Aurora R10, AMD Ryzen Master App

Modern CPU's, like the Ryzen series, balance various elements internally to maximize their overall performance.

They monitor temperature, current, voltage and power draw metrics to balance their boost and down clock automatically.

It's basically a hands off system and almost negates the point of overclocking a Ryzen CPU. 

I use a Ryzen 3700X, and when I run Cinebench my EDC and PPT are maxed out. However, the gauge that matters the most is the far left one, the temperature gauge. As long as you do not hit that limit, 95C in my case, the CPU will not throttle. Instead it will adjust it's frequency to maximize performance. The lower frequency is the result of power limits, not temperature limits.

You can adjust the power limits to some extend, but it will have an adverse effects on temperatures.

Throttling is when it adjusts it's frequency to lower temperature, which will mean lowered performance.

I have read quite a number of opinions about the app. Some swear by the precision overdrive feature as genius OC control. I got the app to learn more and see more from the gauges. Rather than actually overclock. Although if done properly and automatically, perhaps with this app, I might OC. So far I have OC set to “default”. I went from a 120 to a 360 cooler which allowed more head room on cooling and could definitely tell the difference in Ryzen Master. Yet the EDC at 100% still concerns me. A side from Over Clocking, I wonder about the limits of the motherboard itself being responsible for the EDC limit. I am guessing that is obvious, the limit of the motherboard, yet I get the sense some boards have higher limits. I am starting to question if that is what is actually needed to run these processors at their top (within factory limits) speeds 

You said: Throttling is when it adjusts it's frequency to lower temperature, which will mean lowered performance.

Is that to say throttling does not happen because of current like EDC? 
I was guessing throttling could happen because of maxing out of any of meters except the cpu frequency. Your statement would make me think only temp causes throttling. Is that what you meant? 

I have been studying up on the next motherboard upgrade and I think the Ryzen Master has been an eye opener. Not sure I understand it all yet. However the classic bottleneck or log jam or weakest link in the chain tends to be just that, the limiting factor. With fast processors like the 5800x 5900 and 5900X I am beginning to think that after cooling, current is next main limiting factor. The EDC. Below is a screen capture from Amazon about the specs of a few select motherboards. Note the CPU power phase. Perhaps this is a huge deal with faster multicore processors. Along with the R10 based system I have, I also have an Asus Strix B550 board that hits 100% on the EDC during 3D rendering on a 5800X even with a 360 liquid cooler. The CPU frequency however is way higher than the R10 running a 120 liquid cooler on a 5900. Again, guessing the EDC of that MB is the limiting factor. I notice on Passmark many of the fastest systems often have the Gigabyte Aorus Ultra. That has a true 14 phase digital 12+2. 

Throttling is scaling down frequency due to temperature restrictions.

Boosting is increasing frequency and staying within operating parameters. As in boost up to maximum EDC, or maximum PPT.

Basically throttling is lowering frequency, boosting is increasing frequency.

Frequency will boost and lower by itself under normal use, as the CPU is trying to maximize performance when  needed, and minimize power consumption when not needed.

If it makes you feel better, it can look like this on the R10 board.

I have the CPU frequencies on all 6 cores locked at 4,150 Mhz. This means the CPU never boost up, or clocks down, but instead always sits at the same frequency of 4,150 Mhz regardless of CPU load.

You can see the increased temperature, as under standard precision boost I run 5 degrees C cooler, yet boost up higher to somewhere around 4,300 Mhz for short periods of time, and under sustained stress loads it clocks down to around 4,050 Mhz pending on power limits.

This setting is only better for loads that stay at high levels for sustained periods of time, like for example benchmark programs like Cinebench, as the CPU normally drops below what I have it manually set at. It all depends on how long the processor can boost above 4,150 Mhz under normal precision boost. You only are going to gain if during the benchmark run it stays below 4,150 Mhz long enough.

The increased heat comes from the increased PPT, 97 Watts instead of the standard 88 Watts.

Package Power Tracking (“PPT”): The PPT threshold is the allowed socket power consumption permitted across the voltage rails supplying the socket. Applications with high thread counts, and/or “heavy” threads, can encounter PPT limits that can be alleviated with a raised PPT limit.

Default for Socket AM4 is at least 142W on motherboards rated for 105W TDP processors.
Default for Socket AM4 is at least 88W on motherboards rated for 65W TDP processors.

Thermal Design Current (“TDC”): The maximum current (amps) that can be delivered by a specific motherboard’s voltage regulator configuration in thermally-constrained scenarios.

Default for socket AM4 is at least 95A on motherboards rated for 105W TDP processors.
Default for socket AM4 is at least 60A on motherboards rated for 65W TDP processors.

Electrical Design Current (“EDC”): The maximum current (amps) that can be delivered by a specific motherboard’s voltage regulator configuration in a peak (“spike”) condition for a short period of time.

Default for socket AM4 is 140A on motherboards rated for 105W TDP processors.
Default for socket AM4 is 90A on motherboards rated for 65W TDP processors.

The VRM phases for the boards you linked are high end VRM's and not needed unless you plan on overclocking the CPU, which is what you would be doing when adjusting the EDC value, or the PPT value, or the CPU multiplier etc...

The values for any of these can be changed with Ryzen master, but be very careful doing so as you can permanently damage the CPU/VRM section when setting these to high. Use at your own risk. I would highly recommend not doing this unless you fully understand what effect it will have on the CPU and VRM section.

I can go up to 165 Amps EDC on my R10 board (Ryzen 3000 version 1 board), up from the default 90 Amps for my 3700X (TDP 65 Watts).

Also, be careful reading "guides" on the internet about overclocking CPU's. There's a lot of bad information floating around the internet. There are some good guides from reputable web sites out there, but there's also a lot of bad information out there...

Frequency: what do you make of that meter? You mentioned you locked your frequency at a set amount. Yet, with that you were only 50% or so of the meter. 
Is that indicative of 50% of anything? 
None of what I am saying or asking is intended to dispute or challenge what you are saying, only to understand what you are taking the time to share with me. 
Do you know off hand where to find the specs of the processors in the regard of the min max etc for Ryzen Master? Otherwise I will look for that. I have a 5800x, 5900, 5900 and a 5900x. I found various specs last time I looked on AMD but did not feel like I hit the jackpot. In addition, I notice the processor with the least cores (5800x) is hitting the highest frequency. It also has a 360 cooler. With further testing or knowledge not sure which is the reason. 

Some Notes from the Ryzen Master PDF: 

Precision Boost Overdrive allows the processor to automatically use the power design margin reported by the motherboard above warrantied CPU limits, potentially increasing maximum and average core speed.
• This feature works best with a premium overclocking motherboard, a premium cooler, and a cool ambient environment.
• With the AMD 3000-Series CPUs, the user can return to Default without a system restart if Persistent PCD Values is set of OFF. In ON, then a restart will be requested. Page 32.

Auto Overclocking allows the processor to automatically manage to a boost frequency higher than the stock value while remaining under automatic control.
• This feature works best with a premium overclocking motherboard, a premium cooler, and a cool ambient environment.
• This feature requires a system restart initiated by Ryzen Master on Apply. Page 33. 

I just look at the frequency, not the meter. In my opinion that meter should be at max, since that frequency is the max of what I have it set at. No idea why it's only showing 50%.

AMD processor specs. 

The lower core count will reach a higher frequency because the die size is the same for all models. More cores = more heat = lower frequencies.

That's why many gamers stick with the 8 core CPU's, as they can reach higher single core speeds and overall will boost up higher due to reduced thermals. (when compared to a higher core model).

You said: Package Power Tracking (“PPT”): The PPT threshold is the allowed socket power consumption permitted across the voltage rails supplying the socket. Applications with high thread counts, and/or “heavy” threads, can encounter PPT limits that can be alleviated with a raised PPT limit.

My goal is 3D rendering. In that, multiple cores and threads are the cats meow. 
“Voltage rails” I read that before and did not know what that meant. Guessing those are the two motherboard power connectors. I have 1000 watt power supplies, and old school graphics cards (so far) that use very little power. Thus power, if it is an issue, WHERE is it an issue? 
I have 4 computers setup for testing. Three are R10 motherboard based and the other a Asus Strix B550. I just stocked up on thermal paste! This kind of testing allows for me to test cooling, cases and more. So far I have tested R10 motherboards within and outside the default case. I have tested processors and a little bit (of a number of kinds) of liquid cooling. I have tested air cooling vs liquid too. Currently (ha!) as I mentioned, I am hitting the current wall. Or so it seems. 

Some of the articles I have read lately suggested that for 3D work you want less cores yet higher frequency cores, for 3D rendering you want all the cores you can get to an extent. If fact, the article writers suggested only one ore two cores were needed. 
That chart of CPUs you found seems great! 
Ya that meter is sort of a mystery?