PBO Offset, is lower always better?

Rikk

Rikk

Rikk

Associate
Joined
30 Apr 2003
Posts
1,402
Location
Collier Row, Essex
This is on a 7950X3d, Asus x670E hero MB.
Sorry if this is a dumb question but I'm new to PBO tuning(my 5800x3d I just set to -30 and that was it..) and have been trying to soak up as much info as I can and can't find an answer to this.

All I'm currently doing is using Ryzen master to lower each core by 5 at a time and using the validate option to stress test it with the assumption that when it fails I can start to wind it back a bit at a time.
BUT, is it always, lower is better?
 
Lower is always better providing it is stable as by lowering the curve your essentially undervolting the chip which will allow it to hit the same clocks with less power or even use the extra power/thermal headroom to boost to even higher clocks.
 
My understanding is that lower will allow the cpu to boost higher because you will be supplying less voltage to the cpu and therefore lowers temps which in turn tells the boost algorithm to go higher as you will have greater thermal headroom. Of course if your cpu is unstable then lower isn't better and if your using CO per core them it becomes a balancing act finding the best values for each individual core.
 
Last edited:
I spent ages on my 7900X3D and eventually just put all cores on -20. Boosts to 5.7 too, I have not tried the additional 100mhz. Additionally, I do not waste my time with crappy software when changing settings within the bios is simply superior.
 
Last edited:
Rikk said:
This is on a 7950X3d, Asus x670E hero MB.
Sorry if this is a dumb question but I'm new to PBO tuning(my 5800x3d I just set to -30 and that was it..) and have been trying to soak up as much info as I can and can't find an answer to this.

All I'm currently doing is using Ryzen master to lower each core by 5 at a time and using the validate option to stress test it with the assumption that when it fails I can start to wind it back a bit at a time.
BUT, is it always, lower is better?
Click to expand...
It's probably worth having a read of the main X3D thread in the CPU sub-forum but I'm sure that I read in there that the strongest 2 cores should actually have less offset than the rest.
 
Yes lower is better, not sure id trust Ryzen master validate option to confirm all is fine though, I use Y-Cruncher 1-7-0, if any cores are playing up or too low of a curve.....ie not getting enough voltage to remain stable, Y-Cruncher will tell you exactly which cores it is.
 
Jamin280672 said:
Yes lower is better, not sure id trust Ryzen master validate option to confirm all is fine though, I use Y-Cruncher 1-7-0, if any cores are playing up or too low of a curve.....ie not getting enough voltage to remain stable, Y-Cruncher will tell you exactly which cores it is.
Click to expand...
Y-Cruncher was beyond useless for me. I had -30 on all cores and it passed consistently for hours upon hours. Once you start a game, BSOD, a load of crap to me.
 
random_matt said:
Y-Cruncher was beyond useless for me. I had -30 on all cores and it passed consistently for hours upon hours. Once you start a game, BSOD, a load of crap to me.
Click to expand...
Strange, did you use the component tester ? I've never heard that before, it's pretty much the opposite for me, it passes everything then I run y cruncher and it stops on crashing cores.

It tests everything separately FFT, VST, N64, AVX mem controller etc
 
Last edited:
I don't think you can say lower is always better, if that were the case AMD would have it set lower in the AGESA settings so everyone benefitted and they could claim more performance from their chips. Whether lower PBO settings are better for you or or not depends on a number of variables but they can be beneficial in allowing cores to boost higher for longer periods due to less voltage / heat being applied. As above it is important to test stability in the apps / games you use and to confirm that performance isn't being degraded rather than improved.
 
Jamin280672 said:
Strange, did you use the component tester ? I've never heard that before, it's pretty much the opposite for me, it passes everything then I run y cruncher and it stops on crashing cores.

It tests everything separately FFT, VST, N64, AVX mem controller etc
Click to expand...
I used the settings listed by LtMatt in one of the threads. I cannot remember what those were, but I am fine with the settings I have now anyway.

​

 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom