TR Forums

Found a... "EDIT...Not "cpu" but "CORE_ Performance_ Boost" option in the bios that I turned off and no more 1.5volts/90C fun! Thank goodness!

You lose all the automatic boosting but now I can leave the bios AUTO Voltage control in place and just increase the mulitplier.
That lets the built in controls provide the proper voltages when needed...(I hope).

@4Ghz Ryzen Master shows 0.999 Volts. A CPUZ stress test will cause the voltage to climb to 1.2625 volts.
Which is I what I had already found was neccessary for stabilty @4Ghz. Nice to know the built in controls agree with my testing.

The odd bit is that if I leave the stress test on for a minute the AUTO voltage drops to 1.25v and the temps drop from low 80sC to high 70sC.
I don't see that it can be thermal throttling because at stock if you really stress it you will be looking at 90C and 1.5 volts...not slowing down.

There are so many limiters built into the cpu I don't know what is getting triggered. Will have to pay attention to the amps,watts,power read outs in Ryzen Master and see if I can spot a pattern.
EDIT... I do seem to remember seeing the amps listed at 100% at times. Will get out my plug in watt meter and see it agrees with Ryzen Master read outs

Right now I have hopes that I will be able to leave the auto volts ON. Other wise I'll set the voltage to the 1.2625 volts that the controls deemed correct.
Will take a few days to see if it is stable. I know that setting the voltage to 1.2625 @4Ghz is stable enough but you do see the "peak voltage" listed at 1.2625 all the time and with AUTO you can see the peak showing 0.999 volts... I like that better even tho who knows what it all means.

What's the goal here? Higher all-core clocks?

Waco wrote:

What's the goal here? Higher all-core clocks?

Oh, not speed but lower temps and volts...high 70s/low 80sC and sub 1.3 volts.
Heh, I was raised to find 90C and 1.5 volts being fed into my cpu as... no way/no how!

4Ghz is a decent enough multicore speed boost and the bios AUTO voltage control seems to handle it well so far.
I can raise the voltage to around 1.28v manually and run 4.2Ghz but that a whole 5%. Not going to push for that.

I've read so much about exactly how the new Ryzen cpu's internal controls are a black hole unique to each cpu.
So my "Gigabyte x370 Gaming 5" allows me to change the multiplier and keep the Bios AUTO voltage control and all the power saving states.
Have read that not all boards will do that. That they will lock a lot of stuff down...no power saving. I'm lucky.

So right now I'm happy with the voltages, temps and encoding speed! (finally!)

-------------
I almost wish I did not already have the AM4 x370 < why I bought the 3950x.
Could not justify moving up a notch. Without already having the x370 board I would have gotten the bottom end Threadripper to play with.
More then twice the area to transfer heat with.

Sounds like you need a better cooler and more air going through the case.

Yes a 3950x is a lot of heat being generated but it should still be controllable better than that...

Aranarth wrote:

Sounds like you need a better cooler and more air going through the case.
Yes a 3950x is a lot of heat being generated but it should still be controllable better than that...

Well, I'm on "air". "Noctua NH-D15" and I'm not alone in struggling with high temps from what I read.
Heh, air flow... I have three 3000rpm Noctua fans mounted in the case. Thankfully they don't start ramping up till 73C and up.
Am happy now with encoding speeds and temps.

EDIT... It is nice to KNOW when the current job is finished and that it has not crashed and I think it is still encoding.

thanks.

Water is the trick.

Waco wrote:

Water is the trick.

Not by much though, thermal density has been a growing pain. The much benefit of water is reducing noise level. Waterblocks and heatpipes have similar thermal dissipation performance.

Krogoth wrote:

The much benefit of water is reducing noise level.

That was true 15 years ago, but now not so much.

Waterblocks and heatpipes have similar thermal dissipation performance.

The difference is that water has a higher specific heat than air. If you put a bargain basement CLC up against a decent heatsink, then yeah you're probably not going to see much difference, but you can fix that by not buying crappy gear.

If anything the cost of water cooling has come way down for decent stuff. I am very happy with my H115i Pro and the temps I get on my 8600K that is set to 4.4Ghz. Core temps running full out on all cores are ~54C, water temp in the system is ~35.5C and it's probably ~22C in my office. Most importantly it is quiet.

Krogoth wrote:

Waterblocks and heatpipes have similar thermal dissipation performance.

...he says to the one with a full loop and 70C load temps with PBO enabled.

Does your altitude play into that WRT radiator efficiency?

Captain Ned wrote:

Does your altitude play into that WRT radiator efficiency?

Yep. I have to run about 30% more radiator and/or airflow than I would at sea level thanks to the thinner air.

It made the difference between an almost tolerable Radeon VII and one that I had to put under water to keep my sanity.

Redocbew wrote:

Krogoth wrote:

The much benefit of water is reducing noise level.

That was true 15 years ago, but now not so much.

Waterblocks and heatpipes have similar thermal dissipation performance.

The difference is that water has a higher specific heat than air. If you put a bargain basement CLC up against a decent heatsink, then yeah you're probably not going to see much difference, but you can fix that by not buying crappy gear.

That doesn't help with thermal dissipation though which is the crux of the problem. A waterblock made from copper, aluminum or a composite of two isn't going to move heat any better than a heaksink made from the same material though. Waterblock is much more restrictive on how much surface area the water can utilize versus a heatsink. That ends-up killing most of the advantage that water has with thermal dissipation over air. Countless real-world performance tests between water-cooling and air-cooling for GPUs and GPUs have shown that difference between the two is pretty small in terms of thermal dissipation (water only has a small lead). Water-cooling can be more quiet and/or compact though depending on your setup. I'm not going to factor into the myriad of issues that water-cooling has with electronics though.

There's a reason why water-cooling is pretty much limited to niches like HPC and hobbyist arenas.

Krogoth wrote:

There's a reason why water-cooling is pretty much limited to niches like HPC and hobbyist arenas.

Because crud like the above keeps getting posted?

Yes, you can technically get pretty close with monstrous coolers and a ton of properly-designed heat pipes in a particular orientation and specific heat load...but really, it's hard to get there without spending more on copper/aluminum/heatpipes than you would on water.

I'd love to hear how over 4 times the heat capacity of air makes water "almost the same" though.

Waco wrote:

Krogoth wrote:

There's a reason why water-cooling is pretty much limited to niches like HPC and hobbyist arenas.

Because crud like the above keeps getting posted?

Yes, you can technically get pretty close with monstrous coolers and a ton of properly-designed heat pipes...but really, it's hard to get there without spending more on copper/aluminum/heatpipes than you would on water.

You have to spend more quite a more on water-cooling with pumps(common failure point), piping and large radiator if you want to better noise and performance over air-cooling. This is before you get into the issues that plagued water-cooling with electronics. Electronics don't really like getting wet. You need to be more vigilant (Galvanic corrosion, potential mildew/bacteria growth, checking reservoir levels etc) Only hobbyists and HPC-types are willing to deal with these annoying issues.

WIth air-cooling you only have to deal with fan failures and cleaning dust bunnies.

"Air cooling works just as well as water cooling"

"Why?"

"Water is annoying."

Hmm...

Krogoth wrote:

pumps(common failure point)

Funny, my D5 is nearly 20 years old.

Yes, air cooling is easier and can be cheaper depending on what your definition of quiet is and how much heat you're trying to dissipate. That's it, water wins in early every other metric. You may not like it and that's fine, but water is better for cooling.

Krogoth wrote:

Waco wrote:

Krogoth wrote:

There's a reason why water-cooling is pretty much limited to niches like HPC and hobbyist arenas.

Because crud like the above keeps getting posted?

Yes, you can technically get pretty close with monstrous coolers and a ton of properly-designed heat pipes...but really, it's hard to get there without spending more on copper/aluminum/heatpipes than you would on water.

You have to spend more quite a more on water-cooling with pumps(common failure point), piping and large radiator if you want to better noise and performance over air-cooling. This is before you get into the issues that plagued water-cooling with electronics. Electronics don't really like getting wet. You need to be more vigilant (Galvanic corrosion, potential mildew/bacteria growth, checking reservoir levels etc) Only hobbyists and HPC-types are willing to deal with these annoying issues.

WIth air-cooling you only have to deal with fan failures and cleaning dust bunnies.

Your data is old and based on homemade systems, newer closed systems don't have the issues that you are stating in the volume you assume.

I'm not impressed.

Water is just a better method to move heat around than metal or water vapor (heat pipes). CLCs these days are pretty excellent and require minimal maintenance. Custom loops offer flexibility far beyond CLCs, but have some additional maintenance and care required.


Congrats to all on derailing this thread entirely.

Redocbew wrote:

"Air cooling works just as well as water cooling"

"Why?"

"Water is annoying."

Hmm...

It is because water-cooling is more restrictive in surface area since you cannot immerse electronics in it unlike air (which is technically immersive cooling). The surface area budget is more restrictive with water-cooling plus you have all of the annoying issues. Just check out the countless reviews between air-cooling and water-cooling with electronics. Water-cooling only leads by small margins and is stuck with its own problems. Most customers don't find to worth it unless you are a hobbyist that is willing to deal with them.

Closed systems aren't immune to the problems are heavily depended on QC of the vendor. You just hope that the pump last far beyond the manufacturer's warranty. Also CLC units sacrifice performance for convenience so the performance gap between them and air-cooled heatsinks is smaller.

Waco wrote:

Congrats to all on derailing this thread entirely.

A Krogoth speciality.

Yeah, and it's definitely been catching on. Seems like there's a lot of professional derailers out there these days.

Krogoth wrote:

It is because water-cooling is more restrictive in surface area since you cannot immerse electronics in it unlike air (which is technically immersive cooling). The surface area budget is more restrictive with water-cooling plus you have all of the annoying issues.

Um...what? This is literally the opposite of true. Water cooling allows you to easily move the heat to somewhere else where space is not a constraint.

You keep talking about issues like it's 15 years ago and CLCs are garbage.

Waco wrote:

Krogoth wrote:

pumps(common failure point)

Funny, my D5 is nearly 20 years old.

Yes, air cooling is easier and can be cheaper depending on what your definition of quiet is and how much heat you're trying to dissipate. That's it, water wins in early every other metric. You may not like it and that's fine, but water is better for cooling.

The problem is that somewhat small difference isn't worth the opportunity cost for the majority of customers. Most CLC units on the market are just subpar and often have the same thermal performance as any decent air-cooling solution but cost quite a bit more while being stuck the potential faults of water-cooling.

Krogoth wrote:

The problem is that somewhat small difference isn't worth the opportunity cost for the majority of customers. Most CLC units on the market are just subpar and often have the same thermal performance as any decent air-cooling solution but cost quite a bit more while being stuck the potential faults of water-cooling.

CLCs are far more prevalent and performant than you're implying and they have nowhere near as many issues as you are alluding to. They're also cheaper than high-end air coolers in many cases...

Waco wrote:

Krogoth wrote:

The problem is that somewhat small difference isn't worth the opportunity cost for the majority of customers. Most CLC units on the market are just subpar and often have the same thermal performance as any decent air-cooling solution but cost quite a bit more while being stuck the potential faults of water-cooling.

CLCs are far more prevalent and performant than you're implying and they have nowhere near as many issues as you are alluding to. They're also cheaper than high-end air coolers in many cases...

CLC units are more expensive then the air-cooling competition (Noctuas are overpriced outliers). Most CLC units are fad sells (Like current RGB cancer) that are being bought by the new generation of kiddies/progamers who haven't experienced the headaches of water-cooling. Enermax had a bunch of QC issues over a year ago (recalled/resigned their stuff as a result) while Corsair CLCs has been a mixed-bag throughout the years.

Krogoth wrote:

Waco wrote:

Krogoth wrote:

The problem is that somewhat small difference isn't worth the opportunity cost for the majority of customers. Most CLC units on the market are just subpar and often have the same thermal performance as any decent air-cooling solution but cost quite a bit more while being stuck the potential faults of water-cooling.

CLCs are far more prevalent and performant than you're implying and they have nowhere near as many issues as you are alluding to. They're also cheaper than high-end air coolers in many cases...

CLC units are more expensive then the air-cooling competition (Noctuas are overpriced outliers). Most CLC units are fad sells (Like current RGB cancer) that are being bought by the new generation of kiddies/progamers who haven't experienced the headaches of water-cooling. Enermax had a bunch of QC issues over a year ago (recalled/resigned their stuff as a result) while Corsair CLCs has been a mixed-bag throughout the years.

{{Citation needed}}

tfp wrote:

{{Citation needed}}

Nah, it's more fun to make things up and talk down to people.

It's hard when you are never impressed.

Waco is not impressed with Krogoth's ability to argue a point.