Question Thoughts on this Ryzen software?

https://hothardware.com/news/clocktuner-optimization-app-amd-ryzen-zen-2-cpus

As the title suggests, thoughts on this? Will it be worth it?
There are a lot of settings in BIOS unavailable to user and much is left to inner algorithms mostly based on core temperatures which don't have visible sensors available to BIOS. In addition, windows and other OSs are not able to use individual cores efficiently as not all cores could be same and identical. If this SW can remedy some of those concerns, adjust individual parameters beyond BIOS and OS, it will be successful. I view of 1usmus's track record I believe it will do some good. Will see tomorrow when it's released to general public.
 
Reactions: kurdtnz
Well, Ive only just started playing around with it but have managed to get an all core speed of 4300mhz at 1.25v at 53 degrees Celsius.
I found out that my 3700x has CCX0 that is 25MHz less capable than CCX1 according to this program. After turning off PBO and all other turbo settings in BIOS, program set it to max 4.2GHz all cores @ 1.275v hitting max 54c at CB R20 but maintained CB score within 1-2% less than with PBO on.
With manual OC at 4.3GHz which was most I could get with very good stability but at cost of 1.35v and 72c max temps.
Average CB r20 score ( 5 runs) 4978 (PBO only 5017)
At manual OC at 4.3GHz CB r20 score was 5220 points.
My CPU was one from first runs so I expected a bit higher voltages than later ones.
I wish author payed some more attention to GUI as programs window is not scalable and at 1080p with windows scaling at more than 125% it overruns screen hiding some parts.
 
Reactions: kurdtnz

kurdtnz

Prominent
Feb 24, 2020
652
88
490
7
The issue Ive had, is where he says the ''CPPC tags'' are next to the core frequencies, they only read 100. He says on page 6 on the user manual, ''and the core tags should not have "100," and then that to fix this,I should '' and if the kernel tags look incorrect, clear the System log and reboot the system.'' Which I have no idea how to do?
 
https://hothardware.com/news/clocktuner-optimization-app-amd-ryzen-zen-2-cpus

As the title suggests, thoughts on this? Will it be worth it?
It's probably good for a 'lazy' overclocker, especially since the author seemed to be interested in keeping the ending vcore in a relatively safe range. That means the overclocks are limited.

It's strength is it works using by-CCX/CCD overclocks. So the real benefit looks to be for ThreadRipper owners, and to a lesser extent 3900 and 3950, as it makes it easy to balance thermal load on multiple CCD's and CCX's. A TR has so many cores and CCD's available yet you don't really need to overclock all of them. So only getting the best CCD's involved will give good performance for most workloads. The problem always was finding that balance: this makes it much easier, although it's time consuming.
 
Last edited:
The issue Ive had, is where he says the ''CPPC tags'' are next to the core frequencies, they only read 100. He says on page 6 on the user manual, ''and the core tags should not have "100," and then that to fix this,I should '' and if the kernel tags look incorrect, clear the System log and reboot the system.'' Which I have no idea how to do?
In Cortana Search type 'Event Viewer'. Open the Event Viewer applet.

Expand the ">Windows Logs" item and right click on the System log. Select 'clear log'.

You might click on it first and peruse the events it has recorded. Some may seem scary, but don't worry. Windows is constantly throwing errors and recovering from them. All it does is illustrate just how much of a "house of cards" Windows really can be.
 
Reactions: kurdtnz

kurdtnz

Prominent
Feb 24, 2020
652
88
490
7
In Cortana Search type 'Event Viewer'. Open the Event Viewer applet.

Expand the ">Windows Logs" item and right click on the System log. Select 'clear log'.

You might click on it first and peruse the events it has recorded. Some may seem scary, but don't worry. Windows is constantly throwing errors and recovering from them. All it does is illustrate just how much of a "house of cards" Windows really can be.
Big thanks @drea.drechsler ,it has worked!
 
Just to pick your brain even further @drea.drechsler , exactly what do they mean? I read it has something to do with how good those individual cores are, is it the higher the number the better? (mine range from 116-130)
I've not used it...i really only watched Linus' video where he reviewed it! It's a good watch, as most any of Linus's vids are. He always makes it entertaining!

But the number seems to be a rating of core quality, I think higher is better but how so I'm not sure. I know you can get a simple ranking in HWInfo64...both how Ryzen views it (for overclocking purposes) and how Windows uses it for core scheduling of threads. They're different because the Windows scheduler is 'architecture aware' and will keep a thread on core/cores that share resources (cache) as much as possible when moving it around to even out thermal loading.
 
Reactions: kurdtnz
It's probably good for a 'lazy' overclocker, especially since the author seemed to be interested in keeping the ending vcore in a relatively safe range. That means the overclocks are limited.

It's strength is it works using by-CCX/CCD overclocks. So the real benefit looks to be for ThreadRipper owners, and to a lesser extent 3900 and 3950, as it makes it easy to balance thermal load on multiple CCD's and CCX's. A TR has so many cores and CCD's available yet you don't really need to overclock all of them. So only getting the best CCD's involved will give good performance for most workloads. The problem always was finding that balance: this makes it much easier, although it's time consuming.
What is this overclocking software you speak of? The software this thread pertains to is an optimizing software and not overclocking.
 
Reactions: kurdtnz
I've always felt 'overclocking' and 'optimizing' are synonymous undertakings, so to me it's pure semantics. But curiously, I don't know if you do but Ryzenmaster is considered an 'overclocking software'. 1Usmus calls it an 'optimizing' software, but it's diddling with clock and voltage settings using Ryzenmaster.
Very true. I guess it would come down to opinion.

I don't like Ryzen Master so that's why I'm hesitant on trying out this software.
 

kurdtnz

Prominent
Feb 24, 2020
652
88
490
7
I see some people with certain processers have been having a few issues with the software and the developer is releasing a hotfix for it later. Mine's been running really well.
 
It is good monitoring software...but it doesn't run with CPU virtualization enabled. Sad, but doubtless necessary.
Could be something peculiar with you BIOS or MB, RM works fine with SVM enabled in my case. I'm using VmWare workstation practically all the time.
Anyway, I'm giving up on CTR for now, It's not doing much more than I can set myself thru BIOS and 1usmus Power Plan, actually 2 of those plans but set differently. one with Min/max CPU settings at 5/100% and one at 5/50% where second one limits CPU to 2200MHz I use when no particular performance is required.
 
Reactions: kurdtnz
Could be something peculiar with you BIOS or MB, RM works fine with SVM enabled in my case. I'm using VmWare workstation practically all the time.
Anyway, I'm giving up on CTR for now, It's not doing much more than I can set myself thru BIOS and 1usmus Power Plan, actually 2 of those plans but set differently. one with Min/max CPU settings at 5/100% and one at 5/50% where second one limits CPU to 2200MHz I use when no particular performance is required.
Yah...I found it was the version of RM i had. I got the updated pkg. from the link on Guru3d (where I got 1Usmus' 'optimizer') and it works with SVM enabled now!

I found CTR similar: after running it, I just got the same settings I'd come to when I was experimenting with a fixed OC: 4025Mhz, 1.275V. The difference was I spent about 2 weeks of frustration, off and on, experimenting LOL . It would have been much faster to use CTR and less frustrating. And I do like that it starts off with a bias for no more than 1.275V, much safer than the 1.35-1.375V people (misguidedly) want to use with Ryzen fixed OC's.
 
Last edited:

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS