3700X Takt im Idle?

3dfx01 schrieb:

Uff, dort sind die Taktraten eher viel zu niedrig als zu hoch, ich bin verwirrt
Hier ein Bild davon:

Unter CPU-Z wird mir was anderes angezeigt, was stimmt denn nun?

Zum Vergrößern anklicken....

Hier kann man das auch ganz gut erkennen. - Die Kerne die bei ~ 1-2 Watt Verbrauch liegen sind am Idlen und takten entsprechend deutlich niedriger. Auch wenn bei CoreClock 3,x GHz steht. Wenn du dort Kerne hast die bei 0,0xx Watt liegen sind diese sogar im "Deepsleep" und quasi komplett deaktiviert bis sie wieder benötigt werden. Vor allem dieser Deepsleep macht vielen Programmen beim auslesen das Leben schwer. ​

The Effective frequency does not represent a particular real clock, but the average clock value where sleeping states do not contribute to clock.
So for example when a core is running: 800 MHz, 0 (sleep), 0 (sleep), 0 (sleep)
the average value (effective clock) is: (800 + 0 + 0 + 0) / 4 = 200 MHz

Zum Vergrößern anklicken....

It has become a common practice for several years to report instant (discrete) clock values for CPUs. This method is based on knowledge of the actual bus clock (BCLK) and sampling of core ratios at specific time points. The resulting clock is then a simple result of ratio * BCLK. Such approach worked quite well in the past, but is not longer sufficient. Over the years CPUs have become very dynamic components that can change their operating parameters hundreds of times per second depending on several factors including workload amount, temperature limits, thermal/VR current and power limits, turbo ratios, dynamic TDPs, etc. While this method still represents actual clock values and ratios reported match defined P-States, it has become insufficient to provide a good overview of CPU dynamics especially when parameters are fluctuating with a much higher frequency than any software is able to capture. Another disadvantage is that cores in modern CPUs that have no workload are being suspended (lower C-States). In such case when software attempts to poll their status, it will wake them up briefly and thus the clock obtained doesn't respect the sleeping state.

Hence a new approach needs to be used called the Effective clock. This method relies on hardware's capability to sample the actual clock state (all its levels) across a certain interval, including sleeping (halted) states. The software then queries the counter over a specific polling period, which provides the average value of all clock states that occurred in the given interval. HWiNFO v6.13-3955 Beta introduces reporting of this clock.
Many users might be surprised how different this clock is in comparison to the traditional clock values reported. But please note that this effective value is the average clock across the polling interval used in HWiNFO.
This new method has been tested on several CPUs and has shown to provide more accurate results especially in scenarios with extremely fluctuating values.
For example on Cascade Lake-X running a 1C workload, the effective clock provides values closer to specified 1C Turbo ratio limit, while (due to heavy fluctuations enforced by power limits) the discrete method only occasionally is able to sample the highest ratio.
On Zen2 (Matisse) systems this method can provide results closer to Ryzen Master (RM) per-core clock values, especially because it respects sleeping cores. It is assumed that such cores are marked as sleeping by RM when the effective (average) clock is below a certain threshold (somewhere around 50 MHz and below). Please note, that RM uses a different (proprietary) technique to measure clocks, so there might be some differences between the effective clock in HWiNFO and RM. While we work with AMD on the best way to access more accurate data to measure clock and voltage values, this remains the only method. Additionally, the current effective clock method is an architectural feature meaning that it doesn't depend on a certain CPU model, but is rather universal across a broad range of CPU families.

Zum Vergrößern anklicken....

3dfx01 schrieb:

Bei SMU bin ich jedoch verblüfft, es können doch nicht alle Kerne im Tiefschlaf sein, wo nur zwei im Halbschlaf sind, oder?

Kann man sagen, wenn man wissen will wo der maximale Takt anliegt kann man allen trauen, bei Idle darf man CPU-Z keinesfalls trauen?

Zum Vergrößern anklicken....

3dfx01 schrieb:

Nachtrag:
Das habe ich fast vergessen, den Energiesparplan, ich nutze scheinbar automatisch, also ohne Hand anzulegen, AMD Ryzen Balanced.
Sollte man dies ändern, wenn man im idle wenig Stromverbrauch haben will? Nach deiner Auflistung würde das aber keinen unterschied machen oder?

Zum Vergrößern anklicken....