F5F Stay Refreshed Hardware Desktop Be aware of conflicting character bios in your OC world

Be aware of conflicting character bios in your OC world

Be aware of conflicting character bios in your OC world

C
CreeperHomie
Junior Member
14
05-18-2019, 05:48 PM
#1
I adjusted my CPU (3900x) to a 4.3gz overclock in the BIOS, and everything seemed normal—Task Manager displayed 4.3gz, and HWinfo reported correctly. After a restart, I observed discrepancies: the system summary still showed 4.3gz with a ratio of x43 on a 100MHz bus, while CPU minimum was 550 and base was 4300. On the CPU #0 sensor screen, the one showing green bars read 4.2gz, matching Task Manager. I wasn’t sure why this happened—I assumed the restart reset it back to 4.2, which was the previous setting. I checked the BIOS settings and found a CCD configuration labeled as 4.2, though I hadn’t changed it before. Recently, I’d seen a video by Debauer suggesting individual core speed adjustments to boost performance. I noted that the CCD bios was set to 4.2, which seemed unrelated to the core ratio values. I didn’t configure them myself, and I wasn’t aware of this setting. After changing them back to 4.3, both the summary and the sensor screen now reported 4.3gz. I believe these two readings can conflict, one doesn’t affect the other, and the CCD settings might override the core ratio data. I’m sharing this to warn others about potential mismatches between reports and actual performance.
C
CreeperHomie
05-18-2019, 05:48 PM #1

I adjusted my CPU (3900x) to a 4.3gz overclock in the BIOS, and everything seemed normal—Task Manager displayed 4.3gz, and HWinfo reported correctly. After a restart, I observed discrepancies: the system summary still showed 4.3gz with a ratio of x43 on a 100MHz bus, while CPU minimum was 550 and base was 4300. On the CPU #0 sensor screen, the one showing green bars read 4.2gz, matching Task Manager. I wasn’t sure why this happened—I assumed the restart reset it back to 4.2, which was the previous setting. I checked the BIOS settings and found a CCD configuration labeled as 4.2, though I hadn’t changed it before. Recently, I’d seen a video by Debauer suggesting individual core speed adjustments to boost performance. I noted that the CCD bios was set to 4.2, which seemed unrelated to the core ratio values. I didn’t configure them myself, and I wasn’t aware of this setting. After changing them back to 4.3, both the summary and the sensor screen now reported 4.3gz. I believe these two readings can conflict, one doesn’t affect the other, and the CCD settings might override the core ratio data. I’m sharing this to warn others about potential mismatches between reports and actual performance.

T
Tavado
Senior Member
505
05-25-2019, 06:38 PM
#2
Ryzen Master is frequently a superior alternative to BIOS.
T
Tavado
05-25-2019, 06:38 PM #2

Ryzen Master is frequently a superior alternative to BIOS.

R
RZYao
Member
75
05-25-2019, 08:34 PM
#3
I haven't received positive feedback about using it for OCing. It didn't perform well at 4.3, though the bios version seems okay.
R
RZYao
05-25-2019, 08:34 PM #3

I haven't received positive feedback about using it for OCing. It didn't perform well at 4.3, though the bios version seems okay.

B
Bring_It
Senior Member
423
05-26-2019, 03:00 AM
#4
I rely solely on Ryzen Master for boosting EDC and PPT performance, which provides extra headroom. Temperatures should stabilize better, and the boost potential increases. The BIOS remains unchanged except for memory overclock settings. There’s a discussion thread somewhere—I was conducting some tests.
B
Bring_It
05-26-2019, 03:00 AM #4

I rely solely on Ryzen Master for boosting EDC and PPT performance, which provides extra headroom. Temperatures should stabilize better, and the boost potential increases. The BIOS remains unchanged except for memory overclock settings. There’s a discussion thread somewhere—I was conducting some tests.

2
2wixXpie
Member
63
05-26-2019, 11:35 AM
#5
I practiced memory in BIOS, while other settings were in Ryzen Master. It's not flawless, but it performs better than some BIOS options.
2
2wixXpie
05-26-2019, 11:35 AM #5

I practiced memory in BIOS, while other settings were in Ryzen Master. It's not flawless, but it performs better than some BIOS options.

L
lumpy668
Junior Member
6
06-02-2019, 07:44 PM
#6
He saw a BuildZoid's OC video on a 3950/3900x board and explained how to configure it in the BIOS (300 230 230 from memory). That’s the method I used. My system uses an Aus Tuf Gaming motherboard, so it isn’t ideal for overclocking—it has decent VRM but isn’t a top-tier rig. Still, you don’t need extensive adjustments; it’s automatically applied at startup instead of requiring constant prompts from Ryzen about performance settings and warnings on each boot. Getting the all-core clock running smoothly doesn’t demand much tweaking; actually, my memory-based adjustments were more challenging and took longer to stabilize.
L
lumpy668
06-02-2019, 07:44 PM #6

He saw a BuildZoid's OC video on a 3950/3900x board and explained how to configure it in the BIOS (300 230 230 from memory). That’s the method I used. My system uses an Aus Tuf Gaming motherboard, so it isn’t ideal for overclocking—it has decent VRM but isn’t a top-tier rig. Still, you don’t need extensive adjustments; it’s automatically applied at startup instead of requiring constant prompts from Ryzen about performance settings and warnings on each boot. Getting the all-core clock running smoothly doesn’t demand much tweaking; actually, my memory-based adjustments were more challenging and took longer to stabilize.

S
slayer__is
Senior Member
521
06-07-2019, 10:53 AM
#7
I've dealt a lot with memory issues. Running 4x8 on the latest chips means hitting my rated speed isn't possible, but higher SOC voltage might help reach it.
S
slayer__is
06-07-2019, 10:53 AM #7

I've dealt a lot with memory issues. Running 4x8 on the latest chips means hitting my rated speed isn't possible, but higher SOC voltage might help reach it.

X
Xonus
Junior Member
7
06-08-2019, 09:45 AM
#8
I had to go beyond the standard 3600 off the XMP/DOCP rating because my settings were way too tight. It was a challenging process involving complex memory handling. In the end, I gave up on mastering the difficult task and instead chose a simpler approach by reducing everything by two, which turned out to be sufficient.
X
Xonus
06-08-2019, 09:45 AM #8

I had to go beyond the standard 3600 off the XMP/DOCP rating because my settings were way too tight. It was a challenging process involving complex memory handling. In the end, I gave up on mastering the difficult task and instead chose a simpler approach by reducing everything by two, which turned out to be sufficient.