defunkt and needs to get swapped

2. your system didn't recognise the mobo change or didn't manage a clean install. (hence why it's almost mandatory to do a clean install whenever you switch your mobo)

[Fleanuts]

Just now, Jamuro said:

 

Okay good ... well bad actually, but it seems we have out culprit.

The 3,7 oc was there a voltage change on your part?

 

From what you have showed us, your thermals are fine but your power draw is shoddy at best.

Is by any chance your power supply unit almost capped?

 

Or is it a quite old one?

My psu is 2 years old and is a 750 watt corsair. Is there a way to test its output while in the PC? 

[Jamuro]

Just now, Fleanuts said:

My psu is 2 years old and is a 750 watt corsair. Is there a way to test its output while in the PC? 

 

the only way i know of is by freeing up power and checking if the oc suddenly goes higher.

Do you have an old graphics card with less power draw or does your board have an onboard chip?

 

If so switch to that and check.

 

Or if your graphics card takes 2 power connectors take one off and it should run in low power mode. (i think at least most nvidia cards can do that)

 

 

But if you don't think that the psu is the issue (or can't realy play around with it much) then go to your mobo manufacturers site and download the chipset driver (if you haven't already)

 

 

but again i am quessing here more or less ... so chances are high that you ll need to do a clean install

[Fleanuts]

2 hours ago, Jamuro said:

 

the only way i know of is by freeing up power and checking if the oc suddenly goes higher.

Do you have an old graphics card with less power draw or does your board have an onboard chip?

 

If so switch to that and check.

 

Or if your graphics card takes 2 power connectors take one off and it should run in low power mode. (i think at least most nvidia cards can do that)

 

 

But if you don't think that the psu is the issue (or can't realy play around with it much) then go to your mobo manufacturers site and download the chipset driver (if you haven't already)

 

 

but again i am quessing here more or less ... so chances are high that you ll need to do a clean install

Clean install did not work, i already have updated chipset from AMD. 

[Jamuro]

Just now, Fleanuts said:

Clean install did not work, i already have updated chipset from AMD. 

 

Hopefully someone else has a solution for you, but if not ...

 

Well i would return the mobo then.

Not that i can guarantee that it's causing the issue, but the only step left i can see is to start swapping components.

And overall it looks like for one reason or another your cpu isn't getting the voltage it needs.

 

If you still have another psu you can try that otherwise you'll have to return stuff one by one in the hopes of guessing the right one.

 

You can ofc just give up and use the default settings, but honestly you paid good money for hardware that should support a decent overclock.