Discussion AMD Ryzen 3900x apparently being gimped by bad bios that alot if not most reviewers werent even aware of.

[dphotog]

Im curious what the results will be once these issues are fixed and how much we can expect from correct boosted/overclocked cpu

View: https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/cacwf9/psa_ryzen_3000_gaming_performance_is_being_gimped/



BaitForWenches

256 points·4 hours ago

So people don't have to read through the whole thing, this is the part about the boost frequencies. (seems like benchmarks might need to be redone)


The whole story…
During the first three hours of testing of the AMD Ryzen 9 3900X processor, using the X570 AORUS XTREME board, I noticed the problem when PCMark 8 did not pass the first test after 40 minutes (this is a total of ten tests). I noticed WHEA error (Windows Hardware Error Architecture) in HWInfo64 (se this software for PC telemetry, highly suggested).
From there I also decided to pay more attention to HWInfo64 and also checked that the BOOST frequencies of the processor had problems, since it didn’t get to “boost” all its cores to the maximum that it should, which is 4.6 GHz. It reached 4.5 GHz to 4.575 GHz in a pair of cores and the rest of cores to 4.3-4.4 GHz… We used manufacturers chipset driver, we have used press chipsets, as more current chipset driver version, same results.

It seemed strange to me, so I first decided to write to my contact with GIGABYTE USA (Matthew Hurwitz, I thank him for all the time he has put in to find a solution) and showed him the WHEA (PCI Express) errors, as well as the rare behavior of the 3900X boost frequencies.
Midnight (Wednesday) GBT HQ gives us news and according to their tests, the new AGESA code, including NPRP BIOS (BIOS for press) replicated our results in single-core frequencies, BUT, the original BIOS (AGESA 1002, without code introduced NPRP) turbo boost was working well.
With this information, I decided to flash BIOS, the first BIOS released for the X570 AORUS MASTER board and surprise, the boost frequencies were working as they should, even beyond the processor at 4.65 GHz. The WHEA error problem in the PCI Express was still going on, so I kept pressing and trying if the problem was maybe the chipset driver.

 

[AllanGH]

(smile) It's nice to bypass all this early adoption nonsense.

These issues will be resolved soon enough.

 

[valeman2012]

Im curious what the results will be once these issues are fixed and how much we can expect from correct boosted/overclocked cpu

View: https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/cacwf9/psa_ryzen_3000_gaming_performance_is_being_gimped/



BaitForWenches

256 points·4 hours ago

So people don't have to read through the whole thing, this is the part about the boost frequencies. (seems like benchmarks might need to be redone)


The whole story…
During the first three hours of testing of the AMD Ryzen 9 3900X processor, using the X570 AORUS XTREME board, I noticed the problem when PCMark 8 did not pass the first test after 40 minutes (this is a total of ten tests). I noticed WHEA error (Windows Hardware Error Architecture) in HWInfo64 (se this software for PC telemetry, highly suggested).
From there I also decided to pay more attention to HWInfo64 and also checked that the BOOST freque

Im curious what the results will be once these issues are fixed and how much we can expect from correct boosted/overclocked cpu

View: https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/cacwf9/psa_ryzen_3000_gaming_performance_is_being_gimped/



BaitForWenches

256 points·4 hours ago

So people don't have to read through the whole thing, this is the part about the boost frequencies. (seems like benchmarks might need to be redone)


The whole story…
During the first three hours of testing of the AMD Ryzen 9 3900X processor, using the X570 AORUS XTREME board, I noticed the problem when PCMark 8 did not pass the first test after 40 minutes (this is a total of ten tests). I noticed WHEA error (Windows Hardware Error Architecture) in HWInfo64 (se this software for PC telemetry, highly suggested).
From there I also decided to pay more attention to HWInfo64 and also checked that the BOOST frequencies of the processor had problems, since it didn’t get to “boost” all its cores to the maximum that it should, which is 4.6 GHz. It reached 4.5 GHz to 4.575 GHz in a pair of cores and the rest of cores to 4.3-4.4 GHz… We used manufacturers chipset driver, we have used press chipsets, as more current chipset driver version, same results.

It seemed strange to me, so I first decided to write to my contact with GIGABYTE USA (Matthew Hurwitz, I thank him for all the time he has put in to find a solution) and showed him the WHEA (PCI Express) errors, as well as the rare behavior of the 3900X boost frequencies.
Midnight (Wednesday) GBT HQ gives us news and according to their tests, the new AGESA code, including NPRP BIOS (BIOS for press) replicated our results in single-core frequencies, BUT, the original BIOS (AGESA 1002, without code introduced NPRP) turbo boost was working well.
With this information, I decided to flash BIOS, the first BIOS released for the X570 AORUS MASTER board and surprise, the boost frequencies were working as they should, even beyond the processor at 4.65 GHz. The WHEA error problem in the PCI Express was still going on, so I kept pressing and trying if the problem was maybe the chipset driver.

ncies of the processor had problems, since it didn’t get to “boost” all its cores to the maximum that it should, which is 4.6 GHz. It reached 4.5 GHz to 4.575 GHz in a pair of cores and the rest of cores to 4.3-4.4 GHz… We used manufacturers chipset driver, we have used press chipsets, as more current chipset driver version, same results.

