• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

***The Official 5900X \5950X owners thread***

so basically it runs a stress test usually prime 95 using large FFTs over each core. So lets just say you set -5 on per per core. It will tell you whihc core failed it. If it gives no cores then you move on to the next - offset increment say for example -10. It will take roughly one and a half hours to do all the cores. But generally you will strart to see which cores are seriously failing after the second or third pass. Unless it just utterly dislikes it all and throw up a failed core on the first pass.

I am at a loss now why I have super low cpu scores in the 3dmark timespy default test and low cpu score in R23. In timespy I get roughly 11.5k give or take and in R23 I get 26k. Every other person I see gets way higher. I need to find someone to give me a hand.
 
I'm not versed in 3D Mark or CB23 I'm afraid. But are all the other settings the same /like memory, m2 and videocards/? Because that may affect the end result as well.
 
Hi guys, currently running a 5900x on a MSI X570 Tomahawk. I'm not overclocking however I notice the VCore hitting above 1.4v when its set to Auto in the Bios.

Is this normal? I am a bit concerned this is quite high
 
Rhaos said:
Hi guys, currently running a 5900x on a MSI X570 Tomahawk. I'm not overclocking however I notice the VCore hitting above 1.4v when its set to Auto in the Bios.

Is this normal? I am a bit concerned this is quite high
Click to expand...

Normal, believe it will actually go as high as 1.5v on light single threaded workloads
 
Rhaos said:
Hi guys, currently running a 5900x on a MSI X570 Tomahawk. I'm not overclocking however I notice the VCore hitting above 1.4v when its set to Auto in the Bios.

Is this normal? I am a bit concerned this is quite high
Click to expand...

It’s only when the CPU can boost high. That usually when less than a handful of cores are load. It won’t pump 1.4 continuously.
 
Rhaos said:
Hi guys, currently running a 5900x on a MSI X570 Tomahawk. I'm not overclocking however I notice the VCore hitting above 1.4v when its set to Auto in the Bios.

Is this normal? I am a bit concerned this is quite high
Click to expand...

I put an offset on so it lowers the voltage automatically etc. Keeps the Voltages below 1.4V and my temps down too!
 
I really recommend using OCCT when you are playing with PBO and CO.
I didn't win a silicon lottery but my system (5950X with decent PBO and CO settings) was stable. Every benchmark or game with no failure or reboot. But after I ran OCCT (single thread, SSE) I got errors. Then I had to change the CO for best core to +2, second best core to 0, two other cores to -4 and rest cores to -8. Otherswise I still got errors.

I suggest use OCCT, "Instruction set" to SSE (so neither AVX nor AVX2), "Threads" to Advanced, then choose only first core and enable "Core cycle" (for example every 600sec).
 
Why is overclockers price for the 5900X over £100 more than some other retailers ? and do you think we will see a price cut from AMD shortly because of Alder Lake ?
 
peahead said:
Why is overclockers price for the 5900X over £100 more than some other retailers ? and do you think we will see a price cut from AMD shortly because of Alder Lake ?
Click to expand...

Why ?, so it's in line with their 5950x being priced over £110 more than one from A.N.Other major retailer :D

...and no, I don't think AMD will drop prices while they can sell everything they can make
 
peahead said:
Why is overclockers price for the 5900X over £100 more than some other retailers ? and do you think we will see a price cut from AMD shortly because of Alder Lake ?
Click to expand...

Not sure, the question is would those cuts make it to retail buyers. Probably not IMO.
 
I found the recent HW unboxed review to be quite interesting with regards perf in win 10 versus win11.
It seems VERY surprising, that gaming perf was virtually the same in win 10 versus broken cache win 11.
Almost enough to make a reviewer think there is no odds in using their old results for future intel comparisons.
Then they tested with the fixed cache win 11 and found on 5950 that gaming perf was generally improved 2-3% in various titles.

One does ponder if the intel coded scheduler was indeed very precisely programmed to be on the face of it not damaging to AMD, yet under the hood crippling.
 
To my mind Intel are just being Intel, its always been thus, their corporate tactics are unpleasant, its a shame because the products are actually good, they don't need all the skullduggery in the background.
 
Destination said:
I found the recent HW unboxed review to be quite interesting with regards perf in win 10 versus win11.
It seems VERY surprising, that gaming perf was virtually the same in win 10 versus broken cache win 11.
Almost enough to make a reviewer think there is no odds in using their old results for future intel comparisons.
Then they tested with the fixed cache win 11 and found on 5950 that gaming perf was generally improved 2-3% in various titles.

One does ponder if the intel coded scheduler was indeed very precisely programmed to be on the face of it not damaging to AMD, yet under the hood crippling.
Click to expand...
From these results I would say Windows 10 is/was crippling AMD.
And Windows 11 did improve stuff under hood other than just Alder Lake scheduling, introducing unfortunate L3 bug along the way.

L3 bug was causing 5% frame drop for 5950X in R6:Siege and Watch Dogs, slightly less in gpu limited Cyberpunk.

Curse HW, until this video I didn't have a slightest intention to upgrade to W11
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom