Should i leave Global C-States Disabled by default?

[Waldorf]

@lolokaa
having issues using 99/100% means you have problems with that system, not with the fact your using those settings.

ignoring your advising against something you have doubtly tested on +2000 system, so statistically speaking, zero way for you to confirm anything.

besides, this is official recommendation for AMx/Ryzen cpus and using win 10/11 OS, so if you cant spend 5 min doing an online search to find whatever additional info you want, doesnt mean i will do it for you.



@JimCarry
using the ultra plan is fine, as long as you adjust the min state to 99, so that clocks arent kept artificially high.

[lolokaa]

@lolokaa
having issues using 99/100% means you have problems with that system, not with the fact your using those settings.

ignoring your advising against something you have doubtly tested on +2000 system, so statistically speaking, zero way for you to confirm anything.

besides, this is official recommendation for AMx/Ryzen cpus and using win 10/11 OS, so if you cant spend 5 min doing an online search to find whatever additional info you want, doesnt mean i will do it for you.



@JimCarry
using the ultra plan is fine, as long as you adjust the min state to 99, so that clocks arent kept artificially high.

Would you redirect us to those sources? I can't find anything through my own googling-- and I can't find any confirmation that these changes are necessary through my own testing. Let's keep it on topic.

[Waldorf]

No, as i dont care to keep "'anything" once i have confirmed things to be valid (like mfg info or community feedback).

never said they are necessary, system will run fine, this is to optimize win for ryzen use.
works fine on the last 20 rigs i build for customers (500-3K), on any ryzen setup i helped with, incl multiple forums in past +4y,
and not a single one reporting issues because of min 99/max 100 setting, so again, if there is an issue, its with the system, not the setting itself.

[lolokaa]

You would think it is easy to find an "official recommendation" by AMD if it was true. If you can't find it, perhaps it's not as "official" as you say. My system runs issue-free. Setting your recommendation produced issues-- issues that I've actually never seen in my 30 years as an expert user of diverse Windows configurations.

It would benefit everyone reading these posts, and your credibility, if you can back up your statement with the sources that you keep repeating that you base your recommendations on.

As until then, they should be taken with a grain of salt, considering there's no apparent technical difference-- specifically benefits, other than producing issues across the system (refer to my previous posts).

[JimCarry]

@JimCarry
using the ultra plan is fine, as long as you adjust the min state to 99, so that clocks arent kept artificially high.

Ok thank you,so that means i did it, and you saw my last post showing my power option settings.

[JimCarry]

I would advise against doing this. There is a measureable difference in DPC latency when you do this, and through my testing, when setting the min. to 99%, every time (Ultimate plan)-- the displays began producing visual glitches, "pixelated boxes" flickering, random letters in text appearing and disappearing, etc. At least, on an AMD system (5900X) with an RTX 3080, this is something you should avoid.

I ask of the guy who posted the claim about min.99-max100% to share with us his sources on the claim that this is necessary and/or beneficial in relation to the CPU and OS handling the clocks.

i would also ask for someone to do benchmakrs / test and source for tweaks.i think 100% / 100% is better at least in my case amd cpu + amd vc.

[Waldorf]

@lolokaa
do or dont, fine with me.
i have no info as it was likely a response by amd staff in forum related to ryzen setup guide/issue, and i wont waste my time search adn find it again, just to proof anything to you.

and anyone that cared to read a ryzen guide in the past couple of years knows about the modified power plans amd added with their chipset driver installs, to do exactly what i stated (adjusting min cpu perf on an additional balanced profile).


@jimcarry
of course you will see a difference in any bench, as you artificially keep the cpu clocks at "max", vs the time it takes the sleeping (downclocked) cores ramping up to full speed.
but its not relevant unless you play at low res/high refresh (and are gpu limited), and its easy to gain more than that tiny loss by tweaking/optimizing other things, e.g. secondary timings

[JimCarry]

@lolokaa
do or dont, fine with me.
i have no info as it was likely a response by amd staff in forum related to ryzen setup guide/issue, and i wont waste my time search adn find it again, just to proof anything to you.

and anyone that cared to read a ryzen guide in the past couple of years knows about the modified power plans amd added with their chipset driver installs, to do exactly what i stated (adjusting min cpu perf on an additional balanced profile).


@jimcarry
of course you will see a difference in any bench, as you artificially keep the cpu clocks at "max", vs the time it takes the sleeping (downclocked) cores ramping up to full speed.
but its not relevant unless you play at low res/high refresh (and are gpu limited), and its easy to gain more than that tiny loss by tweaking/optimizing other things, e.g. secondary timings

So i played 3 games with 99% / 100% ,it was very strange feeling,i paly 640x480 on 240hertz,so on the third or fourth game i change back to 100% / 100%.and i also feel that is better,maybe in my case i change many things in my power plan so its better 100% / 100% if you wish i can upload it somewhere and we can do test.again this is pure feeling.i am not saying that your tweak is bad,or not to share more,i am saying in my case i think its worse and 100% / 100% is better.i have xmp profile loaded in bios but for amd.

[Waldorf]

@jimcarry
sure, use it with 100/100, but short of getting paid to play games, you're only wasting power and run the cpu hotter.

i would rather see that you switch to a synced screen (doesnt matter if Nv/AMD or VRR), this also helps/allows to use certain low/latency enhancements.
a couple ppl in my Siege tema as well as some friends play mainly pvp on a pretty good level, and almost all did past 1-3 upgrades on things like that, rather than faster cpu/gpu for increase of refresh (+144).

[JimCarry]

@jimcarry
sure, use it with 100/100, but short of getting paid to play games, you're only wasting power and run the cpu hotter.

i would rather see that you switch to a synced screen (doesnt matter if Nv/AMD or VRR), this also helps/allows to use certain low/latency enhancements.
a couple ppl in my Siege tema as well as some friends play mainly pvp on a pretty good level, and almost all did past 1-3 upgrades on things like that, rather than faster cpu/gpu for increase of refresh (+144).

So from my testing i load up fresh new power plan via this command "powercfg -duplicatescheme e9a42b02-d5df-448d-aa00-03f14749eb61" delete all other power plans and played some cs2.so mid game i check it was very bad minimum proc state was 0% and maximum was 100%,so from now on i will use default ultimate power plan and only change minimum proc state to 100%,i think this is the best way for gaming,also i have c state disabled in bios,if anyone else can show other options to change besides minimum proc state to 100%,share please.