Amd-pstate is here

you are using the latest 5.17 kernel with amd-pstate, right user?

Attached: Screenshot from 2022-03-23 12-48-47.png (1348x965, 71.96K)

Nope.

I'd love to have a modern AMD PC but I'm poor

I'm using my own 5.16 kernel that's had amd-pstate included for months.

did you do any benchmarking?

No benchmarking (it doesn't work on my 1700X), but it feels like it made the battery life on my Zen 2 laptop better.

amd prostate?

Reminder, Linux kernels 5 and up are cucked with COC.

>I showed you my p-state please reply

Is this going to be like intel_pstate? A blackbox were you will be happy with whatever they decide it's best for you?
AMD still being compatible with the kernel governors was a big sell for me, specially due to ignore_nice_load

It still uses the kernel governors but now they can do fine-grained frequency switching instead of choosing between three static P-states. It's much better than the intel_pstate approach.

> cat /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/scaling_driver
intel_pstate

no, should i switch?

It's not in the repo yet..

No, I'm using 5.16.16 with amd-pstate backported.

it's in testing

What does your prostate have anything to do with technology?

As someone who uses Ryzen I wish I went Intel instead.

>using amd-pstate diver
I hope you are joking, why would you use that trash

Attached: embed.png (600x506, 66.88K)

I will once my 38Wh zen 2 shittop arrives.

I don't think the benchmarks are particularly useful for what this driver is intended to do. The the new driver can't magically make the CPU faster. You get what you get when the CPU is running at a particular clock speed. The idea is to give a wider range of clock values to the OS to allow it to have finer grained control of the performance. The old pstate driver tends to perform better on performance-oriented tests because it only has three clock levels to pick from. No matter how much performance you need for a good user experience, you will automatically snap to the nearest clock level. If there were a bios that only defined two clock levels it would probably perform even better than the current sbios with three clock levels. The new CPPC interface gives you a continuum of clock levels. The idea is set the performance level to something that would accomplish the task in a reasonable time, not necessarily the fastest time. If you always want to accomplish the task in the fastest time, always select the highest performance level.

What's the new low end MHz with this driver compared to the base 2200 MHz now?

Why? Are you a gamer?

The picture says it all, ya dingus: "Score, More is Better"

Why would you care? This thing would be useful primarily for laptop users who working from battery.