Alright so, I think I'm 'calling it a night' on my tests. I believe I've done all I could have, and as of now I think I've reached what I would consider an 'acceptable' overall system operation (I.E. how the frequencies behave based on what I do, which apps I use, games I use, etc; and based on the temperatures while I do those things, just overall system operation).
Thanks, by the way guys, to all who offered some guidance on this. I appreciate.
So the things I've done (and re-done).
#1: I observed that with the 'previous' BIOS version (0805, which I was using since my latest trials) the general Performance (synthetic benchmarks and gaming) was
significantly lower. It's not for no reasons why it is often recommended to update BIOSes (although... not always of course, when it's unstable crap hits the fan). In fact, the general performance gap I was seeing while on 0805 was so significant on benchmark scores, FPSes in games AND overall 'boost' frequencies (much lower-than-expected from specs) that I decided to just 'revert back' (or rather, forward) to the latest version, 0922... again.
#2: Related to the above, with BIOS version 0805 I noticed that my very long "
POST--to-BIOS-with-all-Motherboard-LED-Warning-Lights-Possible " issue STILL existed anyway. I believed, originally, that perhaps BIOS version 0922 was - maybe - a culprit that would cause such a POST behavior. But no... apparently not. Now though, that does lead me to believe that there might indeed be something iffy going on with either the Motherboard itself, or maybe the CPU. But if it
was the CPU in any way, shape or form then I think I would experience at least some forms of instability-related issues in Windows, in games, and benchmarks. It would crash, or freeze, or hang, or the Temps would be all over the place (or way too high), or it would always Throttle, etc. I'm not experiencing any of that stuff. Even if, for example, by some impossible scenario there was to be something like say... bent pins on the CPU (either during installation, or as I was pressing down with the installation of the Cooler) then the system would experience at least one out of a myriad of possible symptoms. Again, I re-iterate, that my system is 'rock-solid' stable, all things considered. At least that part does work.
#3: So... let's assume (safe assumption for now) that the Motherboard itself may be somewhat faulty, but with some 'brute force' tempering it does allow full system Boot to Windows, and once I'm there... it works. Alright. If that's the case (although I'm still not 100% sure that is the case) then I CAN live with that. Knowing this at the back of my mind would allow me to use the system like this for a couple of months (crossing fingers that it would last at least that much time) until maybe at some point I do decide to remedy to all this by just going with a new Motherboard, with... a new brand too most likely. I honestly doubt that my actual CPU would be at fault for anything (then again... even on that one... I'm not 100% sure either lest I start analyzing the thing under an actual microscope in Labs conditions which I don't have nor would be willing to).
SO... with all this said...
#4: After I went back to BIOS version 0922... I did the following only, and nothing else in the BIOS...
1) Made sure ALL the ASUS-based settings related to Overclocking was 'let be' at Auto. I only used EXPO1 for my Memory and that one does work without a itch.
2) There is, however (in the BIOS) actual AMD-specific options for Overclocking (Advanced tab, scrolling at the bottom). Under THOSE options, there is also another Precision Boost Overdrive setting, which I Enabled (the rest from ASUS is on Auto).
3) To stay on the 'safe' side of things and to maybe give a small kick in the butt to help the system with voltages (which may be lacking by default settings, which is one thing I suspect might be happening too) I decided to increase the SOC voltage (which I did on my previous system to help stabilize with the Memory timings I had, which worked very well) by 3 notches on the Positive side (Offset). I haven't touched the vCore at all, however.
4) Also, in the BIOS, I used the automatic Q-Fan tuning feature. It adjusted the fans speeds and that was it. I only adjusted a bit further myself in terms of lowest fan speeds by around 200 RPM and that was it, I left the fans setting as-is after that.
5) Then... it was time to go back into Windows and see how the system behaved.
6) Thanks to your help guys I also did a few extra things in Windows itself. I.E. disabling that VBS (Virtualization-based Security) feature thing. And also ensuring that XBOX Game Bar (and Game Mode) are On, and that the apps I use are considered as a Game in Game Bar. All that is now done and works well.
7) Finally, Power Plans. I'm using 'Balanced', followed by "Best Performance" in the Power options (Windows Settings). As I kept reading around that it seems to be the best overall way to go about it in Windows 11.
So like I said in the intro, right now, I think I'm at an 'acceptable' spot as I believe that the system behaves 'as it should' (or very close to it anyway), compared to how it was doing things before.
Some results then...
Overwatch 2
Frequencies varied between 'as low as' 3.2Ghz, but as 'high' as 5.2Ghz on some Cores. Then again, Overwatch 2 isn't that demanding of a game (and I was testing in the Practice Range only). But I think that the 'point' here is to show that the CPU frequencies were behaving in a more 'normal' manner (the only thing that does bother me a bit is that some Cores run way too low basically at 1.0Ghz or more,
below the rated minimum specification of 4.4Ghz for this CPU).
Also, for OW2, the CPU Diode Temp reported 'just' 58ºC.
