It's ok but still rather overclock manually, i never get max turbo clock of 4.6GHz, max is 4.5GHz. Temps have dropped down about 20C which is the best part of it but i just stick to manually overclocking where i can have 6 cores at 4.45GHz and the other 6 at 4.3GHz. Can do 4.5GHz but it falls over in Chinebench R20 i guess it's due to the AVX workload as R15 is happy at 4.5GHz. Have SMT enabled at present for 24 threads, 4.5GHz is stable in R20 with SMT disabled.

Boosted my S/M clocks past stock numbers, but seeing the increase in base clock/voltage and the added heat that comes with it, im going back to using tweaked win profiles and lock the cpu to 50% for max when using power savings when im surfing/streaming etc. The profile works, but i just seems to put the proc on coke and make it feel like a terrier that saw you have a tennis ball.

Thanks 1usmus! Wanted to share my experience. I found for my setup that: 1) The ABBA update for my MSI gaming plus board caused massive BSODs (it was frustrating, almost decided to buy new Drive and Ram, checked and it seems a small population had the same issue on ABBA and rolling back fixed it), in my case I updated to 1.0.0.4 and it has been running both smoother and at better performance vs pre ABBA, even to the point where Synthetic bech marks were scoring higher (consistent 3600s on CB20). 2) With this power plan (universal) + PBO only, I have been hitting my highest CB20 scores of 3700 up to 3714 MT scores (prior on all other bios, I would get 3560 to 3600). 3. With the bios and windows update, plus the power plan, I am hitting 4.07 to 4.1 all core and 4.2 single core per Ryzen Master. I tested with PBO off as suggested, but was getting lower scores and same temps (62-68) under load. All other settings stated in instructions were applied + XMP (DRAM voltage set to 1.35v) + W10 1909 update on 1.0.0.4 bios. Great so far! Butter!

You need to leave pbo on auto, which disables pbo itself, but still allows to use PB. Most your gains are from bios/win/driver updates. So far all the profile does is put cores to sleep more aggressively, allowing others to boost higher. I have yet to see Anyone able to prove, that scheduling in win regarding cores, is handled any better than without this plan. Yes, you get better benches, but its not magically fix that win isnt optimized for amd/ryzen, like it is for intel/ht.

That is exactly what it does which has led to better numbers overall (synthetic wise) for me at 486 single and 3700 multi. My scores with both 1909 update by itself and with 1.0.0.4 combined would never hit 3700 without an all core OC without a 42/43 multiplet, with or with PBO set to advanced/motherboard limits, the best it would hit would be 3600 and some change or less on CB20. Performance of all core prior to the plan would drop to 4.0ghz or slightly under, but now it hits and stays between 4.07 to 4.1ghz with single core staying at 4.2ghz boost on a single core (longer, much longer). In short, it does exactly as said and for me, it has led to technically better numbers. Don't get me wrong, I did not see significant increases in gaming or real life even with a 4.3 all core OC (which is why I dropped the voltage back to stock and removed OC), but I think it is nice to see the performance "increasing" with just a tweaked power plan.

This is what im trying to say, you're not gaining performance, your just moving it around making it look like it does, because the clocks increased. The deeper sleep and longer time it takes to wake cores negates to gains. And since there is no change to how windows is handling threads/still jumps around between cores, we still need MS to improve on scheduling to really see what ryzen "could" do.

I'm confuse, which profil should I use if my windows 10 is updates? Universal or power plan?

Use the ryzen one, but change min cpu to around 25%. Im running a UPS, so i have win showing me the battery icon so i can switch profiles, so im using 0/50% on power saving (surfing/streaming /low power stuff, and balanced with 30/100% for gaming/encoding). This way i lower clocks/voltage/temps. There are ways to put shortcuts on the desktop to allow switching profiles if you don't run a UPS, just google it.

As of 12/29/19, there are 2 plans: 1usmus Universal & 1usmus Power. I am currently using 1usmus Power Plan. My voltage hit an all-time high of 1.5v, steady 1.45v under load. Temps are a bit higher, but benchmarks have shown an increase. Will try the other plan included, and will tinker with PBO in BIOS from Disabled>Auto (w/o using Ryzen Master)

That's after the recent update I believe. https://www.techpowerup.com/review/1usmus-power-plan-for-amd-ryzen-new-developments/ Or well the November update for Windows 10 1903 and then by default for Windows 10 1909 Hidden changes in the OS are lovely as ever I suppose though in this case it did help and the only thing needed is to ensure the bios settings are optimal or the important bits at least for getting this to work optimally. Pretty sure 1909 and who knows maybe more so for the upcoming 20H1 OS build only have smaller differences now with AMD's newest chipset driver and updates and this though this still has the thing with trying to force usage of the optimal cores instead of leaving it to be handled by the operating system. EDIT: Still trying to learn more about this though and the Ryzen 3000 features and how it all works. Forums had some info and comparisons too and the last few pages would have more results from the newest AMD chipset drivers and the 1909 OS build. (Or 18363.xxx as it's called.) https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/1usmus-power-plan-for-amd-ryzen-new-developments.261243/ (The latest chipset drivers would be a few days newer than this update unless there's a even newer 1.2 version now for this power plan need to check that.) Sounds like it's primarily down to the preferred core setting but then there's a lot of hidden settings to these power plans and well some testing will probably reveal which one performs ideally on the users system it's pretty simple enough to just change and compare AMD's and 1usmus and see. 🙂 Suppose there's also the way it does boost and fluctuations in how the processor is scaling up and down and low-core workloads or heavier stuff and all the things that these newer processors do and how these work under varying situations and demands. 😀 EDIT: Though that's probably also up to the actual software to use newer CPU models and additional cores well which probably works better for applications and work type software than it's doing for gaming although it's shifted a bit from the dominant quad core to nearing hexa core although scaling can be all over the place still as I understand things.

I cant find the most settings in the asus strix b450-f gaming , already have the last bios ver 3003

Not all of them are required I believe, some might be more for power saving reasons and the defaults via the AGESA should already be set pretty well although I suppose motherboard manufacturers implement their own overrides at times, long as it's running on the newer 1.0.0.4 AGESA itself it should work fairly well think even the updated 1.0.0.3 works. 🙂 Pretty sure the latest OS updates and chipset drivers have diminished the need for this power profile over AMD's Ryzen Balanced but it doesn't really hurt to check and compare both and I think 1Usmus still tries to enforce favored cores whereas AMD's setting is something like recommending using them at least for now with this current version of the power plan. 🙂 (Maybe a updated version will roll around after 20H1 comes out or some later cumulative for 19H2 but I think the November update already rolled in some benefits into 18362.x/18363.x for the 19H1/19H2 Win10 builds and scheduling and AMD CPU improvements.) EDIT: Well set pretty well in the defaults likely goes right out the window with some of the motherboards and whatever certain manufacturers override for gaining say a performance edge or something over the competition, probably not very reliable as a result without being able to check though not everyone exposes all these settings either for user customizing in the bios. (And some stuff from AMD isn't used or exposed by default either although a few motherboard models still have options for some of it so that's something as well.) EDIT: And then there's the other bit too which is also a issue where some manufacturers drop or delay support or further bios updates or focus on the newer hardware so older but still perfectly good hardware lags behind a bit in support hopefully that's not the case here though. (These bios updates while maybe not completely critical still sounds really important especially the AGESA parts and updates related to this that still applies especially when a Zen2 CPU is used.)

you cant force cores stuff with a power plan. software ye, but not just by adding profile/settings for it. compared to latest amd driver/profile, 1usmus will mainly allow for shorter/less deep sleep for cores/chip, and thats why you gain perf. major reason why there isnt much of a difference anymore vs amd profile.

That's a addition to the newer Windows 10 builds in regards to something for how AMD's Zen2 processors work and improved compatibility and support on this although I am not 100% on exactly what it does. 🙂 https://www.techpowerup.com/review/1usmus-power-plan-for-amd-ryzen-new-developments/ But yeah trying to get scaling to improve via the power profile itself likely won't do much for scaling and usage though the updates and bios and AMD's chipset driver added in might see it so the good cores get the brunt of the work assigned to them however many cores the application or OS actually ends up being capable of scaling to, from my knowledge on this at least. Something with the November or later cumulative update applied to 18362/18363 (The 2019 Windows 10 builds really.) changing up things with the CPU scheduler or having some tweaks and improvements to it's support for these processors which then makes it able to better handle AMD's chiplet design and the CCX for which cores to favor and how it's spread out, at least when it works as I assume software would also have to be multi-threaded and scaling well to actually see the biggest gains here. 😀 From the updated article itself it's this:

While AMD's latest power profile update works much better than before, it sets the scheduler to "may use best cores" (auto), trusting that Microsoft's OS kernel does the right thing, I've changed that to "must use best cores", to ensure the best cores really get used.

Which if everything works correctly the bios and CPU hardware will have the best chiplet and cores and the OS tries to scale to these which for AMD's current software package it tries to and for the current 1Usmus profile it's enforced. Not something I'm very experienced with but I assume it's compatibility related and this should ideally make the Windows 10 OS with these updates or newer build entirely scale better due to whatever Microsoft did under the hood while also keeping things going for older builds and OS's without this particular code update applied. The forum itself has more in-depth discussions and user reports on it, far as I can tell both seem to work fairly close though there is a lot of hidden settings and such in these power profiles so I'm not really sure on what AMD has changed beyond the more noticeable compared to the stock profiles and then this tweaked profile here on top of that. Certainly seems that AMD's own power plans do still apply for Zen2 CPU's and Windows 10 19H1/19H2 and later even after these OS improvements at the very least though tweaking could hinder or alter results a bit since it's reliant on a number of bios settings for boosting, sleep states and such for how it's intended to scale and work with the processor and this dynamic and fast updating state changes and clock switching and all that. 🙂 Then again I'm still trying to find some actual detail on why AMD has two and what this High Perf profile is even about when Balanced just seem to be better overall so still more to learn. (Nothing new.) EDIT: And for this well not sure what the best way to benchmark or compare would be, monitoring and just using the system probably and seeing how the processor behaves and how the cores work and how the threads and such get assigned plus performance and how it all scales. Could be a couple of differences between the two still. 🙂 I don't think the power profile itself has been changed in a while in the chipset drivers either, latest update was just the PCI driver at least. EDIT: Also not too sure on any underlying but less visible or publicly announced changes in Windows 10 20H1 or if AMD might have a newer driver for whenever this gets a proper public release April or whenever. Guess we'll see, even if Microsoft improves how the OS handles things there's probably a reason to keep using the power profiles for Zen2 processors and perhaps the Zen3 or whatever is next too. (Seems likely but that's still for what something like the end of the year or so before those are on the market.)

JonasBeckman:

But yeah trying to get scaling to improve via the power profile

"Scaling" is wrong word, imo. Its not like the performance will jump two (or more) times if OS scheduler will use those favorite cores more.

Yeah I'm not wording it very well re-reading the post again and then there is also the overall understanding or knowledge for how this works which I have some improving to do here, complex matter after all though I find it fascinating even if it's not easy to always follow or see how it's all working software and hardware. 🙂 There might be a bit of a performance increase from having the CPU using the best or favored cores more these would hit a higher clock speed though the way the processor updates so quickly on these power profiles and tends to do this burst of voltage and clock speed particularly for single threading or other lower core utilization conditions can still see it perform really well up around 4 - 4.5 Ghz depending on factors such as temps where AMD in the 1.0.0.3 AGESA updated lowered the thermal thresholds down a bit but the CPU can still do a really good job boosting to higher frequencies. 🙂 (Plus the cap AMD has on various models, think the 3900's max at 4.7 occasionally hitting 4.6 though not under full load and also only in shorter intervals at high voltage.) Then there's the issue I believe this scheduler update has at least also partially addressed where some software assigned just about every thread to the same core because I presume the scheduling behind this didn't understand or know the CCX chiplet design well and now it should be distributed more evenly which might mitigate some bottlenecking although for the higher-end 6, 8 and up to 16 core processor models there's still a thing with games and other software not being able to fully scale or take advantage of it so it might not matter much either if the program is barely loading four cores overall. EDIT: The chiplet design is a interesting one and improvements and other changes and additions to it for Ryzen 4000 and beyond will be fun to read about once more details are available, nice to see the OS also being better at using and understanding these processors and then there's a well there's a ton of little settings in these power profiles that are mostly hidden but AMD has some neat tweaks as does this variant of the power plan which could still have some advantages. 🙂 Only been using this processor for a few months so there's a lot more to read up on and understand or well try to get the basics at least for how it works, it is pretty complex and there's so many different factors for how the hardware works and then the bios and AGESA components on that and these drivers and the power plan plus the OS itself and how the actual software handles CPU scaling and overall resulting performance being able to handle this better or perhaps not. 😀 Nice to move away from the earlier primarily quad core dominance at least. Or what to say, going by various reported issues and common problems with threading and pitfalls and what other issues exists it's not an easy task either from a development perspective to get this all optimal and working across yet more multi-threaded environments or how to describe things best. Sleeping or spinning threads, waiting on other tasks synchronously or asynchronously and well far more way beyond my skill and knowledge plus older techniques and ways of doing it compared to modern improvements and advancements or additions where possible. (Well in short not bottlenecking things too badly I suppose it can be summed up as.) Bah I make it sound really weird either way I guess, overall I guess things are improving but occasionally some game or software just won't be cooperating ha ha.

I bought the first 3600 about a month after they came out, and since then all the changes done (bios/drivers/os etc), it's almost not noticeable between using amd and 1usmus plan for +90% of ppl using it as a "normal" rig for surfing/streaming/gaming etc. But amd and others can only make up for so much, and its really MS that needs to get their a@# in gear and not only update their shit to the "21st century" and start optimizing win for amd, not just intel. Then again, seeing how much stuff they break with updates, im not that confident that gonna happen with H1.

So this Power Plan from last Nov will work well and there is no issues with Microsoft being Microsoft?

Still works as a alternative to the AMD power plans bundled with the chipset drivers. 🙂 (Updated once to 1.1 but I don't think there's been any further changes to it since.)

fry178:

I bought the first 3600 about a month after they came out, and since then all the changes done (bios/drivers/os etc), it's almost not noticeable between using amd and 1usmus plan for +90% of ppl using it as a "normal" rig for surfing/streaming/gaming etc. But amd and others can only make up for so much, and its really MS that needs to get their a@# in gear and not only update their crap to the "21st century" and start optimizing win for amd, not just intel. Then again, seeing how much stuff they break with updates, im not that confident that gonna happen with H1.

MS isn't going to risk incurring the wrath of Intel by "optimizing" Windows for AMD... Besides, do we really need multi-threaded BSoDs? Next you'll expect MS to add color options.....