Ryzen 7 2700 seriously slow

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Gikaseixas

Platinum Member
Jul 1, 2004
2,822
189
106
I have a 2600X and it comfortably outperforms my older i7 4770K in just about everything

My friend, you might have bought a faulty mobo, psu or done some odd config that's limiting performance greatly
 

ancient pedant

Junior Member
Jun 30, 2018
12
3
41
OP stated he "can't find pbo and xfr". This tells the story right there. Dig into the advanced menu and find the options they are both there. I have the same motherboard and a 2700x and I can assure you the error is yours. Whether you will be satisfied with the results once you sort this out, I can't tell you. I will say that the Asrock bios implementation is.....buggy. I am still on the shipping uefi firmware v.1.60. It works well and I have no reason to change it. With only PBO enabled, I am at 2.2 allcore w/o load and .8v. Moderate load gets me 2 or 3 cores to 4.28 or so and some cores to 1.44 v or so. P95 sees all cores at 3.9 and 1.35v. I can continue this 100% load for an hour and the voltage never climbs, the system is stable and responsive and the offset cpu temp stays below 80C. Your kit will do something similar to this if get it set up right. I also have a .8v undervolt on CPU, and a SOC overvolt that sets that voltage to 1.5v. Ram voltage is at 1.35 which gets my 2x16GB CL14 B-Die running at 3GHz. If you enable XFR, you lose your undervolt but gain a bit of OC. and heat. I skipped at as I prefer a quiet, cool system and 100Hz wasn't worth the noise to me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dorion

kschendel

Member
Aug 1, 2018
44
6
41
OP stated he "can't find pbo and xfr". This tells the story right there. Dig into the advanced menu and find the options they are both there. I have the same motherboard and a 2700x and I can assure you the error is yours....
I wouldn't be so sure, mostly because OP has a 2700 non-X; if his Taichi has a 2.0 (IIRC) or later BIOS, the PBO option was removed outright for non-X CPU's.

OP has a CPU that won't boost, and a 2700 should boost over 4GHz, dead stock, on 8-pin power. Either something goofy managed to get set in the BIOS, or he has a dud CPU, electrically or thermally, or just possibly, bad motherboard.
 

Shlong

Diamond Member
Mar 14, 2002
3,110
29
91
I went from a Sandy Bridge 2600K (4.5 ghz OC, 16GB DDR3 Ram, Samsung 840 EVO, GTX 970) to a Ryzen 7 1700 (4.0 ghz OC, 32GB DDR4 Ram, Samsung 960 Evo, GTX 1080) and it has been a pretty huge improvement for me. Day to day OS type stuff not so much but for video rendering and other tasks, it's much faster.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lightmanek

ancient pedant

Junior Member
Jun 30, 2018
12
3
41
I wouldn't be so sure, mostly because OP has a 2700 non-X; if his Taichi has a 2.0 (IIRC) or later BIOS, the PBO option was removed outright for non-X CPU's.

OP has a CPU that won't boost, and a 2700 should boost over 4GHz, dead stock, on 8-pin power. Either something goofy managed to get set in the BIOS, or he has a dud CPU, electrically or thermally, or just possibly, bad motherboard.
The Asrock form has lots of info from members who test all the firmware updates. http://forum.asrock.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=10944&KW=x470+taichi+bios+2.0&title=pbo-xfr-taichi-x470

I see many posts about instability and wonkiness with 2.0, but only one about no PBO/XFR. You could be on to something there. but I would expect more carping about it if it had disappeared for everyone. Unfortunately, 2.0 looks to be one you can't roll back from to the earler agesa. OP should persuse the linked form for more functional-looking version and try it, I think. Pretty sure some of the subsequent versions might suit him better. Folks there test quite enthusiatically and report results.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DAPUNISHER

EliteRetard

Diamond Member
Mar 6, 2006
5,953
812
136
The Asrock form has lots of info from members who test all the firmware updates. http://forum.asrock.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=10944&KW=x470+taichi+bios+2.0&title=pbo-xfr-taichi-x470

I see many posts about instability and wonkiness with 2.0, but only one about no PBO/XFR. You could be on to something there. but I would expect more carping about it if it had disappeared for everyone. Unfortunately, 2.0 looks to be one you can't roll back from to the earler agesa. OP should persuse the linked form for more functional-looking version and try it, I think. Pretty sure some of the subsequent versions might suit him better. Folks there test quite enthusiatically and report results.
I looked around on the forum, somebody else has the same issue as me. Someone claims that both these features are removed for non X CPUs.
http://forum.asrock.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=11254&KW=x470+xfr&title=enabling-pbo-or-xfr-in-x470-taichi-bios
http://forum.asrock.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=11327&KW=x470+xfr&title=bios-settings-cpu-fatal1ty-x470-gaming-k4-x470
http://forum.asrock.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=10029&KW=x470+xfr&title=fatal1ty-b450-gamingitx-ac-xfr2-and-pbo-options

So perhaps this is just a crap MOBO for Ryzen, which sucks since I spent time researching and a lot of extra money to get a good MOBO with proper VRM/BIOS. I guess I need to confirm everything one more time and contact AsRock? Guess I need to decide if it's worth it to tear down the whole system and try to return/replace the MOBO. Though based on my research only MSI has another proper VRM for 8 core CPUs under $200, and they also have BIOS issues (including power/voltage). Hmmm... I wasn't planning on messing with this again until near the end of the month...perhaps I can't wait that long. Might have to terrorize MS about moving the new Win10 license as well.

I guess this thread shouldn't be a rag on the CPU, but the MOBO makers instead. Either way though, this AMD experience is pretty crap. I could get a basic MOBO and mid-range Intel CPU for $400 and get a way better experience than I have with $400 of "premium" AMD gear. It's not my fault either, I shouldn't NEED to put in days of research just to get a safe functional MOBO (long term/VRMs) for an AMD CPU...but I did. Then I shouldn't NEED to spend days researching if said MOBOs have bad BIOS and/or improper support for CPUs claimed to be compatible. This is the only area I failed in my research, and I did look into it some...my initial search didn't turn up these problems with non X CPUs. Hell, I wasn't turning anything up searching the internet after I had the problem...only now am I finding other reports of similar issues.

I was just starting to cool down on all this, now my frustration levels are back up. Again I'm an experienced builder (several a year since the 90s), I should be able to easily select parts and have them just work properly. I think the main reason there aren't more reports of issues is because most people will never realize there's an issue...new/inexperienced builders, no comparable system for reference etc. Also the system is working, no obvious issues/malfunctions/glitches so it's easy to assume it's running "as intended".
 

Indus

Diamond Member
May 11, 2002
5,919
1,626
136
I'm gonna have to disagree with you on that because Taichi is one of the best boards for overclocking.

I think you should try resetting the board to safe defaults first rather than writing off the entire board. These are the XFR frequencies for the 2700.

1557083281726.png

So 4.1 ghz for 1 thread, 3.6 for 2-6 threads and 3.4 for more than that.

There's really no way to see how you get 3.2ghz max unless you tweaked something and forgot about it.. hence I suggested safe defaults.

If you have a good power supply and cooler.. you should easily be able to overclock it manually to 4.0ghz all cores and maybe even higher.

P.S. The included cooler is most likely decent enough for a 4.0 ghz overclock but you're not getting 4.2 on that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dorion

Indus

Diamond Member
May 11, 2002
5,919
1,626
136
Also could it be that you are looking at the wrong thing for your speeds?

I suggest using CPUZ- Taichi version..

Download here: https://www.cpuid.com/softwares/cpu-z.html

Scroll down and look on the right side where it says ASROCK TAICHI

It'll look like this:

ryc-1.JPG

And if you right click on it, it'll show you all the speeds of individual cores.
 

EliteRetard

Diamond Member
Mar 6, 2006
5,953
812
136
Like I said, I'll double check and confirm everything one more time (and try to contact AsRock). I'm about 125 miles away though, got a few reasons I can't head over there right now.
 

LTC8K6

Lifer
Mar 10, 2004
28,523
1,565
126
A Ryzen 2700 that doesn't boost at all should bring howls of protests from owners.

The moment they submit any benchmark, it will be way too low, and they will know something is up.

There would be a class action lawsuit as AMD clearly lists PB2 and XFR2 as features of the Ryzen 2700.

AMD would hammer any mobo manufacturer that crippled it's CPUs.

Contact AMD and tell them that your Asrock Taichi board has disabled PB2 and XFR2, crippling your Ryzen chip.
 

topmysteries5

Member
Jan 31, 2019
152
12
51
I looked around on the forum, somebody else has the same issue as me. Someone claims that both these features are removed for non X CPUs.
http://forum.asrock.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=11254&KW=x470+xfr&title=enabling-pbo-or-xfr-in-x470-taichi-bios
http://forum.asrock.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=11327&KW=x470+xfr&title=bios-settings-cpu-fatal1ty-x470-gaming-k4-x470
http://forum.asrock.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=10029&KW=x470+xfr&title=fatal1ty-b450-gamingitx-ac-xfr2-and-pbo-options

So perhaps this is just a crap MOBO for Ryzen, which sucks since I spent time researching and a lot of extra money to get a good MOBO with proper VRM/BIOS. I guess I need to confirm everything one more time and contact AsRock? Guess I need to decide if it's worth it to tear down the whole system and try to return/replace the MOBO. Though based on my research only MSI has another proper VRM for 8 core CPUs under $200, and they also have BIOS issues (including power/voltage). Hmmm... I wasn't planning on messing with this again until near the end of the month...perhaps I can't wait that long. Might have to terrorize MS about moving the new Win10 license as well.

I guess this thread shouldn't be a rag on the CPU, but the MOBO makers instead. Either way though, this AMD experience is pretty crap. I could get a basic MOBO and mid-range Intel CPU for $400 and get a way better experience than I have with $400 of "premium" AMD gear. It's not my fault either, I shouldn't NEED to put in days of research just to get a safe functional MOBO (long term/VRMs) for an AMD CPU...but I did. Then I shouldn't NEED to spend days researching if said MOBOs have bad BIOS and/or improper support for CPUs claimed to be compatible. This is the only area I failed in my research, and I did look into it some...my initial search didn't turn up these problems with non X CPUs. Hell, I wasn't turning anything up searching the internet after I had the problem...only now am I finding other reports of similar issues.

I was just starting to cool down on all this, now my frustration levels are back up. Again I'm an experienced builder (several a year since the 90s), I should be able to easily select parts and have them just work properly. I think the main reason there aren't more reports of issues is because most people will never realize there's an issue...new/inexperienced builders, no comparable system for reference etc. Also the system is working, no obvious issues/malfunctions/glitches so it's easy to assume it's running "as intended".
Have you tried reinstalling windows or ubuntu or any linux ? This can confirm if problem is with hardware or software. 2700 don't need a SPECIAL VRM on a SPECIAL motherboard for its 8 cores. VRM is Voltage regulator module, it converts voltages from psu to voltage required by cpu. There are cheap X99 motherboard with cheap VRM sets and single 8 pin and they still support OC of 18-22 cores xeons. Ryzen 2700 is 65w tdp at stock, it wont boost to 4.1ghz when cpu is under heavy workload (all core), to maintain its TDP. 4.1ghz is only for 2 threads (1core), if load is on 3-4 cores, speed will be dropped in 3.5-3.6ghz range.
I downloaded and read manual of X470 taichi and only 8pin in needed for cpu, another 4pins next to 8pin is aux power, required for higher overclocking with 2700x. When you oc a 2700x, then its tdp is ~ 150w, at that time you require 8+4pins. But 2700 (non x) is limited by 65w tdp unless you oc it. Nobody here is going to help you by just guessing problems and solutions. We need benchmarks to find out where problem is occurring. Try reinstalling windows or ubuntu or any linux to check raw performance.
 
Last edited:

VirtualLarry

Lifer
Aug 25, 2001
44,749
3,812
126
Have you tried reinstalling windows or ubuntu or any linux ?
Was this not a fresh install with the newest version of Windows 10? If it wasn't, then grab a fresh SSD and make a fresh install. I've seen more power-management-related difficulties in Windows, from installations that were migrated between motherboards or even entire platforms.
 
  • Like
Reactions: topmysteries5

DrMrLordX

Lifer
Apr 27, 2000
13,015
2,688
136
this AMD experience is pretty crap.
I am still floored that you didn't dial in a static overclock to see if that would work. Being an experienced builder, that's the first thing you should have done. 3.2 GHz limitations should set off all kind of alarm bells. X470 Taichi is a good board, and it should work perfectly out-of-the-box with an R7 2700. Even launch boards from 2017 with a 1700 worked better than that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ranulf

lightmanek

Member
Feb 19, 2017
97
110
76
I have a feeling our OP is trolling us.

I ran 4790K and upgraded to R7 1700. Big upgrade there. Even old Ryzen 1st gen boosted nicely and mine never ran 3.2GHz spending most of its time at 3.6 or 3.7GHz.

Refusing to upgrade BIOS to the newest version is not a good practise.

Not posting any screens showing issue?

Not trying different OS?

Not dialing in manual OC?


From my experience, CPU can stay at base clock and maximum voltage if BIOS is not recognizing it properly. It's a safety setting to just make it work.

Best thing to do in case of OP is to flash newest BIOS, reset CMOS on motherboard and install new copy of Windows 10 at least ver 1709.

I've build countless systems, both Intel and AMD (Cyrix, IDT, VIA etc.) and I've seen similar boost issue both on AMD and Intel systems. I never made big fuss about it as it was always resolved with a bit of tinkering.

There is also a possibility of damaged goods, so testing with different motherboard or CPU would give us quick answers.

If OP is not pulling our leg, hope this helps him.

PS. Ryzen even when manually OC can and will lower power consumption when idle. I've found the difference to be single digit Watts, not worth stressing about too much.
 

EliteRetard

Diamond Member
Mar 6, 2006
5,953
812
136
I am still floored that you didn't dial in a static overclock to see if that would work. Being an experienced builder, that's the first thing you should have done. 3.2 GHz limitations should set off all kind of alarm bells. X470 Taichi is a good board, and it should work perfectly out-of-the-box with an R7 2700. Even launch boards from 2017 with a 1700 worked better than that.
I did try a straight OC for half a minute...but found it was sticking at that speed all the time (3.8GHz ~1.4v). I'd like the chip to be able to use power saving features and reduce clocks when not loaded. I only had a limited time to work with the hardware before I needed to be elsewhere. Obviously 3.2GHz set off alarms...I ended up spending 3 days doing research and fiddling with everything trying to figure it out, no time to deal with an OC when I couldn't get the basic features to work first.
 

EliteRetard

Diamond Member
Mar 6, 2006
5,953
812
136
Refusing to upgrade BIOS to the newest version is not a good practise.
Updating the BIOS was one of the steps I took trying to resolve the issues. I only updated to 2.0 as I found it recommended over the newest versions when running 2000 series. I heard that BIOS storage is limited, adding support/features for 3000 series may require removing features for the older series. The BIOS can't be rolled back.

Not trying different OS?
This PC needs Win10, fresh install using the latest downloaded version from MS...bought new activation through the MS store (after install). Updated and installed all the latest software/drivers at first boot.

Not dialing in manual OC?
I did shortly, as mention above and earlier in the thread manual OC appeared to lock the speed.

Best thing to do in case of OP is to flash newest BIOS, reset CMOS on motherboard and install new copy of Windows 10 at least ver 1709.
Essentially what I did, choosing the newest recommended BIOS for my CPU.

I've build countless systems, both Intel and AMD (Cyrix, IDT, VIA etc.) and I've seen similar boost issue both on AMD and Intel systems. I never made big fuss about it as it was always resolved with a bit of tinkering.
I did more than a bit of tinkering, and nothing I found on the internet after days of looking solved it either. The obvious conclusion was the CPU was just slow in the stock configuration. I didn't have any further time to spend trying to figure out how to get a manual OC to idle/boost properly.

There is also a possibility of damaged goods, so testing with different motherboard or CPU would give us quick answers.
If I had access to spare AM4 parts at the time I likely would've tried that. The closest thing we have to a local computer store is the Walmart electronics section.
 

DrMrLordX

Lifer
Apr 27, 2000
13,015
2,688
136
I did try a straight OC for half a minute...but found it was sticking at that speed all the time (3.8GHz ~1.4v). I'd like the chip to be able to use power saving features and reduce clocks when not loaded. I only had a limited time to work with the hardware before I needed to be elsewhere. Obviously 3.2GHz set off alarms...I ended up spending 3 days doing research and fiddling with everything trying to figure it out, no time to deal with an OC when I couldn't get the basic features to work first.
Now we're getting somewhere.

Yes, if you OC a Ryzen processor, it disables all the boost features unless you do a p-state OC (which is an involved process). If the chip booted @ 3.8 GHz, ran, and was stable, then it helps you to eliminate some of the possible root causes of the system failing to boost past 3.2 GHz and otherwise turning in poor performance. What temps did you get stress testing @ 3.8 GHz? Did you stress test it at all for stability? How much power did it pull from the wall? Also, 1.4v is more than you should have needed for that OC. Most Pinnacle Ridge chips could manage that @ 1.3v easily. In fact, I'm pretty sure my 1800x can manage that.
 

lightmanek

Member
Feb 19, 2017
97
110
76
Updating the BIOS was one of the steps I took trying to resolve the issues. I only updated to 2.0 as I found it recommended over the newest versions when running 2000 series. I heard that BIOS storage is limited, adding support/features for 3000 series may require removing features for the older series. The BIOS can't be rolled back.



This PC needs Win10, fresh install using the latest downloaded version from MS...bought new activation through the MS store (after install). Updated and installed all the latest software/drivers at first boot.



I did shortly, as mention above and earlier in the thread manual OC appeared to lock the speed.



Essentially what I did, choosing the newest recommended BIOS for my CPU.



I did more than a bit of tinkering, and nothing I found on the internet after days of looking solved it either. The obvious conclusion was the CPU was just slow in the stock configuration. I didn't have any further time to spend trying to figure out how to get a manual OC to idle/boost properly.



If I had access to spare AM4 parts at the time I likely would've tried that. The closest thing we have to a local computer store is the Walmart electronics section.
You are not losing anything by flashing newest BIOS. The items AMD removed from AGESA are for Bristol Ridge CPUs and you won't miss them if running Ryzen CPU.

Windows 10 fresh install is recommended, using default BIOS setting, without even increasing DIMM speed to 3200MHz. Keep it at safe 2133 just to rule out wired corruption.
If you are confident in your OS being 100% good and fresh, then why not use one of the Linux Live distros just to verify turbo functionality is still broken.

I understand that sometime you don't have access to spare motherboard or processor, but it is down to you as to how far you want to go with troubleshooting your issue. You just have to realize that it is your system which behaves abnormally. Neither AsRock nor AMD designed their product to operate this way. There is an issue somewhere and it can be rectified. It might require warranty repair/replacement or simply taking a step back and redoing everything from scratch.

If your attitude is, 'my way is the only way and it should work', then we can't help you.

BTW, have you tried resetting CPU in the socket?
Not easy guessing your specific fault with little info we have, but sometimes a wild ide might work.
 

VirtualLarry

Lifer
Aug 25, 2001
44,749
3,812
126
My guess is OP tried manual OC, found out it wouldn't boost/power-save, and then started going into UEFI and twiddling boost/power-management settings to try to get that to work, and likely... mucked it all up?

Or OP, upon first boot after assembling parts (takes like 40 seconds to POST, long black time of Ryzen first initialization), maybe hit RESET or powered off and powered on again, screwing up some of that mysterious initial init stuff it does?

Or maybe OP just got a faulty CPU, and that's why XFR2 / PBO isn't showing up in BIOS? (Or the manual OC caused them to hide.)
 

DrMrLordX

Lifer
Apr 27, 2000
13,015
2,688
136
(Or the manual OC caused them to hide.)
Assuming the X470 Taichi operates similarly to the X370 Taichi (which is probable), manual OC only disables boost modes while it's active. Ditto if you set manual voltages (but not voltage offsets).

If you use voltage offsets, p-state changes, and/or bclk adjustments, boost stays active.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lightmanek

alexruiz

Platinum Member
Sep 21, 2001
2,505
139
106
Wow, interesting thread.
I have observed the same, so here is my take. It is based on empiric observation, but seems to be fairly common on the web.

Of the 4 Ryzen 2000 series CPUs, 3 of them are gems, one is not. The 2700 is the one that doesn't shine. While the other 3 boost perfectly fine to their max single core, and even some very aggressive all-core boost, the 2700 refuses to do the same.

I have built a few system based on the 4 of them, the 3 other chips perform admirably. I have observed all-core boost of around 3.85GHz for several 2600 chips systems, 4GHz for several 2600X systems, and 4050MHz for several 2700X machines. Unless you are going for extreme, who wants to overclock when precision boost is loading them that high, and still keeping the dynamic adjustments?

The only 2 system I built with the 2700, however, refused to boost in the same way. Worse still, even in cases that were lightly threaded, the boost clocks still stayed very low. Unless it was a clearly single thread operation, the boost clocks never made it anywhere close to 4GHz.

Speculation:
8 Zen+ cores at around 3.3GHz are already at the 65W thermal limit. The 2700 is enforcing the 65W thermal limit very fiercely, so it is not boosting even if precision boost is enabled. The 2600 has 2 less cores, so has heat to spare and hence it can boost higher. The 2600X and 2700X processors are 95W and 105Wm so also have more thermal headroom.

@EliteRetard
Disable power saving features (cool and quiet)
Let the 2700 run warmer, see if that does the trick.
If its boost to around 3.6GHz-3.7GHz, it will demolish your old system.
Edit: Also, is it a clean windows install? I read it, you already posted it is a clean install.
What version of windows 10? What AMD chipset drivers version did you install?
 

Shmee

Memory and Storage, Graphics Cards
Super Moderator
Sep 13, 2008
3,904
287
126
Perhaps increase the max power envelope? Should be able to do that in BIOS or Ryzen master I would think.
 

EliteRetard

Diamond Member
Mar 6, 2006
5,953
812
136
*snip* What temps did you get stress testing @ 3.8 GHz? Did you stress test it at all for stability? How much power did it pull from the wall? *snip*
It was just a quick test...when I couldn't find other options I decided to see what a manual OC would do. I used the stock ~1.4v since it was a quick test, verified the speed, and found it was an always on OC so I reset the BIOS. I did a little load testing, but don't recall the results from that test.

*snip*
Windows 10 fresh install is recommended, using default BIOS setting, without even increasing DIMM speed to 3200MHz. Keep it at safe 2133 just to rule out wired corruption.
If you are confident in your OS being 100% good and fresh, then why not use one of the Linux Live distros just to verify turbo functionality is still broken.

*snip*

If your attitude is, 'my way is the only way and it should work', then we can't help you.

BTW, have you tried resetting CPU in the socket?
Not easy guessing your specific fault with little info we have, but sometimes a wild ide might work.
I always install with everything at stock. I do verify everything is detecting properly in the BIOS, make sure boot order is correct, ensure AHCI, etc. I noticed that stock was 2400MHz on the RAM, and they were in the proper slots suggested by the install guide. As for Linux, never used it and probably never will. Not worth screwing up Windows and it's license to try something I have no interest/experience with.

I'd say my attitude is "I follow industry best practices, and if something is broken/seems odd search the internet for other ideas" and "If I can't solve it, can't find any solution after exhaustive research, then it's either not a problem or not possible to salvage". Since I couldn't find a solution and the chip was "working", I assumed it was of the "not a problem" category and the chip was just slow at stock. I did just turn down your Linux idea, but I don't think it's a valid solution for me. Since we love car analogies here, it's like saying a car is sluggish from the factory on the recommended fuel...and you're telling me to try racing fuel "just to see what happens". Sure that might work, but it could also cause issues, and I'm not going to ever use racing fuel so why risk it. A suggestion I haven't tried is "MORE PSU!" and that'd be like "try a bigger battery"...I may not agree that it'll do anything, but I will give that a try when I get a chance (it can't hurt anything). I might try reseating the CPU, but the heatsink is such a hassle I'll leave that as a last resort thing. I have seen a CPU somehow not seat properly and manifest as missing RAM (so it's not impossible).

My guess is OP tried manual OC, found out it wouldn't boost/power-save, and then started going into UEFI and twiddling boost/power-management settings to try to get that to work, and likely... mucked it all up?

Or OP, upon first boot after assembling parts (takes like 40 seconds to POST, long black time of Ryzen first initialization), maybe hit RESET or powered off and powered on again, screwing up some of that mysterious initial init stuff it does?

Or maybe OP just got a faulty CPU, and that's why XFR2 / PBO isn't showing up in BIOS? (Or the manual OC caused them to hide.)
I'd say incorrect on all accounts. I build a system, start and wait for boot screen to load/verify BIOS, then reboot to load OS. I always try to use the latest build/service pack for OS install (burning a new disk, or updating a USB stick), and then make sure to get all the new updates and drivers. Download utilities like HWMonitor and CPUZ to verify, and run several tests (in this case things like Prime95, HCIMemtest, ASSSD) to ensure everything is working (I have had bad sticks of RAM etc). Once everything is verified good at stock, only then do I go back to BIOS to optimize (If it's even needed/wanted). During these initial tests I found the system felt slow, and noticed it was running closer to 3GHz than 4GHz. Only then did I proceed to the BIOS to try and optimize things. Couldn't seem to find a solution with the stock BIOS, so I looked at flashing it. Decided 2.0 would be the best version to try, verified I met all the requirements (including installing the latest AMD driver stack first), made sure BIOS was fully reset (I always make sure to reset before flashing), and went about it. I still couldn't find the XFR/PBO options, tried a quick OC to see how it worked on this system, tried whatever else I could find that might work. I always rest the BIOS after an unsuccessful setting/attempt. I used to write down settings (sometimes still do) but more often now I use saved profiles for known good settings (I always tweak CPU, RAM, etc separately and then work to combine them).

And if you read some of the latest posts here, you'll find a forum where it seems verified that AsRock has indeed purposely removed XFR/PBO when detecting non-X CPUs. At least there are several other people who have noticed this "issue" and decided to post it.

*snip*

Disable power saving features (cool and quiet)
Let the 2700 run warmer, see if that does the trick.
If its boost to around 3.6GHz-3.7GHz, it will demolish your old system.
Edit: Also, is it a clean windows install? I read it, you already posted it is a clean install.
What version of windows 10? What AMD chipset drivers version did you install?

Perhaps increase the max power envelope? Should be able to do that in BIOS or Ryzen master I would think.
Interesting observations...I actually wondered if it was a power limit. Unlike modern Intel chips however (which you can alter power levels and duration, boost clocks for each core, etc), I wasn't able to find such settings with this system. AM4 is new to me, along with its XFR/PBO...so I might be missing other adjustment/options (though I spent plenty of time looking online to figure it out). There's definitely no XFR/PBO setting for me though. For the short minute I tried RyzenMaster I did see it had a listed power limit of 65w and seemed to be stuck at max even at idle. I found the software to be terrible, unclear, and totally nonfunctional and pretty much immediately uninstalled it. I had a similar experience with the Radeon control (or whatever), horrible interface, broken/dysfunctional software, just unusable garbage. The old Win95/98 looking CCC was vastly better (it wasn't perfect either though), and I actually had use for it (especially color calibration which is non existent now [forces you to Windows calibration, which is crap]).

Ideally I want to have all the power saving features, I simply want the CPU to run low speed/power at idle and give me full high performance when there's tons of stuff loaded up (as it should, as it's being advertised). As you mention this particular CPU just doesn't seem to work as you'd think/expect based on it's advertising and all the Ryzen hype online. Perhaps the other CPU's are good, I dunno...while I have been quite frustrated I had other things I needed to do that have kept me away and keep it from turning to rage. There's seriously nothing I hate more than getting ripped off, especially when I work really hard for it. There's still a chance I'll give Ryzen a second try sometime (perhaps 2nd gen 3000 and/or only X CPU's).

I hadn't thought about the power saving features being the problem though (if it's not responsible for idle clocks/voltage, and more of a limit on the high end [I don't care about power under heavy load]). That's an easy thing to test, and I'll give it a try.

Cant say what exact versions of software I installed, but they should've been the latest. The Win10 download I found was the "(fixed)October" build (and fully updated on first boot) I recall the AMD chip driver was 18 something and the AMD GPU 19 something.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lightmanek

VirtualLarry

Lifer
Aug 25, 2001
44,749
3,812
126
The Win10 download I found was the "(fixed)October" build (and fully updated on first boot)
Where did you get the download? Was it actually labeled as such on the download site? Did you acquire it OTHER THAN downloading the MS Media Creation Tool from Microsoft, and make your own USB install stick?
 
  • Like
Reactions: dorion

LTC8K6

Lifer
Mar 10, 2004
28,523
1,565
126
So what do benches look like? Cinebench? CPU-Z score?

Something to compare with.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY