The worst memory related issue on this platform is that there is no way to tune the memory controller parameters. They are hard coded into the memory controller firmware (PMU) and cannot be changed by anyone but AMD. This prevents the manufacturers from optimizing the parameters specifically for their designs.
Even if you run 2700X with LN2 and disable all of the power / current limits, it will not boost higher than e.g. 4.35GHz for the best two cores of the CPU.
4.35GHz for the best two cores of the CPU (marked with a golden and silver star in Ryzen Master), 4.2GHz for the rest (1-2C load).
4.075GHz for all cores, unless limited by PPT, TDC, EDC, thermal or reliability (FIT). Clock reductions starts at 85Â°C (95Â°C tCTL), unless configured to a lower value.
The power management must be reconfigured in order to allow higher frequencies, my "eXFR" ("Performance Enhancer" on ASUS boards) does just that.
The "Precision Boost Override" feature available on 400-series motherboards allows increasing the physical limiters mentioned earlier. On SKUs belonging to the 105W TDP infrastructure group, the default limiters are following: PPT 141.75W, TDC 95A, EDC 140A and tJMax of 85Â°C (absolute, excl. offset).
When "Precision Boost Override" mode is enabled (AGESA default), PPT becomes essentially unrestricted (1000W), TDC is set to 114A and EDC to 168A. These limits can be customized by the ODM so that the new limits will comply with the electrical characteristics of the motherboard design in question.
To see what the actual maximum voltage FIT allows the CPU to run at in various different scenarios is, I disabled all of the other limiters and safe guards. With every other limiter / safe guard disabled, the reliability (FIT) becomes the only restrain. The voltage command which the CPU sends to the VRM regulator via the SVI2 interface and the actual effective voltage were then recorded in various scenarios. In stock configuration the sustained maximum effective voltage during all-core stress allowed by FIT was =< 1.330V. Meanwhile, in single core workloads the sustained maximum was =< 1.425V. When the â€œFITâ€� parameters were adjusted by increasing the scalar value from the default 1x to the maximum allowed value of 10x, the maximum all-core voltage became 1.380V, while the maximum single core voltage increased to 1.480V. The recorded figures appear to fall very well in line with the seen and known behavior, frequency, power and thermal scaling wise.
The seen behaviour suggests that the full silicon reliability can be maintained up to around 1.330V in all-core workloads (i.e. high current) and up to 1.425V in single core workloads (i.e. low current). Use of higher voltages is definitely possible (as FIT will allow up to 1.380V / 1.480V when scalar is increased by 10x), but it more than likely results in reduced silicon lifetime / reliability. By how much? Only the good folks at AMD who have access to the simulation data will know for sure.
There are clear differences in how the memory controller behaves on the different CPU specimens. The majority of the CPUs will do 3466MHz or higher at 1.050V SoC voltage, however the difference lies in how the different specimens react to the voltage. Some of the specimens seem scale with the increased SoC voltage, while the others simply refuse to scale at all or in some cases even illustrate negative scaling. All of the tested samples illustrated negative scaling (i.e. more errors or failures to train) when higher than 1.150V SoC was used. In all cases the maximum memory frequency was achieved at =< 1.100V SoC voltage.
I usually type a voltage into box. I do not think I have ever clicked it/selected it by keyboard and seen a drop down box for that setting. Once there is a voltage typed in within box, I can change it up or down a step using the keyboard. Usually use + / - on numeric keypad.
Not seen any page on my rig which will show 2133MHz as MAX if I have selected say 2933MHz and applied it.
No problem 🙂 .
No chap you did not understand me on this 🙂 .
Usually I don't need to press the + / - hundred times as then would opt to type the voltage in 🙂 . I opt to use the + / - when just testing if a step or so is what I need. I only stated both methods as it seemed member was unaware how the UEFI setting is used for input 🙂 .
I do not usually do CMOSCLR, reason being I use Flashback 🙂 . I don't use OS / UEFI UEFI update menu 🙂 . I prefer Flashback as it is being done without system being powered, so let's say you did have flakey profile / hardware your UEFI flash is not going to be affected by it.
Flashback method uses an IC on the motherboard to flash the BIOS chip, it is essentially a hardwired hardware flash tool 🙂 . As the BIOS chip would have been erased and flashed with new UEFI why would I wish to do CMOSCLR? Only time I usually consider it, is if I was having a real ball ache of time with something and wanted to exhaust all possibilities before investigating something else.
There are other benefits of Flashback which are handy 🙂 .
i) It can allow you to flash a beta / older UEFI which may be blocked by other methods.
ii) It can allow you to flash unsigned modded UEFI if you wanted to.
I always look to see if a board supports flashback TBH, as value it 🙂 .
Been working well for me 🙂 .
Recently another unusual fix has resolved trying to nail POST to POST stability for say 3333MHz C14 1T on 4x8GB. Matching VDDP and CLDO_VDDP allowed no deterioration in stability on 6+ consecutive warm POSTs. Default is 0.900V for VDDP and 950mV for CLDO_VDDP, using 0.915V and 915mV has worked brilliantly for my combined hardware/targetted settings.
The big change in the chipset will be in the power consumption. Currently the X370 chipset, built on a 55nm manufacturing process using ASMedia IP, runs at a 6.8W TDP (running at full load). For X470, we were told that this is the same process and IP, but the chip will now run at 4.8W peak and 1.9W in an idle mode. This is due to an improved power infrastructure within the chip, and AMD also claims that overall throughput is improved. The chipset firmware is also set to provide better memory OC support and stability.
The other factor in this is StoreMI, on the next page. This new feature technically does not require chipset support, however the free installer will check for the presence of an X470 chipset before providing a free license, otherwise the software will cost $20 and not have AMD branding
02/03/2018 Bios 0207
16/03/2018 Bios 0401
19/04/2018 Bios 0509
Update AGESA 22.214.171.124a
18/05/2018 Bios 0601
1. Update SMU Firmware to version 43.18.0
2. Update RAID driver to version 126.96.36.199.
3. Update Asus Grid notification behavior
22/06/2018 Bios 0702Update Agesa Code to 188.8.131.52c.
Update compatibility protocol for 3rd party hardware monitoring software.
Fixed miscellaneous issues with fan calibration/options.
Improve memory compatibility.
24/07/2018 Bios 08041. Improve system stability
2. Improve Secure Erase function on NVMe devices
3. Update LPPT firmware
02/11/2018 Bios 1002
30/11/2018 Bios 11031. Update AMD AGESA version to 184.108.40.206
2. Improve system stability
04/01/2018 Bios 1201