AMD wasn't kidding when they said efficiency was way better, even if they defaulted to high power for the desktop models. What this tells me is that the laptop chips are going to be absolutely killer
Yeah, they just pushed their CPUs to the max to make it looks more impressive on marketing just like how Intel pushed the i9 12900K to make it be slightly better than the R9 5950X at the cost of double the power consumption. It's quite cool that we can make then super efficient if we want to.
Once tweaked for realistic performance, there's not much uplift with this series. Productivity would be the only reason to even consider one. This is a pointless release by AMD.
@AmpEdition If you tweak the chip to run a reasonable temp that doesn't require a high-end liquid cooler then the performance loss puts in barely above last gen(plenty of videos that have undervolted with tests) . Add in the total cost of upgrading to this platform and this is a pointless release. Last gen barely loses performance and costs half as much. If this were Intel, I bet you'd be bashing them all day.
I've built a custom water cooler solution for my R9 7950x. Even so, temperatures were INSANELY high. After following your tutorial, I was able to achieve max 62ºC and min 45ºC. Thanks!
Yo phil, gonna piggyback on your comment. Another large problem that I think wasn't touch upon is that you can't possibly measure temperature at every spot of the die. It's just not viable, you can I guess run extensive tests on the silicon and have multiple temperature sensors per core and send back the hotspot only to avoid damaging the die. Well in the case with my 7200U laptop, it simply died from overheating at 100*C after 3 years of regular mixed use;
@@niewazneniewazne1890 maybe you didn't change the thermal paste or maybe you are using it on top of a soft surface that blocks the intake and exhaust? Probably the damaged parts are not the cpu but maybe the VRM or other parts that is overheated
@@siontheodorus1501 I changed the thermal paste, the external gpu temps went up/clocks went down. Cpu temps went a bit down the clocks got +400mhz higher.
Great tutorial! Today I set in BIOSE my Ryzen 7 7700X to a locked frequency of 4.95 GHz at 0.95v. Consumption during gaming is 45-50w (from original 90w) temperature went from 95C to 57C under full load. Maximum satisfaction thank you :)
That's impressive. The best I got was 4.8ghz at 1.05v. Haven't trying increasing the clock, but I'm pretty sure it won't be stable. I'm happy, the silence is well worth the 5% performance hit.
Europeans this winter .... 'Come children gather around the CPU, its nice and toasty warm'...' Honey grab the tea kettle we can place it on the heatsink and make some tea'
Bryan this is a real help for European PC owners. As gas and electric bills have gone true the roof. As I read in the comments this method can be applied to older CPU's as well. For some people this can mean the difference between using their PC or not using it. Especially for power hungry tasks like gaming. Thanks so much!
This is great for everyone. For Europe specifically perhaps as well, but the bills have been going up for a while now, so if someone builds a PC while prices do that, and chooses the newest and most expensive CPU available they probably don't worry about the electric biils too much.
@@Linvael True that these are great tips for everybody and that this is one of the top tier products. As some others in the comment section have pointed out this tactic can also be used on other (older) products. Like high end CPU's from previous generation. Lots of users are unawere of this option. I just watched a video from Hardware Unboxed that AMD madecan update to have an ECO Mode that does all this with one click. Great for the average user. Also some people still have the money to spend on top tier products. But even they might want to save lots of electricity. They can still enjoy the great preformance. Taking 5% preformance reduction for that amount of power savings is intresting for everybody. There is little value in spending so much for 5% extra.
This sounds like a good thing. At least to me, it looks like AMD has given us control over how we want our CPU, you can have it in super efficient mode that provides amazing performance for low power, or try to push it to its limits. I like having this control with the backing of the warranty too.
Intel is the right option for that one the e cores only use 9 watts doing normal desktop tasks amd has no answer to intels power efficiency right now for most users and the 12th gen cores are still better then 7000 series if you look at the graphs my 12600kf is 5.2 for performance giving me a better single core then the tester 12900k or the new ryzens while dropping to no power at all when it’s doing light tasks on the e cores
I love this, I wish more tech channels would do videos about undervolting. I undervolted my 5800x and my 3080, neither of which pass 70c. Anything that I can undervolt, I do. I've been doing that since I was running my 5700xt. It extends the life of your components and give you a consistent clock speed. Plus I live in Florida and it's hot AF a lot of the year.
Meh, I'm still running a 10 year old i7-3770K at 4.1 ghz. Runs fine, games like a champ at 1440P. Why buy performance if you aren't going to use it? Also, I'm in GA so it's not much different ambient temp wise.
@@theconsummatenerd because most components come over overvolted at stock by quite a bit. The stock voltage is designed to be absolutely stable regardless of what kind of sample you got. "The technology judges the amount of thermal headroom the processor has, as well as the number of cores in use, and then boosts clock speed to the maximum safe level." -Intel So you can still keep your boost clock speed and get the voltage lower. Then you maintain boost clocks for longer periods of time without thermally throttling.
Absolutely brilliant. I have been struggling with 7600x. This works!! I ended up setting to 4900 @ 1.1v it dropped from 96c to 62. Im sure i can adjust it a bit more but this is freaking awesome. I tried a MSI water cooler and it was the same temps as a stock AM4 wraith cooler. The temps were scary to say the least. I have 3 systems with 7600x and each have a different cooler. I am still running a stock wraith cooler on one of them and getting mid 68c with 4700 @ 1.04v setting. So far i have had no issues. THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU!!!!!
Great video and tweaks. It really feels like every company has turned on OC by default for this new generation, it be nice to undervolt stuff to get most of the performance at a much more reasonable level if you don't want a free sauna in hot weather.
If you mix curve optimiser with power limit through bios, you will keep the same stock performance while you will consume around 50w less with much lower temps too... it's insane how efficient these CPUs can be but i think the bioses need a lot of updates to extract this efficiency accurately....
True, it is the same with the intel 12th gen, at least for K and KF SKUs. If I let my 12600K boost to 180W it will score around 18k on cinebench R23, working 15min on UV I got the same 18k points but at 145W, which is already quite impressive. I took it further, always with a -90mV UV I locked the power to 95W and I still got an insane 16.9K on R23, at 65W it goes down to 14k and still touches 12k points at 45W. This seems to be true also for the new gens. Simply awesome
@@mastroitek both companies push their desktop CPUs really above their efficiency curve just to get the last 10% of performance... the video that i saw with the ryzen 7 7700x, by using a mix of curve optimiser and power limit to 85w, he managed to get the exact same performance with this TDP... amazing stuff in my opinion which shows the real efficiency of the product... but i'm little confused because i heard the same behaviour for the i5 12600k before... i have an i7 12700k and at stock it was consuming 165w and with -75mv undervolt it comsumes 135w... i was expecting the i5s to comsume a lot less energy in general... are not so well binned or what..?? or it depends specifically on mobo's manufacturer...?? Do you have any idea??
@@vaggeliskosiatzis5487 I think its just that Intel current uArch is not as efficient as AMD. Intel Alder Lake and possibly Raptor Lake are tuned for max performance so they do not lose to AMD. But once they limit the tdp and undervolt arent their CPU arent gonna be as impressive, though its still much better than just letting it running at stock like a furnace.
@@vaggeliskosiatzis5487 I think the 12600k should boost at 150w stock but depending on the motherboard you can get different profiles, in my case if I remove the power limiter it will suck-up 180W and stay there (->18k). Fully stock the 12600k should score around 17k or something more, so in a sense I managed to squeeze another 700-1k points but reducing power consumption. With that said 145W + UV (->18k) still puts the CPU way out of the efficiency curve since with 95W it can perform roughly on par to stock (->17k). About binning I'm not sure if there is any difference between i5 and i7, but mobo and especially operating temps are important, I like a silent PC so even with the 145W profile I was targeting 85-90C which is not great for efficiency... It is probable that with the fans at 60-70% (instead of 20-25%) my temps would have been around 65C giving a bump in efficiency. And the last important variable is the silicon lottery
@@tanphan1848 Indeed, as far as I know R7000 was designed with mobile in mind, hence the efficiency peak could be at a lower wattage compared to intel 12th gen. But I just want to point out that with tuning, my 12600k reaches 81% of the stock performance while being capped at 65W and still gives 70% of stock perf. at 45W. I'm extremely curious to see a comparison in efficiency between 12th gen, R7000 and 13th gen!
Been running a undervolted 3950x in a custom loop for a number years now & It runs all day/every day at 55oC. So to know this new generation can run just as efficiently if needed is great news to me. Thanks for sharing.
Same here. My 3900x was WAY over volted and bounce off yhe thermal limit at idle on a custom water loop. I did a modest undervolt in bios and still get stock frequencies and stay around 55c to 60c with normal use.
undervolting is also beneficial to longevity of the chip, maybe this is why AMD is squeezing the last drop of performance out of it for enthusiasts, so they have to buy a new one way earlier
5% multicore, and 15% single core. In CPU single core limited games, you'll probably see around a 10% to 15% FPS decrease. Optimum Tech years ago did a similar video with the Ryzen 3000 series, and had to take it out, because the losses were much bigger than he initially thought. This isn't totally the same thing, though. Optimum Tech set a static flat voltage, and that had a huge hit to single core even bigger than 15% I believe.
@@FUNktshnl some guys told me that too severe of an undervolt has been having detrimental effects to ryzen cpus. Don't know how true that is. But I know that resistence is higher for lower voltage.
Another awesome video. I love your approach to real world scenarios. Agree some people find undervolting pointless, but the same people that complain about us damaging the planet.
Bravo. This is the 7950 review I was waiting for! And very glad to see the undervolting difference under 3% for both GPU and CPU. I will definitely be following this route to avoid turning my home office into an oven.
Yes, that was.... surprising. I'm wondering if it holds up over more games. It's also odd that I'm seeing some improvement on the 1% timings in this video and some ECO miss testing videos I've watched. Something strange is going on there. Maybe constraining the average power gives headroom for a single core to spike high when needed?
This is something I've also been thinking about on the late gen products. Companies these days really want to push their products to the top, sacrificing efficiency for little performance gain. We're really around the realm of diminishing returns in terms of thermals and power usage. I think it's fine, since we have the control and choice to tweak the hardware we buy. But then again it is not a healthy trend the industry is heading towards.
It's an arms race with the big 3 trying to all one up each other... But, they only do it because it works. Most consumers just see the performance number/graph on the box or website and buy that. They don't think at all about wattage and heat and degradation etc.
@@ascissordollynamedgwen9409 didn't this video just pretty much disprove that? It's a choice they're making to get max benchmarks stock. Clearly doesn't have to be that way though.
100 Percent agree with you.... not getting this gen cause it's not needed for me, but will say that I'd never run any component that hot. I prefer to run more efficent and cooler, i don't need a space heater. Great job. Love to see how these pair with the newer AMD and 40 Series.
Yea man I just built a new pc, with the 7950x and 4070ti, z73 nzxt kraken. My idle sits around 56-59 degrees. Idk if that’s normal or not for this specific cpu. Should I double layer my radiator in fans. I’m scared this is too hot for idle
Thank you so much! My new 7700x build ran perfect the first couple weeks and suddenly started crashing after 5mins of gaming. This has completely resolved the issue. I was suspecting it was the graphics card overheating. I have an RTX 3080 and read about power issues, but that’s not the case. I appreciate you making this video!
Ryzen Master has improved since you made this video. I used its automatic Core Optimizer tweak then set up two "Profiles," one for performance and one for economy. Each profile has its own peak voltage and peak clock speed. It's been months since I've used anything but the economy profile. "Economy" gets me to between 2% and 7% of peak performance but use 25 to 35% less power. I'm a very cappy hamper!
For whoever is seeing this video 9 months later: these chips are designed to get at 95 degrees no matter what when talking about boost frequencies. Of course, if you take away their boost capabilities, you take down the temperature. Do not apply excessive undervolting if you actually need it
Great video! Used your settings running TimeSpy and temps went down to 47C (from 73C) while only losing 1% performance. The system also runs waaay quieter from boot-up. No-brainer!
Hail from France ! Great video ! It's really amazing and so impressive how you can optimised power consumption with undervolting ! Wouaaa ! Hope you the best, keep up the good work !
This was the type of video I was waiting for !!! When I originally watched the reviews on the ryzen 9 7950x I was super dissapointed and wanted to skip this generation of CPUs completely. After watching this video I realize that the undervolting and underclocking is making a big difference ! Thanks you for making this video dude !!!
Thank you for the insight into the new series. With the way energy prices are going, it's far more useful to see how the PCs can be run efficiently with off-the-shelf kit than ever more elaborate and makeshift cooling systems to gain a few benchmark ranks.
It's pretty easy. Curve optimizer -5 to -25 for each core based on Ryzen Master core quality, and lower PPT TDC and EDC until performance drop is very minimal. PBO2 Tuner makes this extremely easy to do without rebooting.
@@weasle2904 I just turned on curve optimizer per core according to a quick ryzen master oc video and went to bed. Maybe not the best thing to let I run unsupervised... If all is well tomorrow, can I use the results like you mention?
Thank you alot for this video! I'm waiting for my full AMD PC build with 7900x and my heart fell when i saw 170W TDP (after i already paid for it) and the temp's with these cpu's. I am 100% undervolting. Again, thank you a shit load for this video!
a piece of silicon doesnt really care if it runs at 50° or 95° all day. but of course, your electricity bill will thank you. and lower cooling noise is also a good thing.
Thank you very much for this - yes 1 year on, but I have recently purchased a 7900X system and had noticed the power usage. This small tweak has lowered temps, which lowers noise and my electricity cost - the latter is necessary in the UK are the moment. Great job, well explained 👍
Hey so I just came across this video and saw your comment Can you share the amount of power consumption u had before undervolting and after it? I actually was considering getting 7950x for productivity and gaming and saw that it’s a power consuming cpu
@@aj9895 Hey there, using HWMonitor and CPU-Z using stock settings I saw 60W Idle and 150W when benchmarking. Using this video's advice, reduces Idle to 30W and peak of 86W using the Ryzen Master Stress Test. Using the CPU-Z Stress test sees 82W. I hope that's helpful.
@@bikerchrisukk It actually helps a lot. Thank you so much for replying. I’m actually gonna invest in AMD since Intel’s 14th gen is their last gen. Although 7950x is kind of expensive in where I live, but it’s an investment for the long term
@@aj9895 Very glad to help and you're very welcome. I chose AMD for work purposes (CAD/3D Rendering/Video creation) because I had seen that Intel weren't doing so well with power efficiency or over all value. Also I was a little apprehensive about the Efficiency cores working correctly. I don't think you can go wrong with either the 7900X or 7950X, I was advised not to get the 3D versions for reliability reasons. Of course there's no knowing if that was the right decision, but my 7900X has been incredibly stable for the last 3-4 months. I'm self-employed so I can't have any downtime and it's worked perfectly, when I'm doing CAD work (single threaded) it is massively over the top. I think if you're not going to use all the cores all the time, the 7900X is a good middle ground and gives better value for money than the 7950X - that is a generalisation of course, as I don't know your use case!
@@bikerchrisukk I’m actually looking for an AMD cpu that works well for content creation (Adobe AE/PP) and for video games. I’ve heard as well that the 3d cash isn’t the right choice for consumers that’s looking for productivity and gaming at the same time. Especially for 7800X3D , I’ve been advised to look over it since it’s the best cpu for gaming ONLY. So when I came across this video (amongst other videos) , I’ve seen that 7950x is actually doing well for productivity and gaming. I would love to know more about 7900x since you’re already using it and know much about CAD and 3D rendering that are heavier than just game editing.
This, THIS, is the future of computer tuning, and I love this content. Keep it up, and I can not wait until we see new fresh ideas and the effort to lower the power use, and still maximize the performance of even low end computers!
Watching you from Hong Kong! This content is a life saver. My 7950x is heating up like Korean BBQ on my x6070e Auros Extreme Motherboard. All do this Motherboard are for extreme over clockers, but us you mention in your video, still need to save my that electricity bill from the wall. 😂 By default when playing Warzone my max temp is beyond 90 to 94. I try follow your settings 😮 wow what good result my tjmax now is 64 degree. Thanks Tech Yes City🎉❤
I've undervolted my last couple of CPUs, an intel mobile and AMD desktop. Both were much more consistent on the clocks and temps with little sacrifice to performance. It's definitely the way to go on modern CPUs. Even if they say it's fine to run that way. I'd rather not have pumps or fans ramping up and down constantly.
@@PetroDobrynin Absolutely! I have an AIO in my desktop and the pump can get annoying if you don't do some tweaking. And laptop fans will scream up and down without adjustments. Stock settings suck. 🤣
@@damara2268 2023 probably.. to counter Intel non-K parts 7600x for $300 while 13400f will be like $220.. they will have to strike back with regular 7600 (non-X)
@@damara2268 The only reason AMD released them so late on Zen 3 was due to supply chain issues. They couldn't make enough chips to meet demand. That doesn't appear to be a problem with Zen 4. They didn't wait forever to release them on any other Zen product line.
This is actually absolutely real useful information, thanks! Not everyone lives in Sweden or Canada to enjoy the heat output of a 230W CPU consumed - and would gladly give up 5% performance / 100W of the consumption to have reasonable heat output of 130W consumed as this can also be cooled easily with all decent air-coolers. Also the reason why I undervolt GPUs, when your computer takes 600 W from the wall you already need an 1000w consuming AC to counter that and it's stupid; for 350W not so much. Besides it's nice to have lower temps, longer fan lifespan, lower noise, and avoiding liquid hazards, I mean, liquid cooling. I am aware not all CPUs are equal so then BIOSes cannot be set for Undervolting settings that would work stable on all CPUs, but this is like the default BIOS profile is for Overvolting. Haven't seen anyone test Eco Mode yet though, but I'm positive it does not compare to manual overclocking and undervolting that I usually do on CPUs and GPUs.
Can’t wait for the over clock tool for zen4 to drop.Power consumption was never an issue I thought of until recently. With energy prices going up and needed higher cooler options I am now all about power savings. Great video.
People are saying about 95C being the intended outcome of using Zen 4 chips, but with the current rising energy prices, having your energy consumption drop by about half is pretty significant, even if you have that baller money to get that latest and greatest, which is covered in the video, of course.
I think the temp thing is being blown up, I recently switch from a 1700x to a 5800x and while the temps reported are way higher on the 5800x than the 1700x the temps of the water in the loop actually increase way slower and reach a lower max temp under long heavy workloads
People are saying that because AMD is stating that. It seems to be about 100 watts difference, which could be significant, it depends upon how often you hit max power on your rig, which honestly is not something I ever check for me so I really have no idea. But lets say you do 10 hours a day on average at max power, that's 1kWh difference per day (10hrs x 100watts), here's a situation that's probably well above the average person so now it's just a matter of multiplying by your electricity rate to find out the daily cost and 365 for the yearly cost, for me in California it's nearly 40c/kWh so that translates to just under $150/yeah which would be a pretty good chunk of change however how realistic is 10 hours a day on average? well everyone needs to answer that question for themselves, but if you go to 2hrs/day on average then $30/year (for me) which is less of a bother IMO.
@@JocaGod this is because the CPU doesn't run hot because it's using a lot of power, but actually because the CCD is very small and doesn't have the sufficient surface area to dissipate heat. I know a few people with the 5900X with no power limit and it actually runs cooler than a similar 5800X because each CCD only has 6 cores worth of heat it needs to dissipate. AM5 also has an extremely thick IHS the heat needs to get through, and derbauer's testing shows getting that out of the way gets you a 20 degree drop in temperatures.
I dont know what the fuss about energy is and why everyone is hopping on this stupid trend like a bunch of sheep. 50-80w difference won’t really matter honestly. If you want to save power switch your lights to LED, Adjust your freezer and fridge. Stuff that is always on 24/7. You don’t think about this stuff and that your gonna save money its damn CPU a gaming machine. If you want to d.ride the efficiency go buy a laptop and make it a desktop system.
Great video! You've changed my mind and I'm sure many others on the 7000 series. When I heard that 95c was the "new normal" I was like....nope I'm never buying this. But you've made it look attractive now. Much thx!
This is my question too. I prefer the way it is; most CPUs/GPU are running at max and under-volting is the new overclocking. This way out of the box you get the best you can but if you care about efficiency, you can hit that as well. Also, it means these parts are designed to run under the higher power/heat state extending the life of the product if you care about efficiency. Overall, it's a win win.
I'm really glad I found your video. When I put in my 7700x and it kept jumping around in temps at idle I thought my cooler wasn't working properly because I'm using my NZXT Kraken z63 from my last build. I used your settings and the 7700x never went passed 50 degrees Celsius at maybe 1-3 fps loss. Incredibly helpful and more people should definitely be talking about this.
Just bought a 7700x for my son does Ryzen master hold the values when rebooting the system? If not how can you save it to hold when rebooting? what values did you use. Building the PC in the next few days cheers Luke Hodgkinson
I think a better way is to use curve optimizer with negative all cores 15 (or more/per core if you want) + setting target PBO temp to 80 or 70 celsius. That way it stays low in idle and boosts high in single core but stays cooler in all cores workloads :)
Like that, yes. I limited the temperature to 80 and set the negative curve to 20. That's 5.0 ghz tdp 150w with the Arctic LF ii 280 running at 80% power (180ppt, 140tdc, 200edc). While through the BIOS - Ryzen Master cannot start with the computer, it's annoying. A little disappointed - expected more frequency like 5.2 or smtn. I'm new to this, maybe something else will be improved later. upd: 20 is unstable, 10-15 is ok)) I don't know how some people put 30, they must be very lucky with their rocks.
It's such an issue how they handle temp now just because it ruins the entire fan curve paradigm we've been using forever. Unironically Ryzen needs the Turbo button back. Either to switch your PBO profile on the fly or swap between your nice friendly 1700 RPM fan curves to you ear-shattering 3200RPM fan curves.
@@thumbwarriordx I literally have a couple of fan control profiles in Gigbyte Control Center)) One for everyday work, when the fans run at 70-75% in case of limited CPU heating to 85 degrees, and the other - "no one is at home", when the fans run at 100 %. The two profiles provide different performance, although the difference is small. It's funny. And yes, it's pretty weird. But I can't say that it gives me any problems.
Nice to see this is an option. I am running 5900x curve optimizer undervolt -30 and my rtx3080 undervolted to run 1890mhz at 0.86v. Only got good results from what I experienced with undervolts. They push these products to obsolute maximum just to best their contender. But forget to give us an option to not waste tons of power and heat while sacrificing few %perf. For long usage sesions like gaming undervolt is the best way when dealing with flagship parts.
With curve optimizer you can get undervolt with negative clock curve set ! That allows your CPU's best cores to boost higher in single thread work loads. Would it be better?
Someone needs to test lapping the ihs since der8auer showed a 20c reduction at a fixed oc by using direct die thats some performance left on the table because of such a bad ihs
DeBauer cooled it down 20 deg C by removing the IHS and cooling direct to the chip/chiplets. My guess is that you shaving 40 degrees already based on power consumption, removing the IHS would only shave another 10-12 degress. However, that would open up some interesting possibilities to bump your core reduction up to 4.9 or 5 while still maybe cooling it down to 50c. You should talk to him and maybe do a tuning collab.
Great video man, good to see that the efficiency is there on the architecture, when it isn't being pushed wayy outside of its efficiency sweet spot for 5% extra performance
The Ryzen 9 7950X3D cache is rumoured to not be release until CES 2023 (Jan 5th-8th 2023). Having seen the HUGE boost in performance that the 3D cache gave to the 5800X3D, to the point where that last generation chip holds its own against the just released 7950X and the not yet released intel 13th gen flag ship, there is no way I would get a CPU before the 3D cache version, so I am praying the Ryzen 9 7950X3D is released sooner, just after intel 13th gen, so they crush it, and I don't have to wait even more months before building a brand new from scratch rig. Fingers crossed AMD have the sense to release the Ryzen 9 7950X3D straight after intel 13th gen so that AMD can corner the market before the Christmas purchasing rush!
Ive set my 7900X to 5.2Ghz with 1.11V & it doesn't exceed 68c on a cb2023 multicore load & that's perfectly fine with me especially knowing that cinebench scenarios are a bit unrealistic so most of the time my CPU will run quiet cooler, thanks for the video :)
Undervolted my 7700x, pretty much identical to your settings. Saw similar drops in my performance and went from 95.5C to 64.1C and from 138.34w to 73.40w peaks while running Cinebench!!! This my first time undervolting, any advice to optimize my settings or is it really as simple as adjusting your voltage and clock speed to the desired "sweet spot"? For those who care, these are my Cinebench scores for the 7700x: 7700x Cinebench Multi Core (Stock): 18850 pts 7700x Cinebench Single Core Core (Stock): 1976 pts 7700x Cinebench Multi Core (Undervolt): 18257 pts 7700x Cinebench Single Core (Undervolt): 1720 pts
Even if you just tuned it to hit 80-85c that's a huge improvement. Worth doing it looks like. I even tuned my 5800x to only draw 95w at peak and that helped things a TON.
glad someone else has noticed this, youre the first tech channel pointing this out. they are all pusshing clocks to the max without care for power usage.
I'm extremely curious of what the non-X 7xxx series CPUs temperatures will be out of box with a stock cooler. It seems that AMD is pushing these X variants out to content creators with the hype train in mind, in efforts to crush all existing benchmarks. If they keep efficiency similar to the under-volt shown here in their non-x skus, it looks quite promising.
It would be interesting to add another axis, i.e the resolution. If the performance loss is on the same order of magnitude no matter the resolution ... then it'd be silly not to undervolt like you suggest
Lol this. There is literally a button in Ryzen Master to solve this if you care about power consumption and heat. Also, confirming a stable undervolt on a 16 core processor takes weeks of daily, routine testing to ensure stability at all points on the power curve. It cannot be done in a 48 hour release window.
Great content. With the electricity prices going through the roof, this will actually save us a good chunk of money. And in the summertime also much less heat dumped to our rooms😅
I was looking for a test like this. I always try to make my CPU as cool and efficient as possible. Could you optimise the PBO and limit the TDP to 65 watt? I really want to see those results
Thank you for this quick guide, I dropped my 7900 to 0.985v and the temps dropped drastically. I have a hardware fan speed controller set to just audible, which is about 48% rated speed of the fans in my fractal Torrent, and the idle temps were high given the restriction. Dropped to around mid-40c now. Just updated to a 4070ti super, will look at an undervolt on that, but temps look great out of the box, if I can save power, that's a bonus.
I tried your ryzen master settings on my corona render. Undervolted & underclocked Vs. Stock, result was 30c(65c vs. 95c) cooler and 50% more power efficient with only 18 seconds render difference. Thanks.
Loved the idea for undervolting but never bothered with it as I never paid for my electricity. Knew it would come into play one day, thanks for being a pillar in this community
I followed your video. Cinebench Results - cpu temp 52-65, Peak Speed 4806 PPT11% of 1000watts, CPU power 90 W, Score dropped 6% from 37785 to 35709 Thank you so much for the VERY clear explanation and demonstration.😀
If anyone is struggeling with this, the best result I got with combining negative offset (in case of my 5800X -0.875V), with Curve Optimizer. I figured which offset was the first without frequency stretching and then generated a Curve via RyzenMaster, which was totally unstable, and THEN running CORE CYCLER for a couple time and adjust the Curve accordingly until it's fully stable. You can save time by starting with smaller intervals like 3 minutes per core and stability test for longer later. This got me lower thermals and more performance in single core as well as multicore, perfectly stable thanks to CoreCycler and is to my knowledge the best method right now for Ryzen 5000 and 7000 series. Took me 1 day this way, which is ok imo.
Good work. For all of use using our PCs in small offices or bedrooms without AC this is a massive quality of life improvement. I like to my office quiet and not sound like an airport runway. The biggest deal breaker is the heat output this summer I was already sweating buckets. If I had an extra 300-500w of heating in the office it would be unbearable.
Took your advice on undervolting and underclocking the rx6600xt and it worked a treat...very pleased withe the card.....was totally put off by those 95c temps but maybe this is the way to go.....cheers
