Remember the infamous RTC bug that made AMD Ryzen 3000 (codename Matisse) chips run seemingly faster than expected when in reality, they weren't? It now looks like the bug never went away, and it occasionally affects AMD's latest Ryzen 7000 (Raphael) processors that rival the best CPUs on the market.
Russian tech blogger Pro Hi-Tech shared a video from one of his subscribers showing a Ryzen 9 7950X coming out of sleep mode to reach a clock speed of 6.28 GHz. It's clearly a bug since the Ryzen 9 7950X has a 5.7 GHz clock speed, so it's impossible that the 16-core chip would surpass 6 GHz on its own without manual overclocking. Unfortunately, the user didn't share the model of the motherboard or the firmware version. Therefore, we're uncertain if a specific AMD AGESA firmware is causing the bug.
The trick reportedly consists of having the Ryzen processor reach its maximum clock speed and then putting the system to sleep. As a result, the clock speed magically skyrockets exponentially. The processor even appears to run faster in benchmarks, such as Cinebench or Corona. In actuality, the processor isn't operating beyond its specifications; instead, what appears to be the return of the RTC bug is fooling the benchmarks.
The RTC bug dates back to 2013, around the Windows 8 era. The flaw was more prominent on Intel processors then, including Sandy Bridge, Ivy Bridge, and Haswell. AMD processors were affected but not to the degree of their Intel counterparts. The RTC bug mainly involved altering the processor's bus frequency. Changes made inside the BIOS were acceptable, but modifying the frequency on a software level would mess up Windows 8's timer.
Benchmarks, including Cinebench and Corona, measure the processor's time to render a scene. A slower internal timer makes the software think the processor takes less time to complete the benchmark. If users were to measure the time with a stopwatch and compare the time exhibited by the software, a significant disparity would be more than evident. The user, who sent in the video, observed a 15% difference in rendering times between the two measurements. Therefore, an abnormally high clock speed combined with the RTC bug creates an illusion that the Ryzen processor is delivering more performance, but it's not.
Microsoft reportedly solved the RTC bug with later versions of Windows, but Zen 2 chips were still susceptible to the issue. We're at Zen 4 now, and the bug apparently hasn't disappeared. It's perplexing that a bug discovered almost ten years ago still lingers in the shadows. The bug doesn't break your system or cause a performance hit. On the contrary, it convinces less-experienced users that their processor is over-performing. At the end of the day, it's a placebo effect, and users and reviewers should be careful, especially the latter since the bug will incline the scales toward Ryzen processors.
Stay On the Cutting Edge: Get the Tom's Hardware Newsletter
Get Tom's Hardware's best news and in-depth reviews, straight to your inbox.
Zhiye Liu is a news editor and memory reviewer at Tom’s Hardware. Although he loves everything that’s hardware, he has a soft spot for CPUs, GPUs, and RAM.
-
Amdlova Ryzen crash/ ryzen bug... I have to disable all power management and a ftpm to get system stable not perfectly. Still locking up and crashReply -
Alvar "Miles" Udell This is the same company which even though Zen 3 (and Zen 4 too?) doesn't display the actual CPU voltage correctly when set manually even in Ryzen Master. I wish my CPU ran on 1.09999v...Reply -
atomicWAR I was complaining about this issue earlier this week in a thread on Toms. Though for me the issue cropped up under load, mostly, I did hit some high frequencies when idling as well which I found confusing. Video play back and games where the big offenders for me. I "hit" 6.439 GHz when playing Hogwarts Legacy and 6.217 GHz on Spider-man. And with video playback I was hitting 6.273 GHz on my X670E Taichi with a 7950X. Its a curious bug though for sure.Reply -
Ogotai
as usual with your other issues with the amd based systems, part of the problem could just be your own fault. i have 4 different ryzen based comps here, NONE have any issues like you keep complaining about.Amdlova said:Ryzen crash/ ryzen bug... I have to disable all power management and a ftpm to get system stable not perfectly. Still locking up and crash -
Syntextoxy Wanna see big numbers for zen4? Just install HWMonitor. Managed to get my new 7600x to nearly 6.8mhz... Yeah... Mhz... After using HWMonitor and i7 4770k for 9 years I couldn't believe HWMonitor had such issues.... A shame really.Reply
a/Udz5zayView: https://imgur.com/gallery/Udz5zay -
TerryLaze
That is 6 thousand and 8 hundred Mhz on that pic and not 6.8MhzSyntextoxy said:Wanna see big numbers for zen4? Just install HWMonitor. Managed to get my new 7600x to nearly 6.8mhz... Yeah... Mhz... After using HWMonitor and i7 4770k for 9 years I couldn't believe HWMonitor had such issues.... A shame really. -
King_V
Typical of their posts...Ogotai said:as usual with your other issues with the amd based systems, part of the problem could just be your own fault. i have 4 different ryzen based comps here, NONE have any issues like you keep complaining about.
And similarly, the following systems have been 100% trouble-free for me:
Ryzen 5600X + RX 6700 XT
Ryzen 5600X + RX 6600 XT
Ryzen 5600 + RX 5700
Ryzen 5600G using iGPU
Ryzen 1600AF + various GPU (now used as a test-bed, previously RX 5700 long term, then GT 730, now RX 5300)
Athlon 200GE using iGPU -
deNameMo
So what? What is this supposed to say? Just because it runs well for you, doesn't mean it runs well for everyone.King_V said:Typical of their posts...
And similarly, the following systems have been 100% trouble-free for me:
Ryzen 5600X + RX 6700 XT
Ryzen 5600X + RX 6600 XT
Ryzen 5600 + RX 5700
Ryzen 5600G using iGPU
Ryzen 1600AF + various GPU (now used as a test-bed, previously RX 5700 long term, then GT 730, now RX 5300)
Athlon 200GE using iGPU -
King_V
What it's supposed to say is that that one, assuming it's not a fabrication, is an extreme outlier.deNameMo said:So what? What is this supposed to say? Just because it runs well for you, doesn't mean it runs well for everyone.
That somehow had been a problem for a very long time since day one, but somehow was never returned or replaced under warranty.
And, I'll point out, it's a post that is completely irrelevant to this thread's topic. Just like your previous comment about GPUs.
And, your absolutely false statement of AMD video cards being "objectively worse"