Alright, this little shit is eating almost constantly 1,4-1,45V with stock settings. Don't look at me, it's XFR's fault

Attached: Untitled.jpg (977x639, 243K)

Ryzen 2700X automatically overclocks up to 4.3 whenever it's under load. Why would 4.1 on stock settings be no no?

What's the active power plan on Windows right now?

its normal. amd engineers have said its designed for small bursts of high voltage when boosting. id only worry if it was sitting at that voltage 24/7

XFR doesn't void warranty as it's considered stock settings so if it kills itself you just get a free chip.

Balanced. When I say I'm with stock settings, I mean I never touched:
- Anything CPU-related in the BIOS
- Any software for overclocking, such as Ryzen Master
- Power Management settings in Windows (besides, it's not related to windows, since this behavior persists even on my main GNU/Linux installation).

That's exactly my point. The boost is triggered for the smallest of activities, so the processor ends up staying on 4.2 GHz/1.4V most of the time.

>4.1ghz is impossible unless you won the silicon lottery
um no sweaty

Attached: No.jpg (419x419, 90K)

if youre using hwinfo64, go into the settings and change the polling rate so that it updates far more often tham 2 seconds so you can check it closer to real time. again it boosting to high voltages for a second is done on purpose so thats fine, even if it happens a lot

That's what you get for buying a shitty motherboard.

These are the readings from hwinfo.

Yeah, my guess too would be poor LLC management capabilities from the MoBo.

Attached: HWiNFO64_cqtBVwAjdJ.png (476x595, 44K)

For the second time
This is intended behavior
There is nothing wrong with your system every ryzen runs like this unless you are manually clocking

Don't talk out of your ass when you're not familiar with the subject matter at hand. 4.35ghz is the top XFR state, a frequency only attained on a single core, and for very, very, very brief periods. Most chips cannot be stable and hit their XFR frequency on 4 cores, let alone all 8.

he's saying that the XFR frequency is not the ceiling. He's also probably implying that a 4.1 overclock from stock isn't a problem for the 2700x, as even the 1600 in can come close to 4.1

XFR ≠ turbo boost

This is why intel chips are more expensive and why they're raging infernos. Once you go past 4.0 GHz you need really good silicon bins and be prepared for an exponential rise in heat output all for that sweet sweet massive 5% higher fps in cowadoody and fart night.

Attached: aHR0cDovL21lZGlhLmJlc3RvZm1pY3JvLmNvbS9DLzkvODA1MjU3L29yaWdpbmFsL2ltYWdlMDA3LnBuZw==(1).jpg (755x561, 109K)

That's 4.01, hun. If you'd been luckier you might make it to 4.1.

the polling rate controls how often the censors are updated, so you have to sit and watch it for a few minutes. by default it only updates every 2 seconds so you cant tell how often it is actually hitting that voltage till you change the polling rate

Okay, a little update. I installed the chipset drivers from the MoBo manufacturer site. Now Windows power management has automatically set an "AMD Ryzen™ Balanced" profile, that is distinct from the default "Balanced (recommended)" profile.

the power profile was only used for gen 1 ryzen until windows updated to change the way it parked ryzen cores its no longer needed

My 2700X does 4.1GHz at 1.25v no problem, and considering how much voltage this thing uses whenever not completely idle, I normally leave it locked at that.

is cool n' quiet enabled ? its supposed to down clock when idle

using win10?
community.amd.com/thread/230768

Yes
>From Redstone 3, the Windows Balanced Power Profile now contains the changes that made the Ryzen Balanced Power Profile Unique

Just to be clear this was specifically a windows issue linux shouldn't have any issue if your using current kernel

My ryzen 5 2600X, on my MSI X470 Gaming Plus, is drawing 1.4V minimum on stock settings. It's always between 4-4.2 Ghz

Should be by default, I'll need to check.

Wow, just how unfortunate I'm on Windows 10 LTSB, which is stuck at 1607. Maybe the patch has been installed regardless as a security update? Hope so. Also, I'm running Linux 4.19 because 4.20+ broke WoL capabilities for my nic.

>meanwhile intel gets 5ghz at the same or better voltages with significantly lower latency even at equal clocks

Please, kindly consider

>imagine being so uninformed about a subject that you think clock speed or voltage matter when comparing two completely different cpu architectures

Attached: fgs.png (650x337, 41K)

I ask this, because the AMD chipset drivers install a power plan that makes it look like the CPU is constantly at a high voltage, even though it isn't.
If you installed any AMD drivers, check again to see if the Balanced power plan is still selected.

MOBO makers tend to void AMD or inlet's specs for power and voltage.
example: some 9900k running 100C+ when others at 70c all due to Mobos overvolting
lower the Vcore in the bios.

except that not the case here or for AMD in general
But by all means pretend you know more than the engineers designing the CPU's Motherboards and related software

this is wrong. change the LLC level not vcore.

>4.01 at 1.352V
Lucky faggot

Check if your board has some sort of retarded "auto OC" feature

How many wrong answers can we get in one thread
man Jow Forums has turned into a shithole where people just spout off random advice without having any idea what they are talking about

These are corevid. show the corevoltage, it is above the soc voltage.

just do the needful and buy intel sir we do not have these problems

OP here. As you can see, I already dismissed many of those answers, the majority of replies were actually somewhat useful to figure out what was going on.

Also OP. These are the core voltages.

Attached: HWiNFO64_yaZdhGAp5v.png (476x595, 43K)

>105w Ryzen = 117w
>95w Intel = 170 fucking watts
How THE FUCK does Intel get away with this, and why doesn't AMD push this situation more into the light? I get the whole law avoiding with (((different techniques and definitions))) for measuring and describing TDP, but then the law is flawed and shoukd be changed.

This has to be illegal, i don't care about the turbo v3 level 5 xfr 77.80 workarounds, this is almost double

>gradients AND transparency
what pajeet made this GUI

>No CPU overclocking or monitoring tools directly from the manufacturer
>Tells them to stop overclocking their premium "unlocked" CPU's
>Every part of the chipset and CPU has some vulnerability
>Fanboys willingly brigade any thread involving the competition
THANK YOU BASED INTEL

Attached: 1494122327808.jpg (1315x794, 510K)

>point
>------
>(You)

TDP isn't power consumption or anything like that. It represents a value of how much heat one must dissipate from the chip for it to operate at advertised speeds. 95w is probably enough for it to run at advertised base speed. They realize that people misunderstand TDP though, so they go as low as they can.

>complains about high voltages
>anons tell you to lower voltages in the bios
>they are all wrong!

>made in china
found the problem

They have relatively similar IPC once you negate the CCX and memory latency of the AMD CPU to match Intel's, therefore it's actually very much ok to compare voltages.

>Wow, just how unfortunate I'm on Windows 10 LTSB, which is stuck at 1607
You know LTSC is a thing right?

delete it.

I'll have the time to backup all of my data and format/install LTSC, someday. It's a bit of a pain in the ass.