It seemed strange to me, so I first decided to write to my contact with GIGABYTE USA (Matthew Hurwitz, I thank him for all the time he has put in to find a solution) and showed him the WHEA (PCI Express) errors, as well as the rare behavior of the 3900X boost frequencies.
Midnight (Wednesday) GBT HQ gives us news and according to their tests, the new AGESA code, including NPRP BIOS (BIOS for press) replicated our results in single-core frequencies, BUT, the original BIOS (AGESA 1002, without code introduced NPRP) turbo boost was working well.
With this information, I decided to flash BIOS, the first BIOS released for the X570 AORUS MASTER board and surprise, the boost frequencies were working as they should, even beyond the processor at 4.65 GHz. The WHEA error problem in the PCI Express was still going on, so I kept pressing and trying if the problem was maybe the chipset driver.

The performance more likely to remain the same. The stability issues can be addressed by AMD/Motherboard makers and Windows probably the one to provide the windows update to fully stabilized the Ryzen 3rd Generation Processors.

 

[DefinitelyNotTom]

Don't know, but I dumbly bought it, even though I'd only occasionally do anything helped by it, such as 4k video editing. Also, one review said the cooler may not be good enough, but other reviews said it is, if you don't OC much, which i am not going to do anyway... I probably "should" get the 3700x, but there's so little performance increase between the 2700x and 3700x that I figured I better get the 12 core to where it would be longer before I get tempted to upgrade again.

Anyway, seems like someone said after the bios update it still is not much different.

 

[CountMike]

Don't know, but I dumbly bought it, even though I'd only occasionally do anything helped by it, such as 4k video editing. Also, one review said the cooler may not be good enough, but other reviews said it is, if you don't OC much, which i am not going to do anyway... I probably "should" get the 3700x, but there's so little performance increase between the 2700x and 3700x that I figured I better get the 12 core to where it would be longer before I get tempted to upgrade again.

Anyway, seems like someone said after the bios update it still is not much different.

I'm waiting for 3800x to make more difference from my 2700x. 12 cores is still too many for 90% applications to make much difference although better IPC and single core performance can partially compensate for that.
I felt more of performance jump (mainly because of faster possible RAM and PBO2) from 1700x although it was on x370 platform to 2700x on x470 than what tests show would be from 2700x to 3700x. Also would most probably had to suffer thru not completely enabled BIOS for some time. It took this long since my MB was released to perfect BIOS for 2nd gen Ryzen.

 

[dorsai]

I noticed there were some large differences in reviews among the various major hardware sites...especially centered around gaming results. Some sites have the 3900x rivaling the 9900k in many games while other show much less performance...others have the 3700x also showing large gains while again others not so much.

Chalk it up to first day reviews and early BIOS releases...things should improve dramatically over the next couple of weeks as BIOS releases get tweaked.

 

[dphotog]

bit of an update for the non believers out there

source: https://twitter.com/andreif7

https://twitter.com/andreif7

 

[tennis2]

Der8auer found the "Max Boost Clock" to be theoretical maximum that AMD found any chiplet to achieve under the best [non-LN2] cooled situations. He tested 12 CPUs and not one of them hit their advertised max boost clocks, even via manual tuning.

I don't think it's bad BIOS. It's shady marketing.

Don't even get me started about their horrible in-house Chipset design.

 

[Deleted member 14196]

(smile) It's nice to bypass all this early adoption nonsense.

These issues will be resolved soon enough.

LOL, you said it.... ahhh, guess they have to wait for non-gimped X570s
it doesn't take smarts to figure that one out or see it coming a mile off.

 

[AllanGH]

Give it a year and all the bugs will be ironed-out, and the current unknowns will be old news.

 

[David_112]

I can believe a bug prevented the CPU for reaching it's designated boost levels, but i'll believe the bios bug held the CPU back on the OC front once i see it.

 

[valeman2012]

LOL, you said it.... ahhh, guess they have to wait for non-gimped X570s
it doesn't take smarts to figure that one out or see it coming a mile off.

They are mostly going patch the stability issues with the 3000 series..the performance would be finally running at "advertised speed". No performance improvement but just restoring the performance to advertised speed.

 

[drea.drechsler]

I can believe a bug prevented the CPU for reaching it's designated boost levels, but i'll believe the bios bug held the CPU back on the OC front once i see it.

Der8auer has some interesting experiences on overclocking Ry3K...

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WXbCdGENp5I&t=928s