Cyberpunk 2077
Now, in Cyberpunk the frequencies seemed to be behaving in a more consistent way (based on the fact that I was indeed running Cyberpunk, known to be of course a demanding game). The fact that way more Cores (than before) seem to boost more is a good sign to me. In this case, some Cores did occasionally drop down to around 3.7Ghz, but it was a lot rarer in comparison to Overwatch 2 for instance. And more Cores in this case also boosted above 5.0Ghz (compared to anything I did before).
For Cyberpunk, the CPU Diode Temp reported 65ºC (this is actually better than the temps I saw in the game in my previous tests especially yesterday, where I saw around 70º+ very consistently). I think that the Q-Fan tuning I did in the BIOS did help to some extent in maintaining a better average (highest) temp range than before. Only something like Cinebench can bump up the temps now (which is normal, no games actually push CPUs like Cinebench does anyway)
Idling in the Desktop
Discover the magic of the internet at Imgur, a community powered entertainment destination. Lift your spirits with funny jokes, trending memes, entertaining gifs, inspiring stories, viral videos, and so much more from users.
imgur.com
Now, in the Desktop doing nothing... it actually behaves similarly to OW2, some Cores go pretty much down by 1.0+ Ghz below the minimum specs, but some Cores do bump up at 5.0Ghz+ (for no particular reason). That's probably the only "weird" stuff I'm seeing now. But I take it, I'm ok with this situation as it is.
Additionally to all of this, since I experienced these 'issues' I had to do more research than I cared to initially. I learned 'the hard way' (shit happens heh) that AMD advertised the 7900X3D model with VERY carefully-chosen wording in their presentations, and they didn't send review units around (only sent 7950X3D units for review, whereas reviewers had to buy their 7900X3D units themselves to review them, apparently). The main reasons? Because...
1) The 7900X3D model, specifically, apparently does NOT actually have ALL the physical Cores set up with the extra 3D cache thing, because of its structure (the 6+6 thing). I don't have the lexicon to properly describe it. But suffice to say that both the 7800X3D and the 7950X3D have all their Cores with the 3D cache... whereas the 7900X3D model specifically does not. So if a game was to run on any one of the non-3Dvcached Cores... then you'd effectively be running a game on a CPU that only pretends to be what it 'is', while it isn't exactly it (if... that makes any sense). I know in the end it's a matter of money and marketing. But I admit... that one from AMD is a very crass move. They did win though, they got me good on that one. I did want to go for the 7900X3D for 3 'main' reasons (as part of the "
Every Day Joe's Perception of the Product Based on Usual Promotional Material in Main Presentations when Unveiling Products").
Reason A - My previous system had 8/16 Cores, I thought ok... might as well do an incremental upgrade, let's go 12/24, simple.
Reason B - This model can boost up to 5.6Ghz, neat! Can't wait to run games at 5.4Ghz to 5.6Ghz! (my previous system's maximum rated boost speeds were very common, and constant)
Reason C - Pricing, $100 less (U.S.D, mind you... I'm in Canadian dollars so for me it was around $130), saving money, no need for a 16 Core version... the 8 Core version is still 1 month away... sure, why not, high price but lower than the 7950, could buy a brand new game with that money or heck... I could order some pizzas for a few weeks.
BUT... what "Mr Joe" doesn't know necessarily is that only enthusiasts who 'dig deeper' would tell you...
The 7900X3D's actual 3dcached Cores do NOT - and are NOT designed - to actually boost higher than 5.0Ghz (*maybe 5.1Ghz if you won the silicon lottery). The 5.6Ghz maximum boost stamp on the 'Main Advertising' stuff for this model ONLY refers to the Non-3D-cached Cores. So yeah, good one AMD... good one. I'm sure you got a bunch of fish from that one.
Now, with all this said... I DO, however, believe indeed that despite the fact that I reached an 'acceptable' system behaviour overall... that there IS something 'wrong' going on, nonetheless.
Because assuming that Non-3D-cached Cores CAN boost up to 5.6Ghz then that frequency has NOT been observed for me so far. The absolutely maximum I have seen at this point (with my current settings after all I've done) was 5.275Ghz exactly (and again, only Cyberpunk 2077 made it there, not even Cinebench bring the frequencies to that point, weirdly enough). There is a 'lack' of potential ('advertised' potential that is) of around 400 Mhz lost in space somewhere drifting away from my product. I do not see 5.3Ghz, 5.4Ghz, 5.5Ghz or 5.6Ghz on anything I test the system with. Period. So THAT part is what leads me to think that either the Motherboard itself is iffy, or the CPU is faulty (but again yeah... I doubt it's the CPU... or rather I HOPE it's not the CPU, maybe I bought the 'wrong' model for the 3D cache stuff, but it IS an upgrade over my previous 5800X non-3D I had before and I do like the improvements in performance... if I can keep it I will... at least for a couple of months, if it does last me that long).
Anyways guys, sorry for the Novels (maybe some of this will help some people around experiencing something similar, who knows).
I'm considering this a 'case closed'. I'm tired from all the tests, barely played anything in the past 3 days or so. I need to settle with what I have and what works. The only thing I'll consider next is maybe a BIOS update when ASUS release one and that will be it (even then, my BIOS settings will be identical to my current ones).
Thanks guys.