AMD and Intel Have Different HPET Guidance

A standard modern machine, with a default BIOS and a fresh Windows operating system, will sit on the first situation in the table listed above: the BIOS has HPET enabled, however it is not explicitly forced in the operating system. If a user sets up their machine with no overclocking or monitoring software, which is the majority case, then this is the implementation you would expect for a desktop.

AMD

We reached out to AMD and Intel about their guidance on HPET, because in the past it has both been unclear as well as it has been changed. We also reached out to motherboard manufacturers for their input.

For those that remember the Ryzen 7 1000-series launch, about a year ago from now, one point that was lightly mentioned among the media was that in AMD’s press decks, it was recommended that for best performance, HPET should be disabled in the BIOS. Specifically it was stated that:

Make sure the system has Windows High Precision Event Timer (HPET) disabled. HPET can often be disabled in the BIOS. [T]his can improve performance by 5-8%.

The reasons at the time were unclear as to why, but it was a minor part in the big story of the Zen launch so it was not discussed in detail. However, by the Ryzen 5 1000-series launch, that suggestion was no longer part of the reviewer guide. By the time we hit the Ryzen-2000 series launched last week, the option to adjust HPET in the BIOS was not even in the motherboards we were testing. We cycled back to AMD about this, and they gave the following:

The short of it is that we resolved the issues that caused a performance difference between on/off. Now that there is no need to disable HPET, there is no need for a toggle [in the BIOS].

Interestingly enough, with our ASUS X470 motherboard, we did eventually find the setting for HPET – it was not in any of the drop down menus, but it could be found using their rather nice ‘search’ function. I probed ASUS about whether the option was enabled in the BIOS by default, given that these options were not immediately visible, and was told:

It's enabled and never disabled, since the OS will ignore it by default. But if you enable it, then the OS will use it – it’s always enabled, that way if its needed it is there, as there would be no point in pulling it otherwise.

So from an AMD/ASUS perspective, the BIOS is now going to always be enabled, and it needs to be forced in the OS to be used, however the previous guidance about disabling it in the BIOS has now gone, as AMD expects performance parity.

It is worth noting that AMD’s tool, Ryzen Master, requires a system restart when the user first loads it up. This is because Ryzen Master, the overclocking and monitoring tool, requires HPET to be forced in order to do what it needs to do. In fact, back at the Ryzen 7 launch in 2017, we were told:

AMD Ryzen Master’s accurate measurements present require HPET. Therefore it is important to disable HPET if you already installed and used Ryzen Master prior to game benchmarking.

Ultimately if any AMD user has Ryzen Master installed and has been run at any point, HPET is enabled, even if the software is not running or uninstalled. The only way to stop it being forced in the OS is with a command to chance the value in the BCD, as noted above.

For the Ryzen 2000-series launch last week, Ryzen Master still requires HPET to be enabled to run as intended. So with the new guidance that HPET should have minimal effect on benchmarks, the previous guidance no longer applies.

Ryzen Master is not the only piece of software that requires HPET to be forced in order to do what it needs to do. For any of our readers that have used overclocking software and tools before, or even monitoring tools such as fan speed adjusters – if those tools have requested a restart before being used properly, there is a good chance that in that reboot the command has been run to enable HPET. Unfortunately it is not easy to generate a list, as commands and methods may change from version to version, but it can apply to CPU and GPU overclocking.

Intel

The response we had from Intel was a little cryptic:

[The engineers recommend that] as far as benchmarking is concerned, it should not matter whether or not HPET is enabled or not. There may be some applications that may not function as advertised if HPET is disabled, so to be safe, keep it enabled, across all platforms. Whatever you decide, be consistent across platforms.

A cold reading of this reply would seem to suggest that Intel is recommended HPET to be forced and enabled, however my gut told me that Intel might have confused ‘on’ in the BIOS with ‘forced’ through the OS, and I have asked them to confirm.

Looking back at our coverage of Intel platforms overall, HPET has not been mentioned to any sizeable degree. I had two emails back in 2013 from a single motherboard manufacturer stating that disabling HPET in the BIOS can minimise DPC latency on their motherboard, however no comment was made about general performance. I cannot find anything explicitly from Intel though.

A Timely Re-Discovery Forcing HPET On, Plus Spectre and Meltdown Patches
Comments Locked

242 Comments

View All Comments

  • jjj - Wednesday, April 25, 2018 - link

    " however it is clear that there is still margin that benefits Intel at the most popular resolutions, such as 1080p."

    That's a false and highly misleading statement, it's not about the resolution it is about an over-dimensioned GPU for a given resolution so , easiest way to put it, high FPS gaming.
    90% will game at 1080p with a 1060 not a 1080.
    Marketing might have moved rich children from 30-60FPS to 120FPS but people are not made out of money and you know very well how limited high end GPU volumes are.

    For now you should test with and without HPET at least for a few results and highlight the HPET impact..
    One thing I did not notice being addressed after flying over the article is the accuracy of the results with HPET disabled. How certain are you that the results are not way off to favor Intel now?
  • Maxiking - Wednesday, April 25, 2018 - link

    The only one misleading and false statement is that 90% will play at 1080p with a 1060.

    Remember, in the future, 1160 will be probably more powerful than 1080, 1260 than 1280 and so on. The bottleneck is still here, not gonna disappear, will get only bigger with more powerfull cards.

    Regardless, how certain are you that the results are not way off to favour AMD now?
  • Maxiking - Wednesday, April 25, 2018 - link

    Damn it, why there is no option to edit messages. *Powerful* kek.
  • RafaelHerschel - Wednesday, April 25, 2018 - link

    Games get more demanding. I'm convinced that at some point 1080p will become obsolete, but we are not there yet. For me 1080p maxed out (sometimes with DSR enabled) looks good enough and ensures that I get the smoothness that is important to me.
  • mapesdhs - Sunday, May 6, 2018 - link

    Where's the evidence games are becoming more demanding? If that were true, typical frame rate spreads in reviews would not be going through the roof. It's been a very long time since any GPU review article talked about new visual features to enable more complex and immersive worlds. These days, all the talk is about performance and resolution support, not fidelity.
  • jjj - Wednesday, April 25, 2018 - link

    People buy GPUs by targeting the FPS they need inside a budget and sane people do not buy more than they need.
    And ofc as someone else pointed out, games evolve too, otherwise we would not need better GPUs.
    Remember that GPUs have been around for decades, we know how things go.
  • eek2121 - Sunday, April 29, 2018 - link

    Benchmarks should not be done on a 1060. The purpose of a CPU benchmark is to measure CPU performance. IMO a 1080ti at MINIMUM should be used to elimininate GPU bottlenecks. There are some games out there that still bottleneck at 1080p.
  • eva02langley - Wednesday, April 25, 2018 - link

    You are damn wrong. Sure you can see CPU bottleneck... however, can you? Now with HPET put into light, you can alter results dramatically for Intel, however is HPET a default function for the OS?

    Basically, you are telling me that benchmarks should have HEPT off, a configuration that is supposed to be set as default, just because we can see which architecture is better in a non conventional use?

    So what is the value of those precious 1080p benchmarks if they don't represent the configuration the typical end user is going to use the product for in its intended use?

    It is coming back to the USE CASE.

    If a budget user buy an RX 560, CPU choice at 1080p won't matter.
    If a mid range user buy an RX 580/1060 GTX, CPU choice at 1080p won't matter.
    If a high user buy a 1080 GTX/Vega 64, CPU choice at 1080p @ 144 Hz will barely matter.
    If an enthusiasm user buy a 1080 TI, CPU choice will matter @ 144 Hz.

    And now... what happens with HPET in the picture? How can you accurately render results without biasing yourself anymore?

    One thing for sure, Intel needs to fix their stuff.
  • eva02langley - Wednesday, April 25, 2018 - link

    "If an enthusiasm user buy a 1080 TI, CPU choice at 1080p will matter @ 144 Hz."

    Mistake
  • malakudi - Wednesday, April 25, 2018 - link

    Thank you for the analysis. Can you somehow verify that very large variations (RoTR 1-2-3, Civ6) of performance on i7-8700K with HPET not forced are real? Is it possible that the reported FPS are wrongly calculated when using non-HPET timer? Can you also get a comment from the developers of those games about this result? 45,76 and 69% performance difference does not seem normal.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now