1Usmus ryzen power plan: 1usmus Custom Power Plan Still Valid (Needed) for Ryzen 3950X : Amd

AMD Ryzen 3000 1usmus Boost Fix: Performance Tested with Fix

AMD’s Ryzen 3000 CPUs had a very smooth launch, with widespread acclaim from critics and fans alike. The chips offered never-before-seen levels of performance in the consumer market, making even Intel’s HEDT lineup obsolete. Not everything went according to plan, though. There was a discrepancy with respect to the boost clocks of the new processors. Very few Ryzen 3000 CPUs were able to hit the marketed boost clocks, even with TOTL AIO cooling. This was a widely discussed issue in the community, resulting in multiple third-party fixes, with 1usmus’ Ryzen 3000 boost fix being the most notable.

AMD ultimately launched an AGESA microcode update to try and address the issue. While it did raise the boost clock by a bit, there were still only a few select users who were able to hit the spec boost clock at stock conditions.

Even after AMD released the official AGESA fix, 1usmus’ mod didn’t become redundant. The modder claims his fix increases the boost clock by another 50-100MHz and optimizes the Windows thread scheduler.

This is done by running the primary threads on the best cores (ones that boost the highest) of the chip. Furthermore, it also makes sure that single-threaded applications run on a single core rather than distributed across various cores (that leads to worse performance as these workloads prefer higher clock speeds over core counts). In case a second thread is needed, it is chosen from the same CCX, to avoid any latency penalties.

  • AMD Ryzen 9 3900X: Stock Cooler vs Water Cooler
  • What is a CCX and CCD in AMD’s Ryzen Processor: Building Blocks of the Zen Architecture

In this post, we compare the performance of the official Ryzen 3000 boost fix to 1usmus’ mod. We’ll have a look at the clock scaling in single-threaded and multi-threaded workloads and see if the latter actually improves the boost clock or not.

Test Bed

  • CPU: AMD Ryzen 9 3900X
  • Cooler: NZXT Kraken X73
  • GPU: NVIDIA RTX 2080 Super FE|Zotac GeForce RTX 2080 Ti AMP
  • Memory: Trident Z Royal 8GB x 2 @ 3600MHz
  • PSU: Corsair HX1000i

AMD Ryzen 9 3900X: Gaming Benchmarks

While Deus Ex: Mankind Divided doesn’t see any viable increase in frame rates, Assassins’ Creed does get a small boost. The average FPS is higher by 2 while the lows are up by 3 FPS. We repeatedly tested this title and found this result to be a good representative of the gains in gaming performance. Now, let’s have a look at the clock scaling in games:

As you can see, although the single-core boost is higher at the stock preset, the average boost clock of all the cores is still a notch above when using 1usmus’ boost fix. Four of the cores almost consistently run at 4,375MHz while in the former, they mostly stay at 4,300MHz. Considering that Assassins’ Creed Origins thoroughly leverages all twelve cores, it makes sense that it’d see a better score with 1usmus’ mod.

Content Creation: Cinebench R20 Benchmarks

In-line with the gaming performance, the multi-core score sees a healthy uplift. Surprisingly, it’s even higher than the AutoOC score (7218), all the while drawing less power. It’s remarkable what a small software/firmware optimization can achieve. The single-core performance is also marginally better.

Single-Core Workloads: Clock Scaling

The clock scaling in single-core applications is mostly identical. However, just as we saw in the other scaling chart, the clocks are much more consistent with 1usmas’ boost fix. The fastest core (Core 3) runs constantly at 4,450MHz while the other cores’ frequencies are also much more uniform through the entire benchmark without any frequency drops unlike the stock benchmark.

Multi-Threaded Scaling: Stock vs 1usmus

The multi-threaded clock scaling is quite different when using the 1usmus mod. Under stock conditions, the 4,150MHz mark serves as the ceiling while when using the Ryzen 3000 boost fix, the clocks regularly go as high as 4,175MHz, and even spiking as high as 4,200MHz at certain instants.

AMD Ryzen 3000 Boost Fix: Installation of 1usmus Profile

This is a two-part process, one requires you to install a custom power profile to improve the Windows thread scheduler and the other one to set PBO power and voltage limits:

Download and install the 1usmus power profile from here and from the Windows power plan select the 1usmus Ryzen Universal Power Plan.

Secondly, in your motherboard Precision Boost Overdrive setup, increase the PPT, TDC and EDC values as follows:

  • 3900X> 160 105 160
  • 3800X> 145 95 145
  • 3700X> 105 70 105
  • 3600X> 140 90 140
  • 3600> 105 70 105.

You can do this by changing the PBO limits to manual mode. That’s it. You don’t need to modify anything else. Cheers!

  • Related:
  • AMD Ryzen 5 3600X vs 3700X vs 3900X Gaming Performance Benchmarks: Averages, 1% and 0. 1% Lows
  • Intel Comet Lake vs Ice Lake vs AMD Zen 2: Comparing the Core and Ryzen Architectures

Related Articles

Ryzen Custom Power Plans for Windows 10 (Balanced and Ultimate) and Windows 11 (LowPower)

CPUDoc now features a custom dynamic power plan with ultra low power in standby:

These are the custom power plans I’ve made for my 5950x.
I have tested them as well on a 3800X and 5600G (not very thoroughly).

They should not interfere with PBO boost and provide same or very slightly lower performances but better thermals.

Please check before and after with AIDA64 memory benchmark; if there’s something wrong the latency could increase by 1 nanosecond.

Updated 25th October for latest Windows 10 and Windows 11 releases.

Window 10:

There are 2 different kinds of profiles, one is marked «(PP)» which stands for Performant Processors.

This version should only be used in very specific conditions or use cases.
You probably don’t need it so don’t use the PP version.

The only processor that could benefit from the PP versions could be the 5800X3D.
If you have a 5800X3D your best plan is probably the Balanced Snappy, test with the PP version.

The recommended for Performances is the Ultimate, followed by the Snappy which is an in-between the Balanced and Ultimate.
The Snappy can be very satisfying for benchmarks, especially in ST performances.

All the profiles are maintaining the peak performances in GeekBench 5 for my 5950X.

The LowPower can reduce the idle power usage by 5-10W and the temperatures by 4-5° C.
Plus overall reduced temperatures and much lower spikes.

Real world usage is something different and of course Snappy and Ultimate will deliver better responsiveness and performances.
But LowPower is just a notch behind.

Which are the specific conditions or use cases when it could be better to use the PP versions?

  • Terrible binning of the non best cores
  • Terrible binning of the 2nd CCD
  • Static OC with 2nd CCD at a much lower frequency than the 1st
  • Very specific competitive benchmarking

This is the effect of using the PP version with background threads:

While with the non PP version:

In practice nothing will scheduled on the 2nd CCD unless needed.
With 1 CCD processors everything will be scheduled on the best processors and nothing on the lower CPPC Perf cores.

This is because Windows Scheduler is considering a Ryzen Processor as an heterogenous architecture, despite not being one.
All the lower perf cores will be considered as Efficient and all higher perf as Performant.

The previous custom power plans where fixing the Scheduler issues forcing the policy for heterogeneous to prefer Performant Processors and prefer Efficient Processors for background threads.
With the latest Scheduler this is not needed anymore; now it’s finally doing it with the Automatic settings.
This means not anymore hacksaw temperature graphs and spikes.

There are some cases as mentioned above where it could be more convenient to force the background task policy to PP.
In general it’s not recommended; for a very small single thread performance increase in normal usage the temperature goes up a lot and the spikes are huge.
With some workloads, mainly benchmarks, could be useful because often the Scheduler is just mistaken an spawns an heavy thread on an Efficient Processor.
The EP is not only slower but once the Scheduler realizes the mistake it has to move it to a PP causing delay and additional loss of performances.

Tip: best would be to use Process Lasso to switch specific applications to use the Ultimate or Snappy profile only when needed.

Window 11:

The standard Power Plans in Windows 11 are pretty good. With some exceptions of course.

Microsoft as usual made one step forward and two backwards.

The Scheduler now works pretty well in terms of performances and core idling, impressive improvements versus the previous releases and Win10.
This is mainly because all the profiles are using Autonomous mode and it can finally properly drive a Ryzen CPU.
For instance the vCore is finally going up only when needed and the performances really great.

What is very disappointing is that basically many of the plan settings are completely disregarded.
Plus while running in Autonomous mode is worse, the Scheduler is disregarding even more.

The Autonomous mode in Windows 11 is a big improvement but it’s not perfect.
Temperatures and spikes are quite horrible.

That’s why I’ve created only one LowPower custom plan.
Unless you have a problem with the temperatures, just use the Balanced with slider in the middle or max.
Or the High Performance or the Ultimate.
They all are configured mostly the same and deliver mostly the same experience…
Maybe the High Performance has a drop of performances more but it’s really one drop in the ocean.

The LowPower will deliver 2-3° C less on idle, same power consumption as Balanced (Why? How? What…) and at least 4-6 °C less during load.
Temperatures spikes are quite decent with LowPower, absolutely awful for all the standard plans.
Microsoft has definitely something to fix there. ..

Just moving the mouse from one screen to another causes the CPU temperature to jump to 45-48 °C with the Balanced plan.
With the LowPower it’s slowly going up to 40-41 °C.
This is achieved mainly disabling the Autonomous mode, plus scheduling tweaking that actually works once not in Autonomous.

Of course the price to pay it’s measurable lower performances, about 10-20p ST and 50-60p MT in GeekBench 5.

All Windows 11 Power Plans have prefer PP for background threads.
Forcing otherwise is hardly taken into consideration by the Scheduler.

Let me know if you experience issues.

AMD Ryzen™ Balanced LowPower Win11
For Windows 11

Modified out of the Balanced plan so it has the Power Slider.
It’s a nice compromise between performance and power consumption in the middle setting for the slider.

Version v1:


AMD Ryzen™ Balanced LowPower
For Windows 10

Modified out of the Balanced plan so it has the Power Slider.
It’s a nice compromise between performance and power consumption in the middle setting for the slider.
Quite reactive to user input; should behave same as Balanced or better.
Slider to the max will keep the vCore high and will be a bit more reactive, in the middle vCore will drop down in idle.

NEW 25/10/2022 v10:

  • Adapted for the latest Windows 10 release

Version v10:


Version v10 (PP):


Version v8:

Version v7:

Version v6:

Version v5:

Version v4:

Version v3:

AMD Ryzen™ Ultimate Performance
For Windows 10

Modified out of the Ultimate Performance plan so it doesn’t have the Power Slider.
It’s an almost no-compromise for performances, slight increased power consumption but yet nice temperatures in idle.

NEW 25/10/2022 v6:

  • Adapted for the latest Windows 10 release

Version v6:


Version v6 (PP):


Version v5:

Version v4:

Version v3:

Version v2:

AMD Ryzen™ Balanced Snappy
For Windows 10

Modified out of the Balanced plan so it has the Power Slider.
It’s a more power hungry profile focused on responsiveness with autonomous mode enabled.
Less spikey than the Ultimate, sometimes with better ST performances.
Best suited for Audio/Video and Professional, lower IPC/DPC latency.

NEW 25/10/2022 v2:

  • Adapted for the latest Windows 10 release

Version v2:


Version v2 (PP):


Version v1:

How to install

Download the POW file.
Start a Command prompt with Administrative privilege (search for command prompt in start menu).

Import the plan with «powercfg -import filename.pow»:

Replace the directory name as needed.




Highly recommended if you want to make your own customizations or compare with other profiles

First versions (outdated):

The first one is modified out of the Balanced profile so it has the Power Slider.
It’s a nice compromise between performance and power consumption in the middle setting for the slider.
Min state on my 5950x: 2200 MHz and 0.9V

The second one is modified out of the Ultimate Power profile so it doesn’t have the Power Slider.
It’s a no-compromise for performances, slight increased power consumption but yet nice temperatures in idle.
Min state on my 5950x: 2880 MHz and 0.